Slashdot Mirror
A Material Found To Carry Current In a Way Never Before Observed (phys.org)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Phys.Org: Scientists at the Florida State University-headquartered National High Magnetic Field Laboratory have discovered a behavior in materials called cuprates that suggests they carry current in a way entirely different from conventional metals such as copper. The research, published today in the journal Science, adds new meaning to the materials' moniker, "strange metals." Cuprates are high-temperature superconductors (HTS), meaning they can carry current without any loss of energy at somewhat warmer temperatures than conventional, low-temperature superconductors (LTS). Although scientists understand the physics of LTS, they haven't yet cracked the nut of HTS materials. Exactly how the electrons travel through these materials remains the biggest mystery in the field.
For their research on one specific cuprate, lanthanum strontium copper oxide (LSCO), a team led by MagLab physicist Arkady Shekhter focused on its normal, metallic state -- the state from which superconductivity eventually emerges when the temperature dips low enough. This normal state of cuprates is known as a "strange" or "bad" metal, in part because the electrons don't conduct electricity particularly well. Scientists have studied conventional metals for more than a century and generally agree on how electricity travels through them. They call the units that carry charge through those metals "quasiparticles," which are essentially electrons after factoring in their environment. These quasiparticles act nearly independently of each other as they carry electric charge through a conductor. But does quasiparticle flow also explain how electric current travels in the cuprates? At the National MagLab's Pulsed Field Facility in Los Alamos, New Mexico, Shekhter and his team investigated the question. They put LSCO in a very high magnetic field, applied a current to it, then measured the resistance. The resulting data revealed that the current cannot, in fact, travel via conventional quasiparticles, as it does in copper or doped silicon. The normal metallic state of the cuprate, it appeared, was anything but normal.
For their research on one specific cuprate, lanthanum strontium copper oxide (LSCO), a team led by MagLab physicist Arkady Shekhter focused on its normal, metallic state -- the state from which superconductivity eventually emerges when the temperature dips low enough. This normal state of cuprates is known as a "strange" or "bad" metal, in part because the electrons don't conduct electricity particularly well. Scientists have studied conventional metals for more than a century and generally agree on how electricity travels through them. They call the units that carry charge through those metals "quasiparticles," which are essentially electrons after factoring in their environment. These quasiparticles act nearly independently of each other as they carry electric charge through a conductor. But does quasiparticle flow also explain how electric current travels in the cuprates? At the National MagLab's Pulsed Field Facility in Los Alamos, New Mexico, Shekhter and his team investigated the question. They put LSCO in a very high magnetic field, applied a current to it, then measured the resistance. The resulting data revealed that the current cannot, in fact, travel via conventional quasiparticles, as it does in copper or doped silicon. The normal metallic state of the cuprate, it appeared, was anything but normal.
In the spirit of Slashdot ... can we use this in a Tesla 3 battery?
While I understand only half of these words, advances in high temperature superconductors have the potential to have an incredible impact on an incredible amount of things, and understanding how they work is a precious first step.
Imagine super long distance lossless power lines, incredibly strong electromagnets everywhere, awesome maglev trains, and whatever repercussions this might have for electronics.
Sure, HTS still work at cryogenic temperatures, but if they can be at least made to work around the temperatures of cheap liquid nitrogen, this would be awesome!
alas, TRUMP has killed the EPA and has killed SCIENCE.
That's nothing compared to the laughably poor English you use.
The phrase "would of" is the sort of speech one expects from people who live in trailer parks.
That was beautiful. I couldn't have said it better myself.
Kudos.
STFU elitist prick
Multiple posts, all idiots, and the freaking Article doesn't even link the free, actually readable link to the story.
All I see here anymore are political whining, Team trolling, paid positions, and bullshit.
The first actual science in a while, and no interest.
Wow.
Here's a link to ArXiv, and the original pdf:
https://arxiv.org/abs/1705.058...
Truth isn't Truth - Guliani
STFU elitist prick
Apparently you're a person who believes ignorance is something worthy of pride.
It must suck to be you, and I mean that most sincerely.
The debate on which direction electrons flow (to positive + or to negative -) is ALMOST as heated as vi vs EMACS. Now they want to inject a new vector? WW III commencing in 3, 2, 1...
"A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." - K
"Elitists" pride themselves in having things you can't. He just corrected your fucking grammar. That's the opposite of elitism. Work on your vocabulary. You don't even have a strong enough grasp of the language to understand how wrong you are about everything.
You should of never of come here.
Are you talking to a mirror?
There's supposed to be a comma after "Apparently." I hope you're proud of yourself, you ignorant bastard!
Have you been voting Republican since the '70s? If so, this is partly your fault and I don't want to hear your bitching. That party has consistently been defunding education my entire life. You rip what you sew, or so I've herd.
Hey, I would of left but my tires on the three wheeler was flat. Hella cool in there.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
May be english is not is native language, or may be he is using an autocorrection for another language...
Not everybody is fluent in english (i m not...)
LSD, shrooms or good old schizophrenia?
Interesting. See, as Asimov pointed out, we have a cult of ignorance. Most people wouldn't know how to spell elitist, let alone pronounce it. Which means you've gone to school, but you feel guilty for being educated
Electrons are negative. Hence they flow from negative to positive. Unless you aren't living on this side of the big bang, of course, and are the goatee-wearing evil anti-matter version of yourself.
The MOST annoying freaking thing in electronics education though, is when the writer fails to mention if he means the technical or physical direction. (IMHO, fuck the "technical" direction! Just admit you got it wrong back then, and get real!)
Not as annoying as the "Jraphics Interchange Format" herd though. Now *there*'s a reason to start WW III, aka "humans VS retards"! :)
Just with a different polarity.
Emacs is not an editor, but a OS anyway. :)
But that aside, they are the opposite of emergent or elegant.
Notepad is easy but also way too powerless.
Emacs and Vim are powerful but also way too hard.
It’s that power per difficulty ratio that's important.
A *good* editor would be as powerful as Vim/Emacs, AND as easy as Notepad.
My favorite editor is Kate.
I could use a bit more power though. But not without compromising usability.
You mention maglev trains and powerful magnetic fields.
The article is clear that the resistance of the LSCO material increases with temperature, and this new research finds that it similarly increases in the presence of strong magnetic fields, suggesting a very simple fundamental property behind the observed behavior.
In any case, this HTS does not work well in the presence of strong magnetic fields, so you can cross that application off your list.
See, it is running hot so it can take advantage of the HTS!
Actually, as a non native speaker, this is the kind of error that I could not do.
I believe this derive from someone that learned English "by ear", and "have" and "of" may sound similar, so a child can grow learning a construct that does not make sense from the grammar point of view.
Like it's - its, there - their, this is the class of errors that i associate with native speakers.
In this particular case, it is because most people don't say "would have" when speaking, the say "would've". It would sound a bit odd and pompous to say "would have" and pronounce each word in a clear and distinct way.
The sound of "would've" when spoken sounds indistinguishable from "would of" and so some people just make the connection in their minds and can't break it.
Or maybe you can recognize that native speakers typically elide in informal speech.
Recognition of cultural linguistic patterns is the difference between our college education and your high school education.
Mescaline, with a soupçon of Special K.
I don't trust atoms -- they make up stuff.