Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

High Temperature Superconductivity Record Smashed By Sulfur Hydride

Posted by timothy on from the could-have-been-taking-steroids dept.

KentuckyFC writes Physicists at the Max Planck Institute for Chemistry in Germany have measured sulfur hydride superconducting at 190 Kelvin or -83 degrees Centigrade, albeit at a pressure of 150 gigapascals, about the half that at the Earth's core. If confirmed, that's a significant improvement over the existing high pressure record of 164 kelvin. But that's not why this breakthrough is so important. Until now, all known high temperature superconductors have been ceramic mixes of materials such as copper, oxygen lithium, and so on, in which physicists do not yet understand how superconductivity works. By contrast, sulfur hydride is a conventional superconductor that is described by the BCS theory of superconductivity first proposed in 1957 and now well understood. Most physicists had thought that BCS theory somehow forbids high temperature superconductivity--the current BCS record-holder is magnesium diboride, which superconducts at just 39 Kelvin. Sulfur hydride smashes this record and will focus attention on other hydrogen-bearing materials that might superconduct at even higher temperatures. The team behind this work point to fullerenes, aromatic hydrocarbons and graphane as potential targets. And they suggest that instead of using high pressures to initiate superconductivity, other techniques such as doping, might work instead.

3 of 80 comments (clear)

  1. Oh Carbon by Firethorn · · Score: 4, Interesting

    fullerenes, aromatic hydrocarbons and graphane

    Oh Carbon, is there anything you can't do?

    Seriously. Superconductors, batteries, capacitors, bullet proof vests, orbital cables, etc...?

    --
    I don't read AC A human right
    1. Re:Oh Carbon by Rei · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The nice potential about a carbon-based superconductor would be the possibility that it could be produced very cheaply. Your raw materials are not a price-limiting factor - think "plastic". Thus there's the potential to be way cheaper than copper, yet superconducting. That would be a total game changer to say the least. Lower distribution costs, way more power to the home, far easier to do long-distance transmission, all electric motors being superconducting motors, nearly lossless electronic devices, potential for major improvements in computer performance, cheap maglev, and on and on. There's good reason why affordable room-temperature superconductors are one of the holy grails of modern technology. There's even a type of energy storage system you can make with superconductors - one of the highest power density and efficiency energy storage methods known to man. The energy density will probably always be too low for electric vehicles, but if room temperature superconductors were cheap, that could be amazing for fixed-installation applications.

      --
      "We consider that six courts and an asylum claim are a rather odd way of returning to Sweden within a month."
  2. sulfur hydride vs. hydrogen sulfide... by jeffb+(2.718) · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I was trying to figure out why they're referring to "sulfur hydride" instead of "hydrogen sulfide". After I got off our broken public wifi and got the paper to load, I see that sulfur turns metallic above 95 GPa, and apparently hydrogen sulfide at high pressures starts to become metallic as well. In that regime, it probably makes more sense to think of it as a metal hydride, if not an intermetallic compound.