Drama as boffins claim to reach the Holy Grail of superconductivity A pair of physicists have claimed to reach the holy grail in physics: room temperature superconductivity. Unsurprisingly, the results have raised several eyebrows and the fear of another cold fusion fiasco. It has also led to a series of strange events involving the impersonation of a famous physicist using an encrypted email …
I always thought that hot fusion worked well - or at least it appeared to be doing ok this morning before it clouded over.
Cold fusion works 100% of the time. Not well, most certainly not gainfully!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutron_generator#/media/File:Neutristor_in_its_simplest_form.JPG
Aka, a neutron generator. Generated neutrons, generates a large electric bill, heat, not so much.
So, fusion does occur and indeed, at room temperature. Poorly, with massive losses. Tweaks lower the loss, increase neutron creation, at a cost of additional energy input at room temperature and ambient pressure.
What gets done now is high pressure, insanely high pressure and hence, temperature isn't extremely relevant there, save if one is conducting quantum level calculations.
This post has been deleted by its author
I always thought that hot fusion worked well - or at least it appeared to be doing ok this morning before it clouded over.
I think skin-cancer campaigns would be much more successful if weather presenters used appropriate terminology.
"The vast nuclear furnace in the sky will be visible between five forty seven a.m. and eight twenty two p.m. Viewers are advised to take necessary steps to shield themselves from its carcinogenic rays."
"The vast nuclear furnace in the sky will be visible between five forty seven a.m. and eight twenty two p.m. Viewers are advised to take necessary steps to shield themselves from its carcinogenic rays."
Be fair: the Sun is only the world's second biggest cause of cancer -- oxygen beats it by a mile.
But that's probably our fault, for letting Frenchmen into recording studios.
I always thought that hot fusion worked well - or at least it appeared to be doing ok this morning before it clouded over.
And before some smartarse points out that they were talking about fusion on Earth, we do have working fusion devices on the Earth.
It's just they only work for less than a second and tend to make very big holes, and are known by names like "Mk/B53" or 'bucket of instant sunshine'...
Oh look, a picture of one >>>>>>
Oh, do you see quantum computing and string theory there with you?
Nope, as string theory still is circulating, as modified and quantum computing, well, I've reviewed classified communications about such a computer that is indeed in usage. Then, the chatter ceased and it went all M32 encrypted.
So, there's something, nowhere ready for prime time and when it's released, I'll not be permitted to speak of it.
Which leads me to say, I can neither confirm nor deny whether I exist or not...
"... you can't turn it off and on again as it's not on or off."
You're not performing the procedure correctly. You need to turn it off and on again *at the same time*.
Of course, that's for quantum software problems. If it's a hardware problem you can resolve it by opening the box and taking a look inside.
"I don't mind opening the box as long as there isn't a cat involved."
If it's a networked quantum computer, there may be some cat6 involved. So that's six cats, one alive, one dead, one half alive, one half dead, one that doesn't give a fuck, and one that is very pissed off.
"I have a string theory for when people ask me "How long is a piece of string?"
The answer is half it's length times by two."
I have a different theory that is better supported by the available observations.
It is just short of the length it needs to be.
"It is just short of the length it needs to be."
It could be that this is just about the long and the short of it.
A string is not "twice as long as the distance from the middle to one end", not always. Strings, according to the theories, vibrate in multiple axes. This makes their lengths at any instant in time indeterminate which leads to the knowledge that should one measure half of its length, the other half will have changed in all but the most unlikely points of the probability spaces. Technically, this would mean that you have the wrong "middle" but *any* middle on a loop of moving, morphing, multi-axially vibrating "stuff" would only be ephemeral anyway if it could be defined at all. Topologically, a string has no "middle" and, as it isn't often perfectly circular, spherical or other multi-dimensional analogue, most likely no "centre", either.
On the subject of quantum computing: on the only occasion when the experiment was actually tried, the cat was neither living nor dead. It was simply missing. It had decided that it was pissed off with being killed and not-killed all the time so it slipped away and left in its place a very confused dog.
"This makes their lengths at any instant in time indeterminate which leads to the knowledge that should one measure half of its length, the other half will have changed in all but the most unlikely points of the probability spaces."
I think you have the wrong end of the problem.
I'll get my coat, it's the one made of string.
as someone said.
And quantum computing... oh my God!!! Those people trying to make it work would do far better working on the fundamentals first, huge disappointment lies ahead. Quantum is not what they think, there is no way it will ever work the way they want, quantum has a charm of its own.
Temps superconductors work at has NOTHING to do with things like plasma temps. It's the holy grail because one doesn't have to use extreme cryogenics to make superconducting magnets for things like plasma confinement. They're only sideways related. It just makes things a little easier though your actual plasma pressure is the key issue not what temp the magnets work at - it's how strong they are.
Why must people say silly things whenever the serious issue of fusion reactors comes up. While people make snarky comments other people are getting it done.
"Why must people say silly things whenever the serious issue of fusion reactors comes up."
Because a lot of designs for fusion reactors use superconductors, so there's somewhat of a link there.
Though to be honest, plasma only entered the discussion as a joke about getting an extension lead to the sun... not related to superconductors until that comment. (Though I suppose, if you're going to connect a power cord to the sun, it'd be better to have it superconducting. Or really high voltage. Actually, thanks to Maxwell, I think it might be really high voltage anyway, calculations on a postcard please.)
HOT fusion exists and works 100%, 1% of the time with no net gain. (Currently)
Cold fusion however does not exist. Cold Fusion was a term invented by the press in an attempt to understand a reported discovery by two electrochemists Martin Fleischmann and Stanley Pons in the late 80s. They claimed to have observed excess heat created by an electrochemical reaction between poladium and Heavy water using small amounts of electricity at room temperature this in turn generated no nuclear reaction at all with no nuclear by products produced just heat. I dont think they even claimed to have discovered a revolutionary new form of power generation i believe that was adlib courtesy of the press. To this day no one can explain why they were getting their results as it appears to be behavior that goes against known physics.
Unfortunately, their experiment proved difficult to reproduce in the lab and was subsequently debunked. Though from what i remember and maybe worth noting a lot of the debunkers were sponsored by the fossil fuel industry.
Currently e-Cat are the only tech firm pursuing this technology as far as i am aware. They themselves face stiff debunking, though they continue to stand by their tech. Meh...
Also, Quantum computing does work. Understanding the science involved will make your head explode though. Do you believe in the multiverse or alternate realities? Eh, whaaaaa... Ok, mind blown. Thanks for that Mr Cox...
"claim that silver particles embedded in samples of gold can become superconductive at 236 Kelvin or -37.15 degrees Celsius" If that's room temperature, somebody really has their AC cranked up. (It would of course be considerably warmer than previous "high temperature" superconductors, but temperatures like that are found in the Arctic... in winter. Or maybe Minnesota.)
"They also claimed a sample was still super conductive at 77°C but they could not find the critical temperature because it was higher than the limit of their equipment. The equipment mentioned in the paper works up to 400K (127°C)."
Sure, but that's not the weakest link in their equipment.
ipads don't do well above 70°.
Like astronomy & "metal" or "low frequency", "room temperature" has a very different meaning for superconductor physics than for general usage. When I complained to my physicist friend about twenty five years ago, he responded, "liquid nitrogen is cheaper than milk."
When I complained to my physicist friend about twenty five years ago, he responded, "liquid nitrogen is cheaper than milk."
Cheaper than milk, soda, and unleaded. In the 1990s, the lab I worked at was purchasing liquid nitrogen at about $0.06 per liter. It led to some interesting economic design decisions in experimental equipment. Electricity for sample heating was expensive, but nitrogen for cooling was cheap.
Interesting how the immediate response without seeing any supporting evidence at all was 'this is clearly bullshit'.
Yes, this would be one of the scientific breakthroughs of all time, and naturally something as huge as this needs peer review and replication. However, while it is likely to be incorrect as the odd emails seem to point out, I find it sad that the initial reaction seems to be from other people claiming they're just 'in it for the money' and 'Let their colleagues convince them that it is in their best interest to do so instead of hiding behind technicalities.”' - they wouldn't be saying this if THEY had discovered the secret...
I hope it IS true. Perhaps then the whole concept of peer review and scientific method should be slightly revised as to not immediately pour scorn on those who claim to have discovered something before THEY did...
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
