The First Room-Temperature Ambient-Pressure Superconductor has been found

[MrAeRoZz]

 

 

Summary

South Korean scientists claim to have developed a room-temperature ambient-pressure superconductor called LK-99. If confirmed, it could revolutionize technology as superconductors usually need extreme cooling. LK-99's critical temperature is 127°C, making it suitable for various applications without requiring high pressure. The researchers believe LK-99 exhibits superconductivity due to stress on lead from copper atoms. Further verification is needed, but if successful, it could open new possibilities for humankind. The paper is available on arXiv.

 

Quotes

Quote

For the first time in the world, we succeeded in synthesizing the room-temperature superconductor ( K, 127C) working at ambient pressure with a modified lead-apatite (LK-99) structure. The superconductivity of LK-99 is proved with the Critical temperature (), Zero-resistivity, Critical current (), Critical magnetic field (), and the Meissner effect. The superconductivity of LK-99 originates from minute structural distortion by a slight volume shrinkage (0.48 %), not by external factors such as temperature and pressure. The shrinkage is caused by Cu substitution of Pb(2) ions in the insulating network of Pb(2)-phosphate and it generates the stress. It concurrently transfers to Pb(1) of the cylindrical column resulting in distortion of the cylindrical column interface, which creates superconducting quantum wells (SQWs) in the interface. The heat capacity results indicated that the new model is suitable for explaining the superconductivity of LK-99. The unique structure of LK-99 that allows the minute distorted structure to be maintained in the interfaces is the most important factor that LK-99 maintains and exhibits superconductivity at room temperatures and ambient pressure. [...]

All evidence and explanation lead that LK-99 is the first room-temperature and ambient-pressure superconductor. The LK-99 has many possibilities for various applications such as magnet, motor, cable, levitation train, power cable, qubit for a quantum computer, THz Antennas, etc. We believe that our new development will be a brand-new historical event that opens a new era for humankind.

 

 

My thoughts

Because of previous events in this field of research, these Papers are subject to very strong doubt (e.g. https://www.iflscience.com/roomtemperature-superconductivity-has-been-achieved-after-109-years-with-a-catch-57478 this paper claiming similar things has been redacted 2 years later). The paper still needs to undergo peer-review, but if this turns out to be true, the future technologies with this would be changing for the whole world.

 

Sources

 https://www.iflscience.com/first-room-temperature-ambient-pressure-superconductor-achieved-claim-scientists-70001

https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/2307/2307.12008.pdf

[HenrySalayne]

This is quite interesting, but I see two problems:

- Lead is banned under the RoHS directive, so a lead-based superconductor might be a problem.

- The time between creating something in a lab and solving the technical issues to deploy and use it in everyday applications can be easily two decades.

[Curufinwe_wins]

The really cool part of this discovery is that the manufacturing process laid out is hilariously easy, fast, and straightforward. And the claimed conditions are sooo high that one of the supposed demos is literally a video of a guy pushing a crystal on a magnet.

 

Within the next two weeks, we'll know if this is utter fraud or the start of a new era.

 

---

Yes I know it isn't necessarily immediately viable, but proving existence at all would be instant Nobel and a huge achievement for humanity.

[leadeater]

3 hours ago, Curufinwe_wins said:

The really cool part of this discovery is that the manufacturing process laid out is hilariously easy, fast, and straightforward. And the claimed conditions are sooo high that one of the supposed demos is literally a video of a guy pushing a crystal on a magnet.

 

Within the next two weeks, we'll know if this is utter fraud or the start of a new era.

 

---

Yes I know it isn't necessarily immediately viable, but proving existence at all would be instant Nobel and a huge achievement for humanity.

Would this be applicable to MRI-LINAC's? Those are currently really, really expensive. I know "Closed MRI" use superconducting magnets so yes? 

[StDragon]

6 hours ago, HenrySalayne said:

- Lead is banned under the RoHS directive, so a lead-based superconductor might be a problem.

And for good reason; lead is toxic at any level. There is no safe amount. Also the absorption of lead is cumulative over one's lifetime.

 

That said however, it's found everywhere from spent bullets at the range or hunting to wheel balancing weights.

 

So the application of lead "depends". But I agree it should remain banned. It's not worth mass application of this material.

[Zodiark1593]

1 hour ago, StDragon said:

And for good reason; lead is toxic at any level. There is no safe amount. Also the absorption of lead is cumulative over one's lifetime.

 

That said however, it's found everywhere from spent bullets at the range or hunting to wheel balancing weights.

 

So the application of lead "depends". But I agree it should remain banned. It's not worth mass application of this material.

So, assuming that the articles are wholly correct, would this be something you'd consider a sort of  "forbidden fruit", where the toxicity of the material, outweighs the benefits a room-temp superconductor would bring?

 

With the use of lead in mind (and again, assuming the above), I could see it being used for industrial and military applications, things that need tons of power or every edge they can get, but I don't think it would be deployed in consumer applications, where safety measures are far less likely to be effective or adhered to.

[leadeater]

12 minutes ago, Zodiark1593 said:

So, assuming that the articles are wholly correct, would this be something you'd consider a sort of  "forbidden fruit", where the toxicity of the material, outweighs the benefits a room-temp/ambient pressure superconductor would bring?

 

With the use of lead in mind (and again, assuming the above), I could see it being used for industrial and military applications, things that need tons of power or every edge they can get, but I don't think it would be deployed in consumer applications.

Lead is as safe to use as you try to be safe with it i.e. lead paint = no attempt to be safe. I wouldn't say all lead usage is unsafe but I wouldn't say all lead usage is safe either.

 

If this can for example make MRI machines 50% cheaper making cancer treatment cheaper then it could only be a benefit. Operating conditions of MRI's would make lead usage safe inherently anyway.

 

Edit:

Oh also imagine a superconducting magnet in a EV motor, 5000+HP? Hmmm 

[Zodiark1593]

6 minutes ago, leadeater said:

Lead is as safe to use as you try to be safe with it i.e. lead paint = no attempt to be safe. I wouldn't say all lead usage is unsafe but I wouldn't say all lead usage is safe either.

 

If this can for example make MRI machines 50% cheaper making cancer treatment cheaper then it could only be a benefit. Operating conditions of MRI's would make lead usage safe inherently anyway.

I don't see MRI machines and other medical equipment being a problem with the use of lead. Reducing or eliminating the need for liquid helium alone is well worth it. I don't imagine exposure being an issue when contained within the machinery.

 

Consumer goods such as EVs though, I wouldn't imagine ever adopting lead based conductors, despite potential massive benefits to efficiency. A fire would be pretty disastrous, for example.

[leadeater]

4 minutes ago, Zodiark1593 said:

Consumer goods such as EVs though, I wouldn't imagine ever adopting lead based conductors, despite potential massive benefits to efficiency. A fire would be pretty disastrous, for example.

But my EV needs to be as fast as a top fuel drag car

[Zodiark1593]

3 minutes ago, leadeater said:

But my EV needs to be as fast as a top fuel drag car

For once, I can say username checks out.

 

[williamcll]

Mmmmmm yes Lead based MRI

[StDragon]

1 hour ago, Zodiark1593 said:

So, assuming that the articles are wholly correct, would this be something you'd consider a sort of  "forbidden fruit", where the toxicity of the material, outweighs the benefits a room-temp superconductor would bring?

Correct. For example, I would use it in MRI machines, but not for thousands of miles/kilometers of high voltage transmission lines.

[Zodiark1593]

52 minutes ago, StDragon said:

Correct. For example, I would use it in MRI machines, but not for thousands of miles/kilometers of high voltage transmission lines.

Undoubtedly, governments would probably use it for their own purposes too.
 

For ICs, there’s a lot of conflicting info as to the benefits superconducting interconnects and transistors would bring, but the general consensus at least seems to be much heightened efficiency. NASA would probably jump on this in a heartbeat if it pans out. Given that a portion of the composition is lead, would a cpu made with the material, be innately resistant to radiation?
 

If CPUs can yield far greater performance with superconducting materials as well, could probably count on the NSA making use of it. Depending on the performance yields, perhaps it may be time to consider extending AES to a 512-bit key size for general use.

[05032-Mendicant-Bias]

I'm very confident the toxicity of the buiding material is irrelevant for this application. The problem with putting lead in... anything is if you ingest it as it eats your brain connections. Putting it in gasoline has measurably impacted IQ scores over decades.

You could build a room temperature superconductor out of nerve agents and cyanide, and it would still see ubiquotous industrial use. It would only place requirements on the casing and containment.

Our civilization is built on electric energy. Loseless electric power transmission is just too transformative to be passed along. Imagine if this material was compatible with the backplane power delivery of an IC. Imagine all the electric motors out there. IF it's true, it would be a transformative discovery.

[HenrySalayne]

46 minutes ago, Zodiark1593 said:

For ICs, there’s a lot of conflicting info as to the benefits superconducting interconnects and transistors would bring, but the general consensus at least seems to be much heightened efficiency. NASA would probably jump on this in a heartbeat if it pans out. Given that a portion of the composition is lead, would a cpu made with the material, be innately resistant to radiation?
 

If CPUs can yield far greater performance with superconducting materials as well, could probably count on the NSA making use of it. Depending on the performance yields, perhaps it may be time to consider extending AES to a 512-bit key size for general use.

Most superconductors are ceramics. They are nuggets made of powder pressed into shape under high pressure and they are then "baked" in a kiln.

Getting the same physical properties out of a semiconductor manufacturing process is probably a real challenge. Maybe the material can be deposited with sputtering. But how do you apply the pressure? And "baking" will diffuse the doping and might destroy other materials. I would not expect any semi-superconductor chips anytime soon.

 

40 minutes ago, 05032-Mendicant-Bias said:

Our civilization is built on electric energy. Loseless electric power transmission is just too transformative to be passed along. Imagine if this material was compatible with the backplane power delivery of an IC. Imagine all the electric motors out there. IF it's true, it would be a transformative discovery.

That's true and I don't think lead will be too much of a problem as long as it can be contained.

[Brooksie359]

4 hours ago, Zodiark1593 said:

I don't see MRI machines and other medical equipment being a problem with the use of lead. Reducing or eliminating the need for liquid helium alone is well worth it. I don't imagine exposure being an issue when contained within the machinery.

 

Consumer goods such as EVs though, I wouldn't imagine ever adopting lead based conductors, despite potential massive benefits to efficiency. A fire would be pretty disastrous, for example.

Yeah who in their right mind would use lead to increase the efficiency of vehicles.....

I mean imagine if we did that for say small planes? Oh I forgot we still use lead based fuels for small airplanes so i guess we don't care that much especially because lead in gas goes into the atmosphere which is way worse than having it in say an engine. 

[HenrySalayne]

As a side note, this video from Nile Red explains the creation and properties of superconductors pretty well:

 

[Kisai]

4 hours ago, leadeater said:

Lead is as safe to use as you try to be safe with it i.e. lead paint = no attempt to be safe. I wouldn't say all lead usage is unsafe but I wouldn't say all lead usage is safe either.

 

 

I'd say the main problem with "lead" is how it's treated by those handling it. The problem in a lot of industry is that materials that should be handled carefully, simply aren't. Like UPS/FEDEX and airlines just straight up ignore "this side up" and "fragile" markers. 

 

I suppose the best way to use it this way would be to simply look at it the same way lead aprons are used by dentists, and leaded glass in CRT's. It must never be exposed in a way that would cause the lead to escape into the environment. So that may mean, at the least, making sure that "right to repair" is not available for devices containing lead or radioactive materials, can only be handled by trained professionals that are employed directly by the manufacturer (none of this "mcdonalds ice cream machine" repair nonsense) and failure to repair the device that leads to an exposure event, pushes liability on the manufacturer and the operator.

 

Outside of medical devices, the danger would probably be less (eg military, law enforcement, spy agencies, etc) since there would not be a risk of someone being harmed in operation, only if the device had a catastrophic failure.

[tim0901]

7 hours ago, leadeater said:

Would this be applicable to MRI-LINAC's? Those are currently really, really expensive. I know "Closed MRI" use superconducting magnets so yes? 

Yes, absolutely. You could not only shrink the size of the magnets (superconductors can take far higher currents, inducing a stronger magnetic field) but also remove the need for the liquid helium cooling system, massively reducing costs and space requirements.

 

CERN is another institution that will be jumping on this. Their next particle accelerator (FCC) is in the early planning stages right now and again, between being able to ditch the liquid helium cooling system and the energy savings from zero resistance coils, the cost benefits of such a material could be enormous.

 

It's also really funny seeing all the comments about lead poisoning in this thread - you guys do know that we still regularly use this stuff in modern life right? For example, the walls of every x-ray room are lined with a good amount of it to ensure nobody in the surrounding rooms is exposed to excess radiation unnecessarily. So that's not only hospitals, but also private clinics, dentists, vets - it's really not that uncommon. Lead lined clothing is also worn in these environments, and lead safes are used for storing any radioactive materials. And may I remind you that basically every ICE car has a lead-acid battery under the bonnet? There's also then stained glass, bullets, lead paint (which is still used sometimes) etc. which are perhaps less common depending where you are in the world. Sure we got rid of most lead paint and lead pipes, but we didn't stop using the stuff completely like we did with eg. CFCs. - it's still really easy to find, and not only are we aware of the risks it poses, but we're much better at handling and disposing of it safely.

 

It also depends on how the structure itself breaks down. While this superconductor contains lead in its structure, it is not pure lead metal - it appears to be based upon lead apatite, which is a phosphate compound. Being in a compound like this can completely change its structure and properties. Think how graphite and diamond are, fundamentally, made up of the same carbon atoms, and yet their physical properties are completely different. This is also pretty much the theory behind what we do with radioactive waste to make it safe - the processes of vitrification essentially traps the radioactive atoms in an insoluble, glass-like structure that then prevents the dangerous atoms from leeching into the environment.

 

And so just because this compound contains lead, doesn't mean it will leech that lead into its surroundings. In fact, the lead apatite that this superconductor appears to be based upon is already known to be almost completely insoluble in water - for this exact reason we deliberately add phosphate ions to the water supply in areas that use lead pipes to prevent them from leeching. It could well be (and is probably quite likely) the case that this modified version retains many of those same properties. So maybe we shouldn't just immediately condemn the technology and start fearmongering because of a "hurr lead bad" mentality, and should instead wait for the experts to test the material and find out it's properties before casting judgement.

 

BUT we also can't get too excited. As OP mentioned, this is a pre-release (aka not peer-reviewed) paper and this wouldn't be the first time such a claim has been made in this field recently. And of course there are many other potential pitfalls that might prevent it from being useful, for example many superconductors are rather brittle, which makes them rather impractical to use in the real world. The same could yet be found here.

[HenrySalayne]

1 hour ago, tim0901 said:

It's also really funny seeing all the comments about lead poisoning in this thread - you guys do know that we still regularly use this stuff in modern life right?

This conversation started about the RoHS directive, which simply forbids lead in electrical and electronic equipment.
 

1 hour ago, tim0901 said:

While this superconductor contains lead in its structure, it is not pure lead metal - it appears to be based upon lead apatite, which is a phosphate compound. Being in a compound like this can completely change its structure and properties. Think how graphite and diamond are, fundamentally, made up of the same carbon atoms, and yet their physical properties are completely different. This is also pretty much the theory behind what we do with radioactive waste to make it safe - the processes of vitrification essentially traps the radioactive atoms in an insoluble, glass-like structure that then prevents the dangerous atoms from leeching into the environment.

Graphite and diamond are a bad example, TBH. They are just different phases of the same matter, just like water and ice.

[CarlBar]

Some major caveats to throw out from an article i'll add in at the bottom.

 

First, this lab allready produced one retracted paper with a similar claim. 

 

Second, someone else attempted to independently reproduce and failed, but someone else who got their hand on the original material saw a result that agrees with the original paper. So it's not clear yet if this is real at all.

 

Third, they produced this material in extremely tiny quantities and given such things have been seen in chemistry before we can't rule out extremly low levels of trace contamination in their production process that may be producing a material slightly different to what they're describing. We also can't rule out some wierd small scale effect potentially occurring.

 

https://www.science.org/content/blog-post/superconductor-chaos

 

Ignore all of the above, turns out the stuff in the OP is a completely different material and the same blogger put up a blog post about it that i hadn't spotted yet. Apparently should be trivial to replicate but has some potentiol issues as it's peak current carrying capacity before the effect breaks down is fairly low, but if it holds up it's a new method of getting a superconducting effect. And if that holds up it's going to open up a lot of research avenues.

[tim0901]

53 minutes ago, HenrySalayne said:

This conversation started about the RoHS directive, which simply forbids lead in electrical and electronic equipment.

No, it doesn't. It restricts it's use, but doesn't remotely forbid it. There are over 80 exemptions in RoHS for various materials for various reasons - lead's use in car batteries, medical devices, HDD solder and solar panels are such examples. It wouldn't be difficult or unreasonable for another exemption to be made for this if it were accurate.

53 minutes ago, HenrySalayne said:

Graphite and diamond are a bad example, TBH. They are just different phases of the same matter, just like water and ice.

No, they really aren't - that's not what a phase of matter is. Phases of matter are solid, liquid, gas etc. and graphite/diamond are clearly both solids. What they are is different allotropes - different arrangements of the atoms while in the same phase of matter.

 

But thats really irrelevant to the point of the comparison. My point was that just because two materials contain the same element, that doesn't mean you can assume that they will have the same mechanical properties. You cannot assume that everything with carbon in it will be as hard as diamond, and in the same vein you cannot assume that everything with lead in it will be soluble in water. That's just... not how that works.

[CarlBar]

5 minutes ago, tim0901 said:

No, they really aren't - that's not what a phase of matter is. Phases of matter are solid, liquid, gas etc. and graphite/diamond are clearly both solids. What they are is different allotropes - different arrangements of the atoms while in the same phase of matter.

 

But thats really irrelevant to the point of the comparison. My point was that just because two materials contain the same element, that doesn't mean you can assume that they will have the same mechanical properties. You cannot assume that everything with carbon in it will be as hard as diamond, and in the same vein you cannot assume that everything with lead in it will be soluble in water. That's just... not how that works.

 

Whilst thats true, for anything containing a toxic element the bigger question is how prone it is to breaking down, either in the wider world, or if the compound finds its way into the body. If the lead breaks off easily it's a problem. In short what needs to happen to the compound to render it toxic.

[tim0901]

4 minutes ago, CarlBar said:

 

Whilst thats true, for anything containing a toxic element the bigger question is how prone it is to breaking down, either in the wider world, or if the compound finds its way into the body. If the lead breaks off easily it's a problem. In short what needs to happen to the compound to render it toxic.

 

2 hours ago, tim0901 said:

And so just because this compound contains lead, doesn't mean it will leech that lead into its surroundings. In fact, the lead apatite that this superconductor appears to be based upon is already known to be almost completely insoluble in water - for this exact reason we deliberately add phosphate ions to the water supply in areas that use lead pipes to prevent them from leeching. It could well be (and is probably quite likely) the case that this modified version retains many of those same properties. So maybe we shouldn't just immediately condemn the technology and start fearmongering because of a "hurr lead bad" mentality, and should instead wait for the experts to test the material and find out it's properties before casting judgement.

Yes. I agree.

[CarlBar]

I wouldn't take it's similarity to a known not-problem material as any kind of clue.

 

A) Chemistry gets bloody weird somtimes.

 

B) This stuff if everything holds up is exploiting weird quantum mechanics fuckery to do it's thing. And is doing somthing that isn't just unprecedented, but is completely outside anything professional scientists have a word to describe. As Derek Lowe put it "Boiling-Water Temperature Superconductor" was not in is or anyone else's lexicon of phrases until this paper dropped. If it holds together i wouldn't bet a thing on any of this materials properties or interactions without seeing them tested first. It's too damned weird by far.