News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:The superconductivity of layered graphene is surprisingly... by PaulRobinson on Friday February 07, 2025 @11:14AM (#42974324)
I think everything we don't have a model for is surprisingly strange. Gravity only seems "normal" because we've been teaching a reasonable model for it for hundreds of years - Aristotle thought things fell to the ground because that was "their nature", but thought it quite weird. X-Rays seem bonkers unless you've grown up with them, and there is something deeply unnerving about genetics, quantum and even GenAI until you've spent some time pulling apart the innards and building an explainable model that makes sense to you. And even then it can catch you out. More ways to explain the models help normalise it all - what's now taught at 9th grade used to be advanced post-doc research, in almost every field. And so it goes on.

2D superconductors don't make much sense because, as the article says, theory is behind experimentation here. That's also why there is both incredible excitement, but also a worry that none of this is going to stack up to anything more than a bubble. My old Uni (Manchester) doubled down hard on the work of Geim and Novoselov by building a dedicated "Graphene Institute", after they got the Nobel Prize, but even 15 years after that award most people are still trying to figure out what does it all actually mean really? Not just in terms of the theory of physics, but how useful is this stuff, in real world usage?

It'll settle down in due course. The model will become apparent, we'll be able to explain it through a series of bouncing back between theory and experiment, as ever, and then it won't seem so strange any more.

I'm not sure that'll ever be true of quantum computing for me, but then I am getting a bit older now...

Re:The superconductivity of layered graphene is surprisingly... by SecretDreams on Friday February 07, 2025 @12:06PM (#42974970)
> My old Uni (Manchester) doubled down hard on the work of Geim and Novoselov by building a dedicated "Graphene Institute", after they got the Nobel Prize, but even 15 years after that award most people are still trying to figure out what does it all actually mean really? Not just in terms of the theory of physics, but how useful is this stuff, in real world usage?

That's the beauty of real research. There's no guarantees it'll pan out. But it's generally worth doing and spending (sometimes decades of) time exploring. Too many people have become infatuated with instant gratification. It's pervasive even in young, scientific minds. The real gratification is failing that same test 100 times until you finally land on a variation that might work. And then figuring out why it worked.

Edit: And if that success never comes, the gratification is graduating and moving on to more solvable problems, but bringing with you the scientific methods you learned along the way. Scientists might spend their whole lives working on something that won't work and that's okay. If that isn't for you, go into product dev.

Re:The superconductivity of layered graphene is surprisingly... by tasty_freeze on Friday February 07, 2025 @12:15PM (#42975061)
When I was a kid, magnets seemed magical. I'm 60 now, and they still seem like magic, despite always having some on hand to play with.
Re:The superconductivity of layered graphene is surprisingly... by Synaesthesia on Friday February 07, 2025 @03:16PM (#42976964)
Magnets, how do they work? It's surprisingly complicated actually!
Re:The superconductivity of layered graphene is surprisingly... by pelagicAustral on Friday February 07, 2025 @09:18PM (#42979748)
Miracles!
Re:The superconductivity of layered graphene is surprisingly... by ggddv on Friday February 07, 2025 @11:20AM (#42974410)
It’s interesting to think what in people’s personal perception makes them find strange thing interesting or scary or boring. Especially when it comes to grapheme.
Re:The superconductivity of layered graphene is surprisingly... by desdenova on Friday February 07, 2025 @11:31AM (#42974554)
Imagine doing computing on grapheme clusters.
Re:The superconductivity of layered graphene is surprisingly... by HappMacDonald on Friday February 07, 2025 @02:01PM (#42976195)
That's what I thought LLMs did
Re:The superconductivity of layered graphene is surprisingly... by aaronblohowiak on Friday February 07, 2025 @11:40AM (#42974660)
I still don’t believe explanations for gravity…let alone dark matter!
Re:The superconductivity of layered graphene is surprisingly... by hansvm on Friday February 07, 2025 @11:46AM (#42974730)
Not believing an explanation for dark matter seems prudent. It's just the name we've given to a certain set of observations not matching how we believe the universe works. We're still piecing together the details.
Re:The superconductivity of layered graphene is surprisingly... by __MatrixMan__ on Friday February 07, 2025 @12:02PM (#42974935)
Do you suppose everything is explainable? Gravity feels to me like the sort of thing that just sort of is. I'm all for better characterizations of it, but I'm not holding my breath for an answer to: why?
Re:The superconductivity of layered graphene is surprisingly... by jepj57 on Friday February 07, 2025 @12:47PM (#42975393)
Everything may be explainable, just not by humanity.

How does our biology affect the limits of what we can comprehend?

Re:The superconductivity of layered graphene is surprisingly... by __MatrixMan__ on Friday February 07, 2025 @03:47PM (#42977305)
Oh plenty of ways probably. I expect there are perspectives out there which would have a look at our biggest questions and find them to be mundane with obvious answers but which would themselves boggle at concepts that we consider elementary.

But here I am in this body, and not that one, so I'm content to accept an axiom or two.

Re:The superconductivity of layered graphene is surprisingly... by aaronblohowiak on Friday February 07, 2025 @03:51PM (#42977339)
the question is depth and quality of explainability as determined by the predictive power those explanations provide...
Re:The superconductivity of layered graphene is surprisingly... by oneshtein on Saturday February 08, 2025 @12:35AM (#42980678)
Gravity is something very simple. It cannot be a complex thing, because it demonstrates a very simple behavior.
Re:The superconductivity of layered graphene is surprisingly... by __MatrixMan__ on Saturday February 08, 2025 @05:48PM (#42986871)
There are plenty of cases where a complex thing has very simple behavior. For centuries, brewers could get away with a mental model for yeast as something that multiplies and converts sugar to alcohol until it can't anymore. It took quite a jump in technology to realize just how fantastically complex the inner workings of a yeast cell is.

I'm not proposing that gravity is underpinned by something complex, just that if its mechanism is out of our reach then so to are any conclusions about that mechanism's complexity.

Re:The superconductivity of layered graphene is surprisingly... by moffkalast on Friday February 07, 2025 @11:59AM (#42974884)
Relevant xkcd tooltip: https://xkcd.com/1489
Re:The superconductivity of layered graphene is surprisingly... by jasonvorhe on Saturday February 08, 2025 @10:33AM (#42983590)
I also think that gravity is complete bunk. Funny how there's suddenly Graphene everywhere from dental applications to injectibles.Weird times.