Slashdot Mirror
Possible Room Temperature Superconductor Achieved
TechkNighT_1337 sends news that surfaced on the Next Big Future blog, concerning research out of the University of Bengal, in India. The report is of a possible superconducting effect at ambient room temperatures. Here is the paper on the ArXiv. (Note that this research has not been peer-reviewed or published yet.) "We report the observation of an exceptionally large room-temperature electrical conductivity in silver and aluminum layers deposited on a lead zirconate titanate (PZT) substrate. The surface resistance of the silver-coated samples also shows a sharp change near 313 K. The results are strongly suggestive of a superconductive interfacial layer, and have been interpreted in the framework of Bose-Einstein condensation of bipolarons as the suggested mechanism for high-temperature superconductivity in cuprates. ... The fact that the results described above have been obtained from very simply-fabricated systems, without the use of any sophisticated set-up and any special attention being given to crystal purity, atomic perfection, lattice matching, etc. suggests that the physical process is a universal one, involving only an interface between a metal and an insulator with a large low-frequency dielectric constant. We note in passing that PZT and the cuprates have similar (perovskite or perovskite-based) crystal structures. This resemblance may provide an added insight into the basic mechanism of high-temperature superconductivity."
After reading the summary, everything is plainly obvious...
(walks away slowly before anyone can notice I didn't understand anything)
until the experiment has been repeated by someone else, I'm not holding any hope.
it was Bose-Einstein condensation of bipolarons that would allow for room tempurature super conduction.
Not peer-reviewed and not published = why the fuck is this on Slashdot?!
"Unobtanium." James Cameron just beat these researchers to the punch.
"I'd just like to emphasise that taking a million years isn't a metaphor here..." -Rich Bradshaw
Ever notice that we constantly get reports of ground-breaking research out of India, only to never hear about it again? I'm guessing they lie about their research just like they lie about their degrees.
313K is 40C. So this stuff ought to behave just fine in the UK, but only part of the year in India :-) Even in temperate climates, you'd have to be careful not to leave it out in the sun, so again it should be fine in the UK...
Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
This smells of Cold fusion. I was 12 when that scandal erupted and I'm *still* recovering from the disappointment that we hadn't just entered the age of flying cars. This time I think we're better off saving our excitement until the experiment has been repeated.
There has been a number of fraud reports of high temperature superconductivity, and while there are some confirmed examples of superconductivity at very high temperatures ( like -70C ) they usually involve some microscopic crystal or other structure which is not very useful for most practical applications.
In addition, that something super conducts does not imply it can handle a very large current at high temperatures. The current creates a magnetic field, and superconductors can only work when the magnetic field is less than some fixed value that depends on the material. If I'm not mistaken this value is at its highest when the temperature is very low, and thus it's quite plausible you could get a room temperature superconductor which can't carry any significant current unless cooled to more traditional temperatures.
It sounds extremely plausible to me based on many factors. You are just jealous of their discovery.
If it superconducts at room temperature, trust me, nobody's going to give a crap what it's made from.
> The surface resistance of the silver-coated samples also shows a sharp change near 313 K.
Pure copper does the exact same thing.
I call bogus.
Maury
Yes, I see. Something involving that many big words could easily destabilize time itself!
Well, silver isn't -that- expensive. Especially when we're just speaking of a layer of the stuff.
GAAH! MY PRINTER IS ON FIRE!!! PUT IT OUT! PUT IT OUT!
Cheap materials, cheap process, room temperature......way too good to be true.
How much current can it carry? Superconductors tend to lose superconductivity in the presence of a large magnetic field, limiting the amount of current they can carry. I don't know if the high Tc superconductors are more susceptible than the regular ones, but it's something to keep in mind.
If they can take a really high magnetic field then that would be really cool for projects like the LHC. A large part of what makes that project dangerous, difficult, and expensive is the large number of He cooled superconducting magnets it needs. The danger comes in when you get a cosmic ray or something that increases the temperature of the magnet so that even a small part loses its superconductivity. When that happens, the non-superconducting part rapidly starts heating up the rest of the magnet in a process called "quenching." The results of a quench can be quite catastrophic.
...exceptionally large room-temperature electrical conductivity...
Ok, that's not the same as identically zero resistance. Regarding their measurements, from TFA:
...measured using a home-built instrumentation amplifier...
A more accurate way of doing this would probably be to see if can it support persistent currents for large timescales. This isn't rocket science -- make a loop of this stuff (shouldn't be hard, since it's a "very simply-fabricated system"), drop a magnet through it, go grab a bite, come back and measure the field strength. (Obviously, take into account any ferromagnetic behavior, and verify that the field strength is due to a current loop.)
Well, apparently you don't have to deal with electricity stealing Werewolves. I for one, am glad someone is finally addressing this problem.
The real Sig captains the Northwestern. This one captains
Is this a joke? Did someone put this paper up to smear someone's reputation? There isn't anything close to good data or analysis there. You can't put that out there.
Slashdot shouldn't be looking at this, it's embarrassing.
Magnetic levitation photos or it didn't happen.
-- Alastair
Silver IS cheap. They even use it in many solders.
In a superconductor, it wouldn't have to be very thick. Compared to the cost of solid copper wire for the same current, it'd probably be a lot cheaper. Copper isn't all that cheap these days.
In that case, we'll just make it out of unobtanium.
Uhhhm no, you don't have to wait for replication. All you have to do is move on to the next story and ignore this stupidity. It's a SINGLE AUTHOR PAPER from some dude at the University of North Bengal, which was reported by a laughably sensationalistic pseudoscience mongering blog and regurgitated here by perhaps the dumbest, most credulous editor on /.'s staff: kdawson (who posts trumpet-blaring room temperature superconductivity stories with such regularity that you could probably set your watch by it). Hang your head in shame /.
- "Hear that?! The percolations are imminent! Cease your ingress!"
I hate to say it, but let's wait a tad for confirmation. Indian institutions have had a tendency in the past to, let's say: exaggerate their achievements....
If reproduced, it'll be a great win. But I remain skeptical.
the "kink" that supports superconductivity does not look like an actual kink.....I dont know how they decided to fit their data but dartboard springs to mind
www.RacquetUp.org - Helping Detroit Youth
I skimmed TFA and from what I understand (and I don't understand much to be true) they merely suppose there is "super conduction phase" within this material based on some observations (sharp change in resistance(temp) function or something [not measured directly?]). Neither they directly observed superconductivity, nor they claim so. They state that their conclusion is true assuming that some theory is true ("The data have been interpreted in the framework of above model", which probably isn't yet confirmed).
I'd say that this article is far from stating that room-temperature superconductor of any kind has been found. No breakthrough here.
It appears no one (but Slashdot) has commented on it in any way yet. I'm reminded of the "Surfer dude stuns physicists with Theory of Everything" headlines that had scientists so stunned they haven't commented on it in three years...
Consider that copper is used in nearly everything, while silver has a relatively low demand with a high supply. Then jack up the demand for silver to the levels copper is at, and see where the price really is.
Amazing! Simply ama...
"In prison you just have to shut your eyes and take it. Here you have to shut your eyes and give it."
Where do I mail the cash??? ;-)
My cursory and inexpert review says that the graphs look extremely inconclusive. I wouldn't hold much hope.
Whoever banked on silver will care a great deal. Bauxite is too common for aluminum prices to rise a lot, but another industrial use for silver makes it jump a few. Did any of these researchers invest in metals recently?
I'd easily settle for a room temperature superconductor first, and then worry about mass producing using viable (read cheap) alternative materials later on, no?
...this ground-breaking invention. Granted, it is from Nepal, and not India, but it is close enough.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
I'm a condensed matter physicist. This claim is weak beyond belief, and it pains me to no end to see it get picked up by slashdot and other sites (nextbigfuture.com). To demonstrate superconductivity, you need to show (a) zero resistance over some range of current; (b) the Meissner effect (expulsion of magnetic flux, seen via magnetometry); (c) a characteristic feature of a phase transition in the heat capacity. This paper shows exactly none of these things. The noise level in the resistance measurements is so poor, you could not tell the difference between zero and 0.01 Ohms (which would be totally believable considering there is already a metal film in the system). This paper in its present form is not fit for publication. Seriously, you don't have to be an expert at this stuff to see that this is weak - just look at the noise level in the current-voltage curves and use some common sense!
talking about the contents of the paper! Seems like the "quantum theorists" and web coders who roam around on ./ can't decode real physics, but sure can come with lame comments.
Can we make electric motors with zero friction if we had RTSCs? It would seem that even the best of electric motors need bearings support the main rotating mechanism.
It would amazing to have giant 5 metre size motors that were completely silent.
Why OpalCalc is the best Windows calc
I'm going to use some of this superconductor in my perpetual motion machine that feeds the cold fusion reactor I'm planning.
deposited on a lead zirconate titanate
Sorry. That violates RoHS regulations.
Have gnu, will travel.
But if this replaces coper wire, what will all the crack addicts steal from construction sites?
Have gnu, will travel.
But kudos for the ringworld reference
http://michaelsmith.id.au
There was also a discovery of a superconducting phase formed at the surface of an N-type diamond substrate six years ago. Since then, Johan Prins has managed to get one paper published in a semiconductor journal, but this work has been almost completely ignored by the scientific community. More disturbingly, to my knowledge, is that there has been no effort to duplicate this astonishing result, nor a single challenge of the experimental method or physics contained within the paper.
The observed behavior is clearly at odds with the presently accepted superconducting theory, and should be welcomed by any open-minded scientist, or at the very least refuted. The accepted theory not only doesn't fit the data for Type-II superconductors, it is useless in practice, and offers no real insight into the physical phenomenon.
Since then, he has postulated a new theory of superconductivity, and a new interpretation* of quantum mechanics, both of which look very reasonable from what I have seen. What is more, his theory accurately models both types of superconductors with the same physics, and is useful enough to engineer new superconductors. If the theory does fit the existing data more accurately, this certainly deserves further investigation.
Though I haven't been able to track down his book, there are chapters of his current and upcoming books here. They at least give insight into his ideas. My crude understanding follows, and I look forward to the completed book.
The fundamental idea, is that the the wave equation is not a probability distribution of a point particle, but a harmonic wave which represents the mass distribution of the particle, the complex part of which is actually another dimension. There are no particles, only waves, and all are subject to appropriate boundary conditions. The extra dimension also provides a pair of entangled "particles" a mechanism for action at a distance--they are in reality a single wave. Photons are waves without mass, and may entangle with an electron, imparting energy in the process. An interesting point, is that in Kaluza-Klein theory, Einstein's field equations and Maxwell's equations fall out of general relativity, simply by assuming an extra dimension.
Anyway, as applied to his superconducting discovery, the electrons actually entangle into a single electron wave, and form what he calls an array of orbitals. It is a purely electronic Bose-Einstein condensate, which is stable at room temperature, and where charge moves not by some convoluted electron-pair and phonon interaction, but by a quantum effect, in what is otherwise essentially an insulator. This same array is asserted to form within metals, or within the ceramic superconductors between layers, where there are sufficient donor atoms. All that is required is for the right density of orbitals to form and entangle, and that charge carriers be anchored somewhere, so that they can not undergo acceleration and collisions. (Which is why the best conductors do not superconduct.)
* the currently accepted interpretation of quantum mechanics is unsatisfying to say the least. The math is useful, but who really believes that wave-particle duality and the statistical interpretation are not a mere mathematical construct, but the foundation of reality? Never once did I believe that, nor did Einstein or Schrödinger, and it is disturbing that people would so easily accept it as fact.
Sure, but even so, 1) the amount of silver you'd need wouldn't be much per foot of wire, and 2) it'd be used for high-value/high-performance applications, not to replace all the wire out there. Of course, this assumes that this is for real; I'm not holding my breath.
Silver
The purpose of language is communication, If the idea is clear the grammar ain't important
Since when did an overrated speaker company get involved in physics? I would have preferred B&W-Einstein meself.
Crack addicts? Maybe things are different in your area, but here in Phoenix, the tweakers (meth addicts) are famous for stealing anything that can be melted down, at least they were until tough new laws were instituted on scrap-metal dealers.
I fully expect to never hear about this again.
Three of Earth's most chemically imbalanced heros!
It's The Manic Maurauder! (POW!)
The Hyperthymic Huntress! (ZAP!)
And The Depressed Defender! (Mwah-mwahhh!)
Using their insanity in a never-ending battle against crime and the forces of evil!
They're off their meds and on the case! It's The Bipolorons!!
.
Prisencolinensinainciusol. Ol Rait!
Which is likely exactly the only thing that would work, unfortunately.
Nothing you said is relevant except for the actual paper, which is well written (and doesn't read like a crank - he appears to be fully cognizant of the current state of the field). I've posted (elsewhere on this page) exactly why this conclusion is unlikely (based on a critique of the actual arxiv paper). Further, the author does not claim what the summary here states (another reason to RTFA) - he merely states that it may be an indication of superconductivity in the context of a specific model that was published a while ago (in a mainstream journal). You might want to take a minute to look into it before showing your ignorance with such ludicrous rants.
Actually, everything I said was relevant and it's called considering the source. Something Slashdot editors, and apparently yourself, care little for. Single author papers in the twenty-first century are the hundred decibel alarm bells of pseudoscience and there is NO WAY in a million years that a paper with a substantial result about something as earth-shattering as room temperature superconductivity is going to be single author (and it sure as hell isn't going to first appear on the freakin' ArXiv).
Your claim that the paper itself is somehow mischaracterized in this story's post is a joke. The title of the paper is "Indications of room-temperature superconductivity at a metal-PZT interface", it's practically identical to what the story here claims. I read the paper and the author is clearly claiming RTSC effects in a PZT transducer, an extraordinary claim if there ever was one. Furthermore, he pompously refers to himself as "we" throughout the paper, even though he's the only author. Credible physicists who are NOT CRACKPOTS, do not put the phrase "room temperature superconductivity" in the title of a paper without making sure the rest of that fucker is filled to the brim with the most spectacularly extraordinary evidence that anyone in the field has seen in years, in order to support such a wildly sensationalistic claim. This paper has exactly none of that kind of evidence and because of it, the author deserves to have his name now associated with a certain Pons and a certain Fleischmann. It doesn't even have a plot showing K vs. ohms at the Tc, the paper is a joke, it's not even fit for burning.
- "Hear that?! The percolations are imminent! Cease your ingress!"
Riddle me this: if "considering the source" is the only valid criterion on which a person's authority on a subject rests, then how the hell does said person achieve enough authority to ever pass the "consider the source" test?
Considering the source is a shortcut for where to look for interesting papers. It does not, however, have anything to do with the validity of the data itself.
Is it an extraordinary claim? Sure is. Is it valid to wait for someone with some authority to make similar claims before judging that paper? Sure is. Is it possible to dismiss the claims immediately? Complete,utter, bullshit. Your entire argument rests on semantic and personal judgments. There is not a single iota of science in your post. It beats the hell out of me how you got modded up.
Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
I wouldn't trust any voltage measurement made on this PZT.
Riddle me this: if "considering the source" is the only valid criterion on which a person's authority on a subject rests, then how the hell does said person achieve enough authority to ever pass the "consider the source" test?
You author a paper alongside someone who's already an authority in the subject. In the field of Mathematics, for instance, this is measured as the Erdos number though similar schemes exist for other fields as well.
No problem is insoluble in all conceivable circumstances.
It was thousands of micro black holes simultaneously created in a vortex. They annihilate each other in seconds, and collapse a quantum vacuum around the radius of the muon. This lowers the temperature automatically in that region of the molecular assembler, and then it warps space time for a second to super conduct from one part of the crystal matrix to another.
It's not like a traditional superconductor at all, and that's why it works at room temperature, but only in the tropics.
I hold very few opinions. I hold information based on observation and fact. If you wish to disagree, please use facts.
Or he'll try to corner the silver market.
On second thoughts...
Watch this Heartland Institute video
Yeah, that's got nothing at all to do with anything that deglr6328 pointed out. Where, in his post, did he mention at all the identity or even qualifications of the author?
In this case, there are a few ways in which the author could have made his paper more credible, all without requiring anything resembling authority:
1. Collaborated with other condensed matter physicists.
2. Submitted paper for publication in prestigious journal (with a high-profile discovery like room-temperature superconductivity, this would be a discovery fit for such a journal).
3. Worked to get more comprehensive data before claiming room-temperature superconductivity.
It could be that he lacks the equipment and resources to do such. But he has what he considers to be interesting evidence, and is throwing it at the ceiling to see if it sticks.
More investigation using better equipment could show it to be a glitch in the noise, or it could clean it up and we are on our way to something really big. Does it belong on slashdot yet? Well, that depends on future results!
Prediction for end of Universe #42: Fencepost error in Quantum_bogosort.cpp
As the silver is vapor-deposited a few atoms thick - I don't think it is going to affect the world stocks of silver. Granny's old plate could keep us going for a few thousand years.
Prediction for end of Universe #42: Fencepost error in Quantum_bogosort.cpp
Where are the error bars?
I had a college teacher in one of the experimental courses who figuratively ran over me and some of my fellow students' reports for plotting graphs of measured quantities without error bars, particularly when there's a "curve fit" on it. The idea is to figure out how close/far from the "expected behavior" are the experimental point. From then on I've always paid attention to it. At least some reference to it in the preprint would be nice. For all we know, those microvolt output voltages could have errors as big as the graph scale.
My sig is better than your sig.
Just give it a rest you worthless piece of trash.
Nonsense. Single author papers are common in science. The number of authors has absolutely nothing to do with the quality of the paper. Ditto for publishing on arXiv. ArXiv has become the de facto standard venue for publishing preprints. The Gupta result may be rubbish, but the fact that he published without co-authors, and put the preprint on arXiv has nothing to do with the quality of the paper.
Just because you are paranoid does not mean that no-one is out to get you.
The correct pronoun in a single author paper is still "we". If you are unaware of this then why would anything else that you say about the state of the literature be credible?
For the [citation needed] crowd.
Slashdot: where don knuth is an idiot because he cant grasp the awesome power of php
Yeah, that's got nothing at all to do with anything that deglr6328 pointed out. Where, in his post, did he mention at all the identity or even qualifications of the author?
In this case, there are a few ways in which the author could have made his paper more credible, all without requiring anything resembling authority:
1. Collaborated with other condensed matter physicists.
2. Submitted paper for publication in prestigious journal (with a high-profile discovery like room-temperature superconductivity, this would be a discovery fit for such a journal).
3. Worked to get more comprehensive data before claiming room-temperature superconductivity.
Honestly it's things like this which makes science unappealing to younger generations. Nothing like watching someone put their toe in the water and have every other scientist verbally trash him as if the extra vitriol were necessary.
Out of modpoints but really liked a post? 1BDkF6TtmmeZ3yqXbz9yhdYVqRYnwFoXDj
fuckin' superconductors. HOW DO THEY WORK? ?
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
UofB does a synchronized dance, singing of their utter asskickedness as, in the background, thousands of IIT students sharpen their pencils.
It's ON, yaar.
It's never a bad time to rant about kdawson's sensationalism. That kind of rant is refreshing in the morning, invigorating even.
sadly, the more basic law that stealing power lines while they are still connected is highly correlated with premature death hasn't had much impact, apparently.
I thought that the mechanism for Copper Yttrium Barium Oxide low temperature superconductivity was Cooper Pairs traveling unimpeded through an emergent Bose Einstein Condensate.
Perovskites have a similar lattice structure and would therefore make an ideal substitute for forming an Bose Einstein Condensate.
The low quality of the perovskite used in the experiment may only be suitable for testing the effect in aggregate and may not be suitable for deployment.
Silver: about $18 / oz. Gold is around $1200 / oz
BTW, silver is already double the price of copper; a fact I didn't realize when I wrote that post.
They don't need laws to deal with that. They just need to build the power poles so that there's a nice metal step (connected to ground) for the thief to stand on while he reaches up to grab the power line, along with a nice metal handhold (also connected to ground) to hold onto. Then just change policies so that any bodies or charred body parts littering the area are not cleaned up, so they can serve as a warning, and no one will bother trying to steal them again.
This is informative? No serious mathematician takes the Erdös number as more than pure entertainment (for what it's worth, I am a professional mathematician). You are essentially advocating authority by association, which can rapidly degenerate into nepotism. I don't know about other fields, but mathematics is actually one field where truth can be judged (though sometimes it take ridiculously long) and reputation earned.
Engineers also speak PDE, only in a different dialect.
The scientific community is ignoring him, because he's a retard.
Don't blame me, I was aiming for Funny.
No problem is insoluble in all conceivable circumstances.
Forgot to mention - Copper is about $3 / lb, or $0.19 / oz.
I am a little unclear as to why my comment was scored "flamebait". At it happens I work in the large-scale electricity world, and the amount of aluminum and steel that is used for high-voltage transmission lines is staggering. As is the amount of copper used for underground high-voltage cables in places like NYC and Chicago. A room temperature superconductor is badly needed for those applications, but it would need to be almost as cheap as aluminum to be useful. Silver ain't.
sPh
until the experiment has been repeated by someone else, I'm not holding any hope.
Wait... WAIT!
I have a friend- Stanley Pons!
With a bit of Fleishman margarine, I think this can be arranged!
.
- aqk
F U
> The surface resistance of the silver-coated samples also shows a sharp change near 313 K.
Pure copper does the exact same thing.
I call bogus.
Maury
Cheap shi.. uhh, shot.
Time to grow up, sonny boy!
This phenomenon has already been explained quite explicitly
at the SLASHDOT TIMECUBE!
Well known here amongst us slashdot cognoscenti. Where ya been?
.
- aqk
F U
Carbon-graphite?
Hmm.
AC
That's a convention now, but it wasn't always the case, and there's no reason why it should be necessary. If you really don't think anything written in the first person is credible then you will have to take issue with thousands of articles in the Proceedings of the Royal Society. For instance: http://rstl.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/12/133-142/821).
Conservation of angular momentum makes the world go round.
And in fact is is *STILL* the convention to use "I" for a single author in the Proceedings of the Royal Society. (http://rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/366/1882/3883) I hope you've learned something today.
Conservation of angular momentum makes the world go round.
I pointed out the GP that avoiding writing in the first person was not grounds to dismiss the paper that he was criticising. I pointed out that given that writing in the first person was frowned upon in the majority of venues his criticism was bogus and cast doubts upon his opinions on what should be in the literature.
So while your two posts have conclusively proven that the Royal Society operates that way it doesn't change anything that I have said.
Yes indeed. I've learnt that your reading comprehension is terrible.
Slashdot: where don knuth is an idiot because he cant grasp the awesome power of php
Oh I see. The problem was that the GP you refer to was below my threshold, and it looked like you were replying to that post's parent.
Conservation of angular momentum makes the world go round.
Ah I've done that a few times myself. Thought it made a strange reply :)
Slashdot: where don knuth is an idiot because he cant grasp the awesome power of php