Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by cthalupa 1048 days ago
Sure. No one reasonable is seeing this and deciding they need to go investing their life savings in whatever adjacent stocks they think will take off. Skepticism is fine.

The Nature article is still weird in tone, though, since there's been plenty of interesting results that have been replicated. LK99 is a weird material, at the very least. That it's weird in a way that somewhat implies it could be an RTAPS makes it plenty interesting.

I've seen a lot of discussion around LK99 in a bunch of different contexts, and the portion of people that are treating it like anything more than entertaining curiosity at this point is extremely low - so this article really reads as the authors being upset that other people are having fun in their domain. That's what comes across as gatekeeping.

Or the concerns around "amateur" reproduction - who is trying to reproduce this without any understanding of how to operate the equipment or some understandings around basic chemistry and physics? These private reproductions are being done by engineers, chemists, physicists, etc. - I haven't seen anything to indicate that people with no business doing these experiments are rushing out there to try it.

It's just a very strange to be written in the tone it is and make these points. It seems very divorced from the reality of the situation, which is basically a whole lot of people on twitter memeing "MAKE ROCK FLOAT"/"WE BACK"/"ITS SO OVER", people on more technical/science oriented forums having the sorts of discussions we see on HN, and most the population sitting around waiting to see if anything useful comes of this.

1 comments

Having worked in a solid state lab that focused on synthesis and imaging characterization of various substrates including superconductors, being an engineer does not make you not an amateur.
Please read my comment again. I am not saying engineers (of the sort attempting replication) are more than amateurs when it comes to superconductors, I am saying they are not amateurs around relatively mundane equipment.

> who is trying to reproduce this without any understanding of how to operate the equipment or some understandings around basic chemistry and physics?

The engineers replicating it are at places that already had this equipment. They weren't using it to try and make floating rocks, but they didn't have the furnaces, etc., sitting around for the hell of it, and they're going to be aware of basic precautions like "Don't eat your lead and don't breathe it in in vaporized form when pulling it out of a 1000C furnace."

I do not understand the idea that people already using this equipment day to day for other purposes are somehow at significant risk while attempting to synthesize LK-99