News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on LK-99 isn’t a superconductor – how science sleuths solved the mystery. Parent comment

Re:LK-99 isn’t a superconductor – how science sleuths solved... by deepspace on Wednesday August 16, 2023 @02:16PM (#37151311)
When I first saw the quoted resistivity, 0.002 ohms per cm, my thought was "this is not even a conductor, let alone a superconductor". 0.2 Ohms/m is several orders of magnitude less conductive than most metals, and solidly in the semiconductor range.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:LK-99 isn’t a superconductor – how science sleuths solved... by rubberpoliceman on Wednesday August 16, 2023 @03:05PM (#37152042)
Resistivity is measured in ohms * meter, so this may be a unit conversion issue…
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:LK-99 isn’t a superconductor – how science sleuths solved... by moffkalast on Wednesday August 16, 2023 @04:36PM (#37153427)
Right? That's what's not clear to me either. If they got readings for superconductivity and Cu2S impurities were the cause then fantastic, Cu2S is the room temperature superconductor? Just get a load of that instead then.

Or perhaps the way they measured the whole experiment was completely inane from the start if a simple conductor passes with flying colours. With that and them presenting ferromagnetism as the Messner effect makes me kind of question the competence of the entire analysis.

[ Parent | on HN ]