Claims of Room Temperature and Ambient Pressure Superconductor

[Guderian2nd]

Note: I stopped updating this table back in August 2023. It is no longer up to date.

---
Compilation of all Claims/Reports of Replication Efforts underway that I know of.
(By "Reliability of Claim", I refer to the reliability regarding whether this individual/institution is actually attempting a replication of LK99 or not. It does not refer to the reliability or trustworthiness of an individual/institution in general. All Reliability of Claim classifications are based on my personal judgement, do not take them at face value, read the details and judge for yourself) :

Official/Institutional

Group	Country	Reliability of Claim	Progress/Status	Results	Notes	Sources/Ref.
Donostia International Physics Center (DIPC) & Department of Physics, Princeton University & Schoop Lab, Department of Chemistry, Princeton University & Max Planck Institute for Chemical Physics of Solids (MPI-CPS) & Hendon Materials Simulation Group, Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of Oregon (HMSG-UO) & IKERBASQUE, Basque Foundation for Science	America, Germany, Spain	High	Completed synthesis, conducting experiments	Attempt #1 - XRD analysis negative	Notes Schoop Lab summarized their initial findings on their twitter account as follows: 1. Samples following the described synthesis are multi-phase 2. Single crystals of an apatite phase can be isolated and are transparent. Our SXRD solution agrees with published powder pattern 3. Cu doping on Pb site seems not feasible based on formation energy calculations And finally: even if we assume the Cu doped structure to be correct, theory predicts (for the given structure) a magnetic ground state due to localized flat bands. Click to shrink... They've put up a pre-print of their findings on arXiv. They say they'll likely conduct more property measurements soon.	arXiv Link Twitter Link
Argonne National Laboratory	America	High	Completed synthesis, conducting experiments	Partial Failure? - levitation X	Notes (Excerpt from article linked) "They come off as real amateurs," says Michael Norman, a theorist at Argonne National Laboratory. "They don't know much about superconductivity and the way they've presented some of the data is fishy." On the other hand, he says, researchers at Argonne and elsewhere are already trying to replicate the experiment. "People here are taking it seriously and trying to grow this stuff." Click to shrink... (Excerpt from 2nd article linked) "We have people at the lab who've grown samples and they're measuring them, and we'll see what they find," Norman said. So far, he said, the samples do not levitate on magnets as a superconductor would. Click to shrink...	Science Link Marketplace LInk
Dessau Lab & Gang Cao Research Group & Michl Research Group, University of Colorado-Boulder	America	High	Retrying	Failure - levitation (partial) O - superconductivity X	Notes They've conducted a press interview with the Washington Post, where they said they've attained tiny flecks that partially levitate but weren't superconducting.	WaPo Link
Institute for Superconducting and Electronic Materials, University of Wollongong	Australia	High	N/A	N/A	Notes (Excerpt from article linked) Wang and other superconductivity experts have been skeptical about the original LK-99 experiment, pointing out inconsistencies in the data. He says the results shouldn't be hyped "until more convincing experimental data are provided." Last weekend, his team at the University of Wollongong began working on replicating the results, but they've been having trouble with sample fabrication. Click to shrink...	CNET Link Wollongong Link
Power Engineering Research Group, Queensland University of Technology (PER-QUT)	Australia	High	N/A	N/A	Notes (Excerpt from article linked) "Just by doing that, we would get a very significant direction to achieving our goals for mitigating CO₂," said Dr Richard Taylor, a superconductor researcher at the Queensland University of Technology. ... Other teams are working to replicate the discovery, including Taylor, who said he was working on getting the materials. "It seems to be quite hard to synthesise." Click to shrink...	SMH Link QUT Link
Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Manchester (UoM)	Britain	High	Complete	Attempt #1 Failure - zero resistivity X - levitation X - diamagnetism X Attempt #? Failure - XRD, SEM, EXD analysis O - levitation X - zero resistivity X - superconductivity X	Notes They've released a video documenting their first attempt and results on their lab website. They've released a pre-print of their findings: The obtained materials were first characterized using XRD, scanning electron microscopy (SEM), and energy-dispersive X-ray (EDX) microanalysis (Zeiss Ultra microscope), to confirm the crystallinity and elemental composition of the synthesized materials. ... However, neither diamagnetic levitation nor zero resistance was observed in any of our LK-99 samples. In the synthesized samples, we found few very small pieces of materials, either black or pink appearance under optical microscope, with strong para- or ferromagnetic response. ... Overall, at this stage, we can conclude that although the synthesis of LK-99 shows XRD features similar to the reported, and EDX data confirm their elemental composition, but no signatures of superconductivity are visible. Click to shrink...	Lab Link Group Link Video Link arXiv Link
School of Physics, Nanjing University	China	High	N/A	N/A	Notes (DeepL Translate excerpt from article linked) On the recent people hotly debated "if really immediately can get the Nobel Prize 'South Korea room temperature superconducting materials LK-99 paper'", July 28, Nanjing University, professor of physics Wen Haihu interviewed to the surging science and technology, said. "It's really buzzing, but it's not surprising because this thing is important." "Most of the (buzz) people are not doing superconductivity." "We carefully analysed their data, and from three aspects - resistance, magnetisation and so-called magnetic levitation - none of them are sufficient to show that it is a superconducting phenomenon (material)." "We judge that (its so-called superconductivity) is most likely an illusion." As for repeating the experiment, Wen Haihu said, "In fact, we didn't even want to do it because we judged that it didn't look like superconductivity, and then we also sent one of our classmates to work on it. Many groups internationally are repeating it. With our experience, (the data published in the current paper) is not enough to show that it is superconducting." Click to shrink...	ScienceNet.cn Link
School of Materials Science and Engineering, Beihang University	China	High	Complete	Failure - XRD match O - diamagnetism X, - levitation X, - superconductivity X Resulted in a paramagnetic semiconductor	Notes At a large magnetic field of 0.5 T, our Pb10-xCux(PO4)6O powder exhibit a paramagnetic behavior. ... Our results show that the modified lead-apatite Pb10-xCux(PO4)6O is semiconducting with a large room temperature resistivity on the order of 10^4 Ω·cm, rather than superconducting. Click to shrink...	arXiv Link
International Center for Quantum Materials, Peking University (ICQM-PKU)	China	High	Complete	Failure - XRD match O - diamagnetism ? - levitation (partial) O - superconductivity X Resulted in a mostly soft ferromagnetic semiconductor with a diamagnet-ferromagnet phase transition	Notes To summarize our results: (1) We have synthesized ceramic samples which, despite the inclusion of secondary phases such as Cu2S, are primarily of the same chemical composition and crystal structure as LK-99 samples previously reported [6, 7, 10]. (2) In terms of magnetic response to external fields, our samples contain at least one linear-diamagnetic phase which is nearly temperature-independent, and one soft-ferromagnetic phase with a Curie temperature above 350 K. The volume fraction of the two phases appears to vary between different sample fragments. (3) The majority phase shows semiconducting resistivity as a function of temperature, and no trace of superconductivity. (4) In our small and flaky sample S3 which exhibits half levitation atop a Nd2Fe14B permanent magnet, the magnetic response is dominated by the ferromagnetic phase in the field range (> 1 kOe) that corresponds to the surface magnetic field of the permanent magnet. Click to shrink...	arXiv Link
School of Material Science and Technology, Huazhong University of Science and Technology (HUST)	China	High	Complete	Attempt #1 Failure - XRD match O - magnetization X - weak diamagnetism? - superconductivity X Resulted in a possibly weak diamagnetic semiconductor Attempt #2 Partial Success? - levitation (partial) O - diamagnetism O Resulted in tiny traces of a diamagnet Attempt #3 Failure - XRD match O - diamagnetism O - zero resistivity X - superconductivity X Resulted in a diamagnetic semiconductor with with resistance/magnetization phase transition likely due to impurities	Notes Since early on, a team at HUST had been posting live streams and videos of their replication attempt through the account 关山口男子技师 at Bilibili. For attempt #1, all 4 synthesized samples did not display flux pinning. Magnetization measurements show the material to be weakly diamagnetic. Resistance measurements do not show 0 resistance, shows the material to be a semiconductor. They had apparently live streamed their synthesis process on Bilibili, but no recordings remain so I cannot corroborate this myself. A link to a partial recording of their attempt #1 live stream is available in the links. You can see screenshots taken from their live stream in the linked twitter thread. On 2023-08-01, they posted two videos, showing tiny fragments that are repelled by both sides of a magnet, displaying diamagnetism (ie. partial levitation), rather than ferromagnetism. Both are linked in the arXiv preprint. An English Translation of the first of these two videos is available on Twitter. They've released a pre-print paper of their findings: However, the diamagnetic transition temperature of micron crystal sample 2 screened by magnet repulsion is about 340 K, which is slightly higher than that of macroscopic sample, showing a higher purity, crystallinity and better Cu doping in the micron crystal sample 2. ... Figure 3 further illustrates the levitation phenomenon of sample 2 measured at room temperature and atmospheric pressure, showing a rise and being completely perpendicular to the base when the ferromagnet is close to it, with a larger levitation angle than Sukbae Lee's sample at room temperature. ... Moreover, we also performed an attraction test on sample 2 (Figure 4), which shows no response when attracted by a ferromagnet, excluding the effect of ferromagnetism. Click to shrink... They've released a second pre-print of their third attempt, where they replicate the phase transition semiconductor in BNLCMP-IoP-CAS's replication attempt: In short, the LK-99 sample we obtained is a mixed phase, in which the semiconductor phase is dominant. The overall temperature resistance characteristics show a typical semiconductor behavior, but an abnormal resistance jump is found near 387 K, which may come from Pb_{10-x}Cu_x(PO_4)_6O or impurity such as Cu_2S or Cu_2O. The resistance jump temperature keeps unchanged with the increase of the applied magnetic field. The diamagnetic jump temperature is slightly lower than the resistance jump temperature. To identify the intrinsic property of Pb_{10-x}Cu_x(PO_4)_6O, high quality crystals with high purity are highly needed. We should also note the possible contribution from impurity especially in resistance tests. Click to shrink... This row originally consisted of rumours based from a WeChat screenshot. As a considerably more verifiable/reliable claim has surfaced from the same institution, I've replaced said claim with the latest one relayed to us via Bilibili. You can still check out the original WeChat screenshot rumour claims in Sources/References.	Bilibili Link 1 Bilibili Link 2 Twitter Link 1 Twitter Link 2 arXiv Link 1 arXiv Link 2 --- Rumours: Zhihu Link Medium Link
Superconductivity and Superconducting Material Research Laboratory, Southeast University at Nanjing (SSMRL-SEU)	China	High	Complete	Attempt #1 Failure - XRD match O - magnetization X - weak diamagnetism? - superconductivity X Resulted in a possibly weak diamagnet Attempt #2 Partial Failure - XRD match O - 1 sample zero resistivity@100~110K? - rest semiconductive - superconductivity ? Resulted in strange semiconductor + one possible high-temp superconductor? Attempt #2-1 Failure - XRD match O - diamagnetism - zero resistivity? - extremely inconsistent and diverse electrical behavior Resulted in a diamagnet with a hidden paramagnetic/weak ferromagnetic response, with strange electrical behavior	Notes A Team at the Dept. of Phys. at Southeast Univerisity including Prof. Sun Yue goes operates a channel named 科学调查局 at Bilibili. Prof. Sun Yue and all others in the arXiv paper linked below are members of the SSMRL-SEU. They've synthesized 8 samples in accordance with the recipe in the paper. Their XRD profile matches the one given in the paper, but the magnetization and other measurement results do not display Superconductivity, although it could indicate weak diamagnetism (graph is too noisy to tell). You can read an english summary of the video in the Twitter Link in Source/References. You can watch an english translation of the video in the Twitter Link in Sources/References. They've released an arXiv pre-print of their findings as well as a video on Bilibili, where 1 sample shows 0 resistance@100~110K, no meissner signals, and other samples semiconductive. there's an english translation of the video in Sources/References: Fig. 3(a) showsthe temperature dependence of resistance sample S1, with a clear zero resistance characteristic observed at 110 K, indicating the possibility of superconductivity. It is worth noting that some other pieces exhibit semiconductor behavior, consistent with the literature. ... To further verify the superconducting properties, we conducted magnetic measurements on the sample, but unfortunately, no obvious Meissner signal was observed, indicating that the superconducting volume fraction of the sample may be very small. Click to shrink... They've released a second paper, which more closely examines the sample that displayed zero resistivity at 100~110K in Attempt #2. Figs. 3(a-d) depict four distinct R-T (resistivity-temperature) curves acquired from various regions of the same sample. Fig. 3(a) reveals a semiconducting behavior, resembling recent findings [9,19]. Interestingly, Fig. 3(b) displays metallic behavior, and an extremely small resistivity emerges below 110 K, as more clearly illustrated in the inset of Fig. 3(b). Data shown in Fig. 3(b) is the same as that presented in our previous report [8], but in the linear plot. In Fig. 3(c), an abrupt drop in resistivity to a small value at ~ 250 K was observed. The enlarge of the low temperature part can be seen in the inset of Fig. 3(c). We also measured the temperature dependence of resistivity under fields up to to 9 T. As the applied magnetic field increasing, the resistivity drop is gradually suppressed. In Fig. 3(d), resistivity manifests a good linear behavior and a sharp transition at 7.1 K, strongly indicating the presence of Pb although it is not detected via XRD. ... We also conducted M-H loop measurements at varying temperatures. In Fig. 4(c), the M-H curve at high field and low temperatures displays a positive slope, indicating prevailing paramagnetism. Conversely, at high temperatures, 150 K and 250 K, a negative slope manifests, pointing to prevailing antimagnetism. Zooming in on the M-H loop at low fields, as shown in Fig. 4(d), a distinct magnetic hysteresis loop emerges, spanning the entire temperature range from 10 K to 250 K. This unequivocally confirms the presence of ferromagnetic ordering. Click to shrink...	Faculty Link Bilibili Link 1 Bilibili Link 2 Bilibili LInk 3 Twitter Link 1 Twitter Link 2 Twitter Link 3 SSMRL Link arXiv Link 1 arXiv Link 2
Key Laboratory of High Temperature Superconductivity, Shanghai University (KLHTS-SU)	China	High	Completed Synthesis, conducting experiments	Failure - diamagnetism X	Notes They gave an interview to Knews and allowed a reporter to visit their lab on the night of 2023-08-02. They ground their sample into a powder to better homogenize and measure bulk characteristics of the sample. They failed to detect diamagnetic behavior.	KankaNews Link
High Pressure Physics and Material Science Lab, Qufu Normal University (HPPMSL-QNU)	China	High	Complete	Failure - levitation (partial) O - diamagnetism O - zero resistivity X Resulted in tiny traces of a diamagnet, likely insulator	Notes 科研农民工 at Zhihu has been posting some pictures of their process and intermediate products. A video of theirs is captioned "Source: Qufu Normal University High Pressure Science Team". They've done a press interview with Jiemian News where they reported their results of finding some diamagnetic behavior, but no zero resistivity. 科研农民工's video shows small fragments displaying possibly diamagnetic behavior. According to the press interview, the 4-probe measurements on the diamagnetic sample showed extremely high resistivity.	Zhihu Link 1 Zhihu Link 2 Bilibili Link Jiemian News HPPMSL-QNU Link
Beijing National Laboratory for Condensed Matter Physics, Institute of Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences (BNLCMP-IoP-CAS)	China	High	Complete	Attempt #1 Failure - diamagnetism O - zero resistivity X - superconductor X Resulted in a diamagnetic semiconductor, with resistance/magnetization phase transition due to Cu2S impurity Attempt #2 Failure - XRD match O - diamagnetism O - zero resistivity X Resulted in a diamagnet/weak ferromagnet mixture, with an electric resistivity phase transition	Notes Below 100 K, the resistivity increases with decreasing temperature, showing a semiconducting-like behavior. The sharp drop in resistivity and the transition temperature are similar to that observed by Lee et al. ... It exhibits typical diamagnetic behavior, with no resemblance to the behavior of a superconductor. ... The findings above strongly suggest the superconducting-like transition in LK-99 as reported by Lee et al. [5, 6] originates first order structural transition of the impurity phase of Cu2S from a hexagonal structure in β phase at high temperature to a monoclinic structure in γ phase at low temperature around 385 K. Click to shrink... By combing AFM, NV, and SEM results (Fig. 4 (a-i)), we discover that the micro-size Cu2S regions can induce a diamagnetic (or strictly speaking, diamagnetic or an absolute zero-magnetic) local response. In contrast, the Pb phase exhibits a mixture of diamagnetic and weak ferromagnetic responses. Note that the distribution of local magnetism is predominantly influenced by the different phases rather than the local heights. Phase boundaries at the microscale shown in AFM, NV, and SEM results align very well. This observation implies that the volume fraction ratio between Cu-related and Pb phases might significantly affect the overall magnetic attributes of the synthesized samples. ... To further study possible connection between Cu-related phase the diamagnetic response, we locate a tiny piece of sample has the ability to (half) levitate above permanent magnets. Markedly, it is predominantly composed of Cu2S, with a minor segment of the Pb phase embedded in the center of its surface (as depicted in Fig. 4(l)), that is suggestive of the possible origin for the (half) levitate behavior. We note that typical 99.5%-pure Cu2S pellets do not levitate in our experiments. A specific combination of mixed phases or the geometry of the piece could be vital in this regard. ... To illustrate, Fig. 5(c) compares the electrical resistance measured on an arbitrary long current path on C1, a region dominated by Cu2S/Cu, and a region dominated by Pb phase. A clear jump in electrical resistance of C1 is observable, transitioning from behavior similar to that of Cu2S/Cu to behavior resembling that of the Pb phase. This change signifies a current path switch potentially due to different temperature effect on the local chemical phases. Because the majority of the LK-99 related compounds synthesized so far contains Cu2S and other Curelated regions [9-22], these results shed light on the electrical behavior observed in the similar compounds. ... It is indeed intriguing that the LK-99 related compounds resemble many characteristics of a superconductor. By characterizing compounds containing Pb10-xCux(PO4)6O from three independent groups utilizing comprehensive microregion techniques, we determine that the peculiar magnetic and electrical characteristics observed in LK-99 related compounds can be attributed to phase mixtures at microscales, especially to the presence of Cu2S and related regions. Click to shrink... This row originally consisting of some rumours flying around on the internet. You can still check out the sources of the rumours in Source/References.	arXiv Link 1 arXiv Link 2 --- Rumours: Zhihu Link 1 Zhihu Link 2 Zhihu Link 3
Department of Metallurgical Engineering, Central South University (CSU)	China	Somewhat Low	Completed synthesis, conducting experiments	Partial Success? - levitation (partial/full?) O? - diamagnetism ?	Notes A user named 牛顿的烈焰激光剑 at Douyin has video documented their processes on Douyin, or Chinese Tik Tok. I don't think there's much reason to believe they are lying about trying to replicate this. They claim that some of their fragments seem to display full levitation, ie. without contact with the magnet, as the fragment did not seem to be in contact with its own shadow. The fragment stays in place relative to the magnet even when sideways or upside down. In a live stream to confirm this, they examined the fragment stuck to the magnet with a microscope, which seemed to indicate that there was, infact, a very tiny contact point (the rest not in contact with the magnet). A user on Zhihu named CSU渣男 has claimed that both them and 牛顿的烈焰激光剑 at Douyin are part of team at Central South University (中南大), Department of Metallurgical Engineering. They claim that they are working on a paper.	Douyin Link Zhihu Link
Department of Condensed Matter Physics, Charles University	Czech Republic	High	Synthesizing final product	N/A	Notes They announced on their twitter that their crystal growth team will attempt a replication of LK99. They're posting pictures of their replication process, ingredients, equipment, and intermediate products. You can track their progress at the Twitter Link in Source/References.	Twitter Link Uni Link
Dresden University of Technology (TUD)	Germany	High	Retrying	Attempt #1 Failure - XRD match O - diamagnetism O - levitation (partial) O - superconductivity X Resulted in a diamagnet with a hidden weak-ferromagnetic response	Notes Both the samples were found to be diamagnetic with no perceptible temperature dependence (Figure 8) or divergence in ZFC/Fc data. Surprisingly the low-temperature hysteresis curves (Figure 8 (b and d)) indicates a weak and soft ferromagneticlike behavior, which could partly explain the half-levitation phenomena. However this is quite intriguing as no 'magnetic elements' (containing d electrons) are present in the sample and due care was taken not to use any metal spatula for weighing or scraping the sample powder while preparation of sample (I). Even at 325 K, this FM-like behavior persists but is primarily superimposed by the strong diamagnetic response of the sample. ... The samples appear diamagnetic but superconductivity or magnetic levitation cannot be confirmed in any of the LK-99 phases we obtained. A notable conclusion from our results is that incorporation Cu at Pb sites proves to be extremely difficult, if not impossible, to accomplish as most of our samples did not or contained only trace amounts of Cu in the desired phase. If Cu-doping is indeed, the key to achieving RTSC in this material then sample preparation using high-pressure technique or hydrothermal growth might prove beneficial in stabilizing the Cu-doped phase. Efforts to grow the LK-99 phase using hydrothermal method are underway. Click to shrink...	arXiv Link
Max Planck Institute of Solid State Research (MPI-SSR)	Germany	High	Complete	Failure - XRD match O - diamagnetism O - levitation X - zero resistivity X - superconductivity X Resulted in mostly diamagnetic insulator with a hidden weak-ferromagnetic response	Notes In summary, we have successfully grown single crystals of Pb10−xCux(PO4)6O (LK-99) via the TSFZ method. The phase-pure crystals are highly insulating, suggesting that previously reported transport anomalies in powder samples, such as a insulator-to-metal transition that might have been mistakenly interpreted as a superconducting transition, are likely attributable to Cu2S impurity phases22. The diamagnetic response of our crystals is broadly consistent with expectations for a non-magnetic insulator, although we also detect weakly ferromagnetic correlations, presumably originating from an inhomogeneous distribution of the Cu substituents. No anomalies indicative of phase transitions are detected for temperatures up to 800 K. These results suggest that the previously claimed occurrence of room-temperature superconductivity in LK-99 is highly unlikely. Click to shrink...	arXiv Link
Council Of Scientific And Industrial Research, National Physical Laboratory of India (CSIR-NPLI)	India	High	Retrying	Attempt #1, #3 Failure (Facebook) - diamagnetism X - levitation X Attempt #2 Failure - XRD match O - diamagnetism X - levitation X - bulk superconductivity X Resulted in a paramagnetic insulator Attempt #4 Failure - XRD match O - diamagnetism O - levitation X - superconductivity X Resulted in a diamagnetic insulator Attempt #5 Failure - complex magnetism - superconductivity X	Notes Dr. V.P.S. Awana from CSIR-NPLI posted their systhesis/experiment results on his personal facebook page. Their first attempt altered the recipe, as the result should still have been the same molecular structure as the authors claimed. The resulting specimen did not display superconductivity, or even diamagnetism - it was paramagnetic. They are in contact with the original authors (Lee Seok-Bae) about how to properly replicate. They are positing that their altered procedure led to an improper doping of Copper, and are currently retrying by more closely following the recipe in the paper. Their second attempt, which closely followed the recipe, also did not show bulks superconductivity. Resistivity results are in the megaohms - their result is a paramagnetic insulator. They've released a pre-print paper of their findings on arXiV: The very first test we did out of our curiosity was to check if a permanent magnet levitates over the obtained LK-99 sample. Fig. 4 shows the picture of tiny piece of sample sitting idle over a permanent magnet. This clearly shows that the obtained LK-99 sample is not superconducting. The isothermal magnetization (MH) plot taken on SQUID magnetometer at 280K, shows a clear paramagnetic behavior at 280K, see Fig. 5. ... In conclusion, our results, as of now do not approve the reported [1-3] appearance of bulk superconductivity in LK-99, in particular the room T levitation. We are en route of being synthesizing more samples of LK-99 and to further ascertain if room temperature ambient bulk superconductivity do exist in this compound. Click to shrink... Their third attempt also failed. They've published an arXiv preprint of their fourth (second official) attempt: The PXRD data and its Rietveld refinement of LK-99 show the shrinkage in lattice parameters, leading to a 0.18% volume contraction as compared to the parent compound Lead Apatite. But the intriguing superconductivity as claimed in ref. 1,2 appears to be elusive. The as prepared sample does not show any levitation on a permanent magnet. The isothermal magnetization measurements at 280K, show that the prepared sample, is though diamagnetic, but without any signatures of superconductivity. Click to shrink... Their 5th attempt contained a fragment which seemed to display strange magnetic behavior, where they stayed "stuck" but also at an angle to the magnet even when sideways or upside down. They determined after a day or so that this was complex magnetism, not superconductivity.	Facebook Link 1 Facebook Link 2 Facebook Link 3 Facebook Link 4 arXiv Link 1 arXiv Link 2
Department of Chemistry, Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) & School of Physical Sciences, Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU)	India	High	Complete	Failure - XRD match O - diamagnetism X - zero resistivity X - superconductivity X Resulted in a paramagnetic insulator	Notes Inspite of the presence of impurity phase Cu2S, the temperature dependent resistance shows an insulating nature of the sample. The radio frequency penetration depth measurement unveils the absence of diamagnetic flux expulsion in this sample. The temperature dependent ac susceptibility measurements reveal the paramagnetic nature of the Ni doped LK-99. Click to shrink...	arXiv Link
Ginzburg Center for High-Temperature Superconductivity and Quantum Materials, Lebedev Physical Institute, Russian Academy of Sciences (CHTSQM-FIAN)	Russia	High	Complete	Failure - XRD match O - diamagnetism X - zero resistivity X - superconductivity X Resulted in a (likely) paramagnetic insulator	Notes (DeepL Translate excerpt from article linked) "The experiment showed that the Korean 'superconductor' is actually an insulator. You put a current in it, and nothing happens. And we started the experiments at room temperature (23 °C), while, according to the authors of the development, superconductivity is fixed at temperatures of 125 °C and below. If the samples are cooled to negative temperatures, the resistance (already conditionally infinite) only increases. In terms of electrical properties, LK-99 is similar to porcelain, which is used to make industrial insulators" ... At the same time, samples of the material obtained by the two ways, behave almost identically. They do not react to a magnet, while superconductors must always repel it and behave like an ideal diamagnetic. Click to shrink...	Gazeta Link
Korea Research Institute of Standards and Science (KRISS)	S. Korea	High	N/A	N/A	Notes Replication attempt announced via press interview with Digital Times.	Digital Times Link
Quantum Materials and Superconductivity Research Center, Sungkyunkwan University (QMSRC-SKKU)	S. Korea	High	N/A	N/A	Notes Replication attempt announced via a Statement from the Korean Society of Superconductivity and Cryogenics (한국초전도저온학회)	KSSC Link
Lab of Superconducting Materials & Applications, Korea University (LSMA-KU)	S. Korea	High	N/A	N/A	Notes Replication attempt announced via a Statement from the Korean Society of Superconductivity and Cryogenics (한국초전도저온학회)	KSSC Link
Center for Novel States of Complex Materials and Research, Seoul National University (CNSCMR-SNU)	S. Korea	High	N/A	N/A	Notes Replication attempt announced via a Statement from the Korean Society of Superconductivity and Cryogenics (한국초전도저온학회)	KSSC Link
Center for Condensed Matter Sciences, National Taiwan University (CCMS-NTU)	Taiwan	High	Retrying	Attempt #1 Failure - weak diamagnetism O - zero resistance X Resulted in a weakly diamagnetic semiconductor/insulator	Notes I couldn't find any official interview, press release, or statement from the CCMS-NTU, but a science youtube channel called PanSci 泛科學 are live streaming a replication attempt from a team under Prof. Wang Limin, who is a real professor at NTU. You can see his face in the live stream and it matches, and given the live stream I don't see any reason to believe they aren't who they say they are. A link to the live stream, the CCMS, and the professor is provided in Sources/References. Their first sample was weakly diamagnetic but did not have zero resistance. Its resistivity increased as temperature decreased, indicating semiconductivity or insulator-like resistivity temperature dependence.	Youtube Link CCMS Link NTU Link

---

Private

Individual	Country	Credentials	Reliability of Claim	Progress/Status	Results	Notes	Sources/References
Andrew McCalip	America	Robotics Engineer at Varda	High	Complete	Failure - levitation (partial) O - diamagnetism X Resulted in trace amounts of ferromagnetic impurities	Notes He'd live streamed some of his steps on Twitch, you can check his progress in real time in the links. I don't think there's any reason to believe that he's lying about trying to replicate this. He's also sent samples of intermediate products to other labs (such as the University of Southern California Materials Consortium, or USCMC) for XRD (X-ray diffraction), MPMS (Magnetic Property Measurement System), SEM (Scanning Electron Microscope) analysis. He's posted a video which again seems to show partial levitation. The USCMC lab analyis result indicate that the fragments that responded to magnets were ferromagnetic impurities (iron, more specifically).	Twitter Link 1 Twitter Link 2 Twitter Link 3 Twitch Link
Max Shirokawa Aalto at Twitter	America	Seems to be a member of Makerspace Workshop, Columbia University	Somewhat High	Completed synthesis, conducting experiments	Attempt #1, #2 Failure? - failed to properly synthesize sample - levitation X Attempt #3 Partial Success? - levitation (partial) O	Notes He's live blogging his replication attempt on Twitter, you can check his progress in real time via the links. Not as good as live streaming, but I don't think there's any reason to believe that he's lying about trying to replicate this. He appears to me a member of the Makerspace Workshop at Columbia University.	Twitter Link Makerspace Link
真·凤舞九天 at Bilibili	China	Operates a Popular Science Channel	High	Complete	Partial Success - levitation (full) O?	Notes He's live streamed, blogged, took photos, and posted a summary video of their replication attempt on Bilibili. As such I don't see any reason to believe he's lying about trying to replicate this. They claim that one of their fragments initially looked like a ferromagnet, as it was dragged along by a permanent magnet, but upon closer inspection it displayed full levitation.	Bilibili Link
半导体与物理 at Zhihu	China	N/A	Somewhat High	Completed Synthesis, conducting experiments	Partial Success? - levitation (partial) O - diamagnetism O Resulted in tiny traces of a diamagnet	Notes I couldn't find any information on this person's credentials, but they've been posting pictures of the ingredients and synthesis process on Zhihu since very soon after the news broke out in the Chinese web. Not as good as live streaming, but I don't think there's much reason to believe that they are lying about trying to replicate this given the pictures of the ingredients and equipment. Their latest update on 20320801 includes a video which purports to show fragments of their synthesis results displaying diamagnetic behavior (ie. repulsion from magnets, partial levitation).	Zhihu Link
胡豆 at Zhihu	China	Claims to be a material scientist PhD.	Somewhat High	Completed Synthesis, conducting experiments	Attempt #1, #2, #3, #4 Failure - levitation X	Notes I couldn't find any information on this person's credentials, but they've been posting pictures of the ingredients and synthesis process on Zhihu since very soon after the news broke out in the Chinese web. Not as good as live streaming, but I don't think there's much reason to believe that they are lying about trying to replicate this given the pictures of the ingredients and equipment. His first, second, and third, and fourth results did not contain fragments that responded to a magnet.	Zhihu Link
zoubair at Twitter	France	PhD Student at Solid State Chmistry and Energy Lab, Collège de France	Somewhat High	Retrying	Attempt #1 Failure? - failed to properly synthesize sample - levitation X Attempt #2 Failure - XRD match O - levitation X	Notes Claims by zoubair on Twitter that he and an few others at the lab of Prof. Jean-Marie Tarascon at the College of France are trying to replicate the results. Prof. Tarascon's lab would be the Solid State Chemistry and Energy Lab. Couldn't find any official information to corrobrate this, but the account does seem to belong to a PhD student at the Lab. Lab webpage linked in Sources/References. They've posted pictures of their equipment and the results of their first attempt at synthesis. I don't think there's much reason to believe that they are lying about trying to replicate this given the pictures. They've stated this is a private attempt by some students attempting a replication in their spare time, rather than an "official" attempt by the lab as a whole. Their first result was a reddish pellet, not a black one, so they're assuming that they made an error in the final step of their synthesis process. They have another sample undergoing a different process, hoping it more accurately replicates the paper. The reddish pellet were not repelled from a permanent magnet. Their second result mostly matched the XRD analysis, but it did not levitate.	Twitter Link 1 Twitter Link 2 Lab Link
Shinya Shimizu at Twitter	Japan	CEO of ElephanTech	High	Retrying	Attempt #1 Failure - no magnetic behavior	Notes They've posted pictures of the ingredients on their official twitter, saying they've begun a replication attempt. Their first attempt was a failure, as it did not display any magnetic behavior.	Twitter Link
Reports relayed through amita on Zhihu (name/affiliation not provided)	N/A	N/A	Low	Complete	Attempt #1, #2 Failure	Notes No pictures or other evidence exists to support this claim, all we have are the words of this one person on Zhihu, who is apparently reporting back from their "foreign friend." According to amita, Attempt #1 synthesized using intermediate materials available on hand did not display superconductivity or strong diamagnetism. Attempt #2 which followed the recipe from starting ingredients also did not display superconductivity or strong diamagnetism.	Zhihu Link
Iris Alexandra at Twitter	Russia	Claims to be a molecular biologist, junior researcher working at the IGB-RAS	Somewhat Low	Completed Synthesis, conducting experiments	Partial Success - levitation (full) O? - resistivity drop at 280K? Resulted in a seemingly strong diamagnet, possible superconductor?	Notes They claim to be a molecular biologist and work as a junior researcher at the Institute of Gene Biology, Russian Academy of Sciences. I couldn't find them on the Staff list. They are claiming to be using alternative, much more efficient methods of obtaining the same compounds as claimed in the paper. They claimed to have completed synthesis of some samples, and that some chunks of it display strong diamagnetism/weak levitation, as claimed in the paper. They have posted pictures which shows what are presumably fragments of her synthesized products levitating, taken from multiple angles to show that the chunks are truly levitating. I think its safe to say that if this attempt is real, the results show a success, at least in terms of replicating the paper. Whether the material is simply a strong diamagnet or a superconductor would require a test to see if this is diamagnetic leviatation or flux pinning, or a measurement of resistivity/magnetization. They claim to have obtained what looks like a big drop in resistivity at 7 degrees celcius, or around 280K. They've posted pictures of their altered process and resulting intermediate products. While there is the lack of cross-referential credentials, lack of concrete data, and unorthodox recipe that diverges significantly from the paper, the pictures of synthesized result fragments seems genuine, so I'm give this a credibility of somewhat low for now.	Twitter Link 1 Twitter Link 2 Twitter Link 3 Twitter Link 4 Twitter Link 5 IGB Link

---

I'll probably be updating this post as the situation develops.

---

Change Log:

Spoiler: Open Spoiler to View Change Log

- 2023-07-30T1755Z : Updated information regarding 关山口男子技师 at Bilibili, see: Claims of Room Temperature and Ambient Pressure Superconductor
- 2023-07-30T1855Z : Changed to table format instead of list format
- 2023-07-30T1903Z : Added Changelog
- 2023-07-30T2000Z : Updated status and notes for Iris Alexandra, added new twitter thread link, see: https://twitter.com/iris_IGB/status/1685740625017102336
- 2023-07-31T0108Z : Updated results, notes, and references for Iris Alexandra, added new twitter thread link, see: https://twitter.com/iris_IGB/status/1685731177523449856
- 2023-07-31T0114Z : Updated my assessment of reliability for Iris Alexandra based on the new info presented in the above update
- 2023-07-31T1214Z : Change notes to collapsed accordions and added small details to results for better readability
- 2023-07-31T1219Z : Updated status for 胡豆, notes for Andrew McCarlip
- 2023-07-31T1228Z : Updated results, notes, and references for CSIR-NPLI, and their failed second attempt
- 2023-07-31T1234Z : Updated credentials and notes for Iris Alexandra
- 2023-07-31T1335Z : Added 科学调查局 at Bilibili (Prof. 孙悦 (Sun Yue) at Southeast University (东南大学)?)
- 2023-07-31T1337Z : Fixed Twitch Link error for Andrew McCarlip's row
- 2023-07-31T1401Z : Updated results for 科学调查局 at Bilibili, as a closer look at the magnetization graph may indicate weak diamagnetism
- 2023-07-31T1419Z : Updated progress/status for CSIR-NPLI, as I couldn't find any statement from Prof. V.P.S. Awana that they are going for a 3rd try
- 2023-07-31T1527Z : Updated progress/status, notes, and references for Prof. Sun at Southeast University
- 2023-07-31T1825Z : Added Solid State Chemistry and Energy Lab - Collège de France (SSCEL-CdF)
- 2023-07-31T1953Z : Spoilered Change Log to prevent it from taking too much space
- 2023-08-01T0150Z : Updated CSIR-NPLI's progress/status, notes, and references with information from their latest pre-print uploaded on arXiV
- 2023-08-01T0206Z : Added Beihang University's replication attempt, changed results format
- 2023-08-01T1545Z : Updated name, credentials, notes, references of Iris Alexandra
- 2023-08-01T1628Z : Updated HUST row entirely to the claims of replication from CCMMND-HUST
- 2023-08-01T1635Z : Fixed formatting error
- 2023-08-01T1653Z : Updated results for 半导体与物理 at Zhihu
- 2023-08-01T1702Z : Added 科研农民工 at Zhihu's replication attempt
- 2023-08-01T1703Z : Changed table classification, removed Professional and Amateur
- 2023-08-01T2027Z : Merged 关山口男子技师 at Bilibili and CCMMND-HUST, updated reliability, notes, results, references for CCMMND-HUST
- 2023-08-01T2050Z : Moved 科研农民工 at Zhihu to Official/Institutional, changed name to High Pressure Physics and Material Science Lab, Qufu Normal University (HPPMSL-QNU)
- 2023-08-02T0033Z : Updated sources/references for HUST, removed redundant Bilibili links.
- 2023-08-02T0036Z : Changed name of Sources/References row to Sources/Ref. for better row width spacing
- 2023-08-02T0147Z : Updated SSCEL-CdF's reliability, status, results, notes, and references
- 2023-08-02T0153Z : Update results for several rows that read Resulted in tiny traces of a diamagnet and added question marks
- 2023-08-02T0158Z : Updated results for rows that had question marks for diamagnetism, removed question marks for those replication attempts that explicitly described their results as diamagnetic
- 2023-08-02T0238Z : Updated credentials for 胡豆 at Zhihu
- 2023-08-02T0450Z : Added a description of what the Reliability of Claim column means to header
- 2023-08-02T0637Z : Added QMSRC-SKKU, LSMA-KU, CNSCMR-SNU
- 2023-08-02T1903Z : Changed XRD analysis to XRD match to better communicate what it meant, moved SSCEL-CdF to Private and changed name to zoubair at Twitter, updated results, notes, references for zoubair at Twitter
- 2023-08-02T1914Z : Updated results, notes, references for 科学调查局 at Bilibili (Prof. 孙悦 (Sun Yue) at Southeast University (东南大学))
- 2023-08-02T1918Z : Updated results, and notes for HPPMSL-QNU
- 2023-08-02T1954Z : Updated notes for 科学调查局 at Bilibili (Prof. 孙悦 (Sun Yue) at Southeast University (东南大学)), removed unnecessary sentences now that it's 99% certain that this is Prof. Sun
- 2023-08-03T0325Z : Updated results for 科学调查局 at Bilibili (Prof. 孙悦 (Sun Yue) at Southeast University (东南大学))
- 2023-08-03T0327Z : Changed name for 科学调查局 at Bilibili (Prof. 孙悦 (Sun Yue) at Southeast University (东南大学)) to just Prof. Sun Yue(孙悦) at Southeast University (东南大学)
- 2023-08-03T0349Z : Fixed formatting error
- 2023-08-03T1122Z : Added Department of Condensed Matter Physics, Charles University
- 2023-08-04T0012Z : Added Max Shirokawa Aalto at Twitter
- 2023-08-04T0127Z : Changed name for CCMMND-HUST to School of Material Science and Technology, HUST. Updated results, notes, references for School of Mat. Sci. Tech., Hust.
- 2023-08-04T0335Z : Added Institute for Superconducting and Electronic Materials, University of Wollongong
- 2023-08-04T0339Z : Updated status for Andrew McCarlip
- 2023-08-04T0342Z : Updated references for Andrew McCarlip
- 2023-08-04T0522Z : Updated notes for Iris Alexandra
- 2023-08-04T1228Z : Updated status, results, notes, references for Andrew McCarlip
- 2023-08-04T1253Z : Added Center for Condensed Matter Sciences, National Taiwan University (CCMS-NTU)
- 2023-08-04T1415Z : Moved Prof. Sun Yue(孙悦) at Southeast University (东南大学) to Official/Institutional and changed name to Department of Physics, Southeast University at Nanjing
- 2023-08-04T1417Z : Updated status, results, notes, references for Department of Physics, Southeast University at Nanjing
- 2023-08-04T1443Z : Changed name for Dept. of Phys. at Southeast Univ. to Superconductivity and Superconducting Material Research Laboratory, Southeast University at Nanjing (SSMRL-SEU), updated notes, references for same row.
- 2023-08-05T0101Z : Updated status, results, notes for 胡豆 at Zhihu
- 2023-08-05T0425Z : Updated results, notes for CSIR-NPLI
- 2023-08-05T0641Z : Updated status for Dept. of Condensed Matter Physics, Charles University
- 2023-08-05T1326Z : Updated reliability, notes for CCMS-NTU
- 2023-08-05T1335Z : Updated results, notes, references for CCMS-NTU
- 2023-08-05T1405Z : Update reliability, notes, references for HPPMSL-QNU
- 2023-08-06T1552Z : Added Condensed Matter Physics Group, University of Manchester (CMPG-UoM)
- 2023-08-07T0443Z : Updated status for Max Shirokawa Aalto at Twitter
- 2023-08-07T0608Z : Updated results for 胡豆 at Zhihu
- 2023-08-07T0954Z : Updated status for CCMS-NTU
- 2023-08-07T1142Z : Updated status, results, notes, references for Argonne National Laboratory
- 2023-08-08T0308Z : Added International Center for Quantum Materials, Peking University (ICQM-PKU), updated results for School of Materials Science and Engineering, Beihang University
- 2023-08-08T0313Z : Updated results color for HUST, SSMRL-SEU, HPPMSL-QNU, and CCMS-NTU
- 2023-08-08T0316Z : Updated status for Department of Condensed Matter Physics, Charles University
- 2023-08-08T0339Z : Updated status, results, notes, references for CSIR-NPLI
- 2023-08-08T1217Z : Added Power Engineering Research Group, Queensland University of Technology (PER-QUT)
- 2023-08-08T1233Z : Cleaned up results for CSIR-NPLI
- 2023-08-09T0359Z : Added Donostia International Physics Center (DIPC) & Department of Physics, Princeton University (DoP-PU) & Schoop Lab, Department of Chemistry, Princeton University (Schoop Lab-PU) & Max Planck Institute for Chemical Physics of Solids (MPICPS) & Hendon Materials Simulation Group, Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of Oregon (HMSG-UO) & IKERBASQUE, Basque Foundation for Science
- 2023-08-09T0408Z : Changed name for IoP-CAS to BNLCMP-IoP-CAS, updated reliability, status, results, notes, sources/references for BNLCMP-IoP-CAS
- 2023-08-09T0424Z : Changed name for CMPG-UoM to Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Manchester (UoM). Updated status, results, notes, references for Dept. of Phys. & Astro., UoM. Updated references for HUST and BNLCMP-IoP-CAS
- 2023-08-09T0946Z : Added Shinya Shimizu at Twitter
- 2023-08-09T1152Z : Updated status for CSIR-NPLI
- 2023-08-09T1231Z : Added 真·凤舞九天 at Bilibili
- 2023-08-09T1233Z : Updated results, distinguished between partial and full levitation results
- 2023-08-10T0521Z : Updated status, results, notes, references for Andrew McCalip at Twitter
- 2023-08-10T0528Z : Updated status, results, notes, references for HUST
- 2023-08-10T0532Z : Updated status, results for Max Shirokawa Aalto at Twitter
- 2023-08-11T0657Z : Added Dessau Lab & Gang Cao Research Group & Michl Research Group, University of Colorado-Boulder
- 2023-08-13T1756Z : Updated results, notes, references for CSIR-NPLI
- 2023-08-13T1804Z : Added Ginzburg Center for High-Temperature Superconductivity and Quantum Materials, Lebedev Physical Institute, Russian Academy of Sciences (CHTSQM-FIAN)
- 2023-08-13T1805Z : Updated results, notes for 胡豆 at Zhihu
- 2023-08-13T1827Z : Added 牛顿的烈焰激光剑 at Douyin
- 2023-08-13T1830Z : Added Korea Research Institute of Standards and Science(KRISS)
- 2023-08-13T1832Z : Updated results, notes, references for Iris Alexandra at Twitter
- 2023-08-13T1836Z : Updated status, results, notes for Shinya Shimizu at Twitter
- 2023-08-14T1233Z : Updated notes, references for DIPC & Dept. of Phys., PU & Schoop Lab, PU & MPI-CPS & HMSF-UO & IKERBASQUE
- 2023-08-14T1313Z : Added Max Planck Institute of Solid State Research (MPI-SSR)
- 2023-08-14T1321Z : Added Dresden University of Technology (TUD)
- 2023-08-14T1328Z : Moved 牛顿的烈焰激光剑 at Douyin to Official/Institutional and changed name to Department of Metallurgical Engineering, Central South University (CSU), updated notes and references
- 2023-08-14T1425Z : Updated results, notes, references for SSMRL-SEU
- 2023-08-16T1325Z : Added Department of Chemistry, Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) & School of Physical Sciences, Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU)
- 2023-08-16T1501Z : Updated results, notes, references for BNLCMP-IoP-CAS
- 2024-01-04T0818Z : Put up deprecation notice

 

[conduct_al]

Korea is behind the west by several days it seems. Those concerns have already been addressed on English speaking Twitter. Are Korean experts aware of the new Theoretical paper released today on arXiv?

https://arxiv.org/pdf/2308.00676.pdf

Click to shrink...

Well. This manuscript just suggests some possibilities. Someone in Asia still argues that they showed diamagnetic characteristic with the wrong experimental video. BTW, who did you cite from "Twitter"?

 

[Guderian2nd]

New press interview with Kyunghyang Shinmun (경향신문):

Article:

퀀텀에너지연구소 관계자는 국제 학술지에 이번 연구 결과를 담은 논문을 게재하기 위한 절차가 진행 중이라고 밝혔다. 이 관계자는 "앞으로 4주 안에, 이르면 2주 안에 학술지에 논문이 실릴 수 있을 것으로 보인다"며 "언론 대상의 설명회도 열 계획"이라고 말했다.

---

Translation (by me):

Quantum Energy Research Center related personnel have revealed that they are currently in the process of publishing a paper with this time's research results. This person has said "We expect to be able to publish our paper onto a journal within the next 4 weeks, possibly 2 weeks.", adding "We plan to hold a briefing for the press as well."

Source: https://www.khan.co.kr/science/science-general/article/202308021450001?utm_source=urlCopy&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=sharing

The "paper that'll get published within the next 2-4 weeks" likely refers to the paper they submitted to APL materials that QERC mentioned in earlier interviews. The "we'll also advertise this for the press" thing unfortunately reminds me a bit of the Hwang affair, but I suppose we'll have to wait and see.

 

[Ash0011]

Wouldn't they still want to wait more time to test before showcasing that?

The original team apparently wasn't exactly ready for the release of their paper yet, if I'm interpreting the drama right. So they might not even get to the point of testing it via water to make sure yet.

While I'm pretty sure someone could answer why it's simple that I'm wrong, but as of posting this, I'm certain we will get a water test once more time passes no?

Click to shrink...

Yeah, a lot of the 'why didn't they just' questions are answered by pointing out they basically had to panic-publish and start rushing when one of the people that had been working on the project tried to preempt them to make certain they would get credit (at least that's the variant of the story I heard, not sure if that was debunked or not). Not entirely certain why they haven't done more now, but it seems like 99% of the labs that aren't in china are being tight-lipped about things till they have unequivocal proof one way or the other, and they might either be following suit or are still rushing in other regards.




Hmm, may as well summarize my current view of the situation outside of the drama, I'm basically a layman, but at worst this'll give a view of potential misconceptions going around so they can be nipped in the bud by someone competent.

First off the theoretical calcs that were run to figure out how this is happening not only provided an explanation for the potential superconductivity, one that is apparently fairly novel (it's replacing part of the lead lattice in the material with copper, in such a way that it effectively compresses, upping the density and simulating increased pressure), but they also provided an explanation for why replication of this is so difficult even under lab conditions (the orientation of the material needed to support superconductivity is a higher energy one, and thus far less likely to form), one that the initial paper did not seem to mention either. This by no means proves anything, but the fact that things are still making sense there is a very good sign, and even if this doesn't pan out there's something good that came out of it in that there's another area to look for superconductors in.

Second off we have the chart, I'd link it but it's pinned to the top, so that'd be redundant. Ignoring the Low reliability score labs till we have a better sample size, currently we sit at most people with High reliability refusing to comment, a few High and Somewhat High with Diamagnets, two Highs with a resounding failure, one that's being retried (though notably with the same results of failure, that's probably meaningful), and a Somewhat Low (who I should probably ignore as well, but her methods are seemingly public and nobody appears to be calling BS, so..?) that is notably customizing the process in (seemingly?) radical ways and getting better overall results, nothing truly concrete, but at least a diamagnet.

Those are admittedly the main points I'm currently pulling from, I'm peripherally aware of other things in the discussion, but those are the big ones that seemed to make sense. Overall this is casting things in a quite optimistic light, though please, if I've made incorrect assumptions or errors anywhere I'm posting this so those can be corrected.

 

[questioningmeme]

Even though I'm keeping myself in check and not dreaming too much, I think this is possibly one of the greatest excitement I've ever felt since I first talked to ChatGPT.

The Brain says that it's likely not as good as it sounds.

But the Heart yearns for the Unobtainium Floaty Rock.

 

[dragonkid11]

I wonder how many of the guests coming into this forum to check on the super conductor news thinking that this forum is full of a whole bunch of smart people but in reality the smart nerds are more like the 1% (or maybe even way less) and the rest are idiots. (I'm the idiot)

 

[Second mover]

Of course not, I demand reparations! I will accept payment in shares of either Seonam Superconductors or AMSC stock. 😤

(just in case, obviously I'm joking, yeah I'm fine with it, you've been very diligent in attributions of where you forked it from and the real meat of the table (the notes section) in your version is indeed your own work anyways. Congrats for making it to VICE!)

On an unrelated note, it seems like very shortly after the Korean Society of Superconductivity and Cryogenics released their statement, their website crashed due to excess traffic.

Click to shrink...

Maybe we should offer them to rehost. After all, this is becoming the worlds central hub on room temp superconductor research.

 

[Fabius Maximus]

Even though I'm keeping myself in check and not dreaming too much, I think this is possibly one of the greatest excitement I've ever felt since I first talked to ChatGPT.

The Brain says that it's likely not as good as it sounds.

But the Heart yearns for the Unobtainium Floaty Rock.

Click to shrink...

I'd be satisfied with "this isn't a usable superconductor, but it gives us some more clues of how to make a room temperature superconductor that can be used".

 

[ChronicEel93]

Woke up. Read the news. Freaked out about the fact that I somehow missed this for a whole damn week. Freaked out when I saw that it wasn't a blatantly obvious hoax (I mean- Who would throw out a 'fake' superconductor that can be made with lead and copper, with a manufacturing process that, material science folk around the world can play with in a relatively short time frame). It's still up in the air in my mind whether or not this is an actual breakthrough, but damn if it isn't grabbing my attention.
Now that I've contributed nothing to the ongoing conversation, (and still quietly trying to stop myself from glomming on to the possibility it's really, really real (seriously, it shouldn't be so hard to manage my own expectations)), I'm going to go back to sleep, and skip forwards eight hours to see if this goes anywhere today.

 

[xXNikito_22Xx]

Tweet from Andrew Cote, explaining the 4 theoretical papers that have come out.

They suggest this could help explain how it retains superconductivity at such high temperatures. Also, they put forward an interpretation of the superconductivity as reliant on overlapping wave functions, or distributions, of the electron energy levels, i.e. the electrons are just slightly overlapping with each other, which creates the flat bands.

They suggest this could help explain how it retains superconductivity at such high temperatures. Also, they put forward an interpretation of the superconductivity as reliant on overlapping wave functions, or distributions, of the electron energy levels, i.e. the electrons are just slightly overlapping with each other, which creates the flat bands.
They also claim the most important consideration is the overlap between the copper and oxygen electron orbitals, noting that the Oxygen-Copper pairing may explain why TK-99 may superconduct at much lower pressures than previous RTS materials (hydrides). (previous hydride-based RTS materials were superconducting at room temperature, but only at millions of atmospheres of pressure).

4th Paper - Northwest U and TU Wien
arxiv.org/abs/2308.00676
Liang Si and Karsten Held (h-index: 67)
These authors find the same results as the previous two studies - flat energy bands around the fermi surface as a result of copper atoms replacing lead. Two different methods for superconductivity are coupling between electrons, 'electron-electron', or coupling between electrons and vibrations in the crystal lattice, 'electron-phonon'. These authors find that both mechanisms could be possible given the structure that is formed.
There is strong agreement with general findings of all the other papers mentioned, however they additionally claim the appearance of diamagnetism without superconductivity is at odds with their results.
This would have immense implications for the early attempts at synthesis which show diamagnetism but have not yet yielded electrical measurements of zero resistance.

~~~~~~~~~~~
All the authors in these studies noted that their simulation results are not predictive or conclusive of TK-99 being the holy grail of materials science - a room temperature, ambient pressure superconductor.
Taken together they paint an interesting and compelling picture - at the very least, TK-99 is a very interesting material that suggests new lines of research into superconductors that have the potential to perform at room temperatures and ambient pressures.
Here is my mental model right now:
This material is difficult to synthesize because getting the copper in the right place is not very likely, producing low-yields. However, it's possible to separate out individual flakes, or crystal grains, that are diamagnetic but these are quite small. Internal to these tiny crystal grains are one-dimensional 'superconducting' channels that result in partial flux-pinning / levitation, however because these don't enable currents to flow in any direction it isn't perfectly pinned. The energy bands that superconduct are resilient to slight disorder, and are oriented in such a way that lets them perform well without requiring large temperatures.
The flakes that levitate aren't just diamagnets, but, the 1-dimensional conduction pathways might feasibly make it difficult to measure resistance (i.e. anisotropic resistance? - my speculation).
~~~~~
I'll reiterate that everything depends on experimental verification, but it is fascinating to read and share this rapidly developing scientific breakthrough.
My personal odds keep going up

Click to shrink...

 

[OrangutanKlaus]

Thanks all the folks here gathering and summarizing all the entropy that is out there. Super helpful to stay sane !

One question that I don't get answered is why no one who replicated the results has done some electric resistance tests so far?
Is it so hard because of the size of the material or is special equippment/software required? Wouldn't a resistance test shed ultimately some light into the discussion if LK99 is actual useful besides its levitating properties?

 

[AntiSanity]

Thanks all the folks here gathering and summarizing all the entropy that is out there. Super helpful to stay sane !

One question that I don't get answered is why no one who replicated the results has done some electric resistance tests so far?
Is it so hard because of the size of the material or is special equippment/software required? Wouldn't a resistance test shed ultimately some light into the discussion if LK99 is actual useful besides its levitating properties?

Click to shrink...

Because of the preparation method, the resulting material is hypothesized to be small nodules of superconductor contained within non-superconducting material. It's quick an easy to apply a magnetic field to it, as the magnetic field can permeate the regular material and flux pin the superconductor. (Though this isn't conclusive, it does suggest the nodules may exist in that sample.) But running current through like a resistance test won't work if it has to pass through non-superconducting material.

I'm guessing the labs that have floating materials are now trying to isolate possible superconductors from the rest of the mass. Maybe using x-rays and other equipment that takes time to examine the entire mass. They may need to then use precise equipment to separate the superconducting material from the regular material. There is a hypothesis that superconductivity may require a crystalline structure so it's not possible to just smash it to dust and throw it above a magnet to see what floats.

 

[yodaisgoblin]

An update from 科研农民工

Xinhaixing个人动态-Xinhaixing动态记录-哔哩哔哩视频

哔哩哔哩Xinhaixing的个人动态，在这里可以看到Xinhaixing动态分享、视频投稿的完整记录，了解Xinhaixing的活动轨迹。

space.bilibili.com

Click to shrink...

The top reply is from the author said he performed four-terminal sensing and the material is not conducting at all.

 

[eirich]

Zoubair - the French PhD student has made a second attempt and failed to see levitation, they note that there's a slight peak that's missing in the XRD.

2nd attempt: failure to see any levitation, the XRD pattern seems to be the right phase although what we noticed is the absence of a peak at 18° that appears in the original paper but in none of the replications (brown circle). Moreover, we have 0 Cu2S impurities(green area)

Click to shrink...

They've also made it clear that this is not an official attempt by the lab - they specialise in battery research and it's just a bunch of curious PhD/postdocs doing it.

We are a battery research lab and we don't do Supcond here, also this is not an "official" attempt by the lab, it's just curious PhDs and postdocs trying to reproduce the LK99. Therefore, I will not answer to any interview requests, thanks for understanding.

Click to shrink...

This, along with the move of the HUST researcher to the "official" table, has made me think about how the separation between the two tables may become more fuzzy over time. Some social media posts like the Indian lab was a precursor to a preprint, but others are students or faculty using their free lab time, and is technically "private". We can't know until we can link it to a verified statement, and I wouldn't be surprised if pre-emptively marking zoubair's attempt as something official contributed to him being bothered for interviews.

Not sure if there's something we can do about, given that we're making our best efforts to get through the haze ourselves. I've moving him away from my copy, though.

 

[Basilisk]

Wasn't there a video of the sample hanging from a string and a magnet being waved at it?

Click to shrink...

If you are talking about this:


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EtVjGWpbE7k

You can replicate this with a piece of aluminium foil from your kitchen as a conductor. I did that, Dave from eevblog did that, etc. I can drag a large sample of a room temperature conductor (not super) around on my table by waving a magnet above it.

The difference with a superconductor is that you can actually hold the magnet still and the sample still be pushed away - what is a transient effect with a regular conductor is a permanent effect with a superconductor. Then, to demonstrate flux pinning, you can move the magnet away and see the sample be now pulled towards the magnet. The faster you are moving your magnet, the less does it matter if your conductor is "super" or not, and they are squarely in the "kitchen foil is a good enough conductor for this" territory. (edit: and to make matters worse they got gold plating on the sample here. And also in the middle of the video it isn't being deflected by a stationary magnet)

With that video there's also two possibilities, one they don't know what a piece of copper foil does when you wave a strong magnet at it, and two they did try to make a hanging at an angle video, it didn't do what it should do, and they settled for a demonstration they could do (which you can also do with copper or aluminium foil).

edit: and to reiterate, in my mind there's two possibilities here.

1. Even as they are doing infighting "me first" publication they have superhuman self restraint, all work, no play, and those few minutes in the video are all that they played with their superconductor. Their good sample that stands up on the magnet, they never hung off a string, they only tried this with a gold plated sample which isn't deflecting from a stationary magnet, for what ever reason.
2. They're normal people, they played around with it. The sample that was standing up at an angle, was hung on a string, etc etc. My guess is that the standing sample when hung on a string stuck to the magnet. What ever it did, we don't know but it wasn't something they'd show. The gold plated sample is what they show because it at least reacts to the moving magnet (because gold is a decent room temperature conductor)

 

[wanicca]

Thanks all the folks here gathering and summarizing all the entropy that is out there. Super helpful to stay sane !

One question that I don't get answered is why no one who replicated the results has done some electric resistance tests so far?
Is it so hard because of the size of the material or is special equippment/software required? Wouldn't a resistance test shed ultimately some light into the discussion if LK99 is actual useful besides its levitating properties?

Click to shrink...

Possible Reasons

Reason 1: Most of the replicated samples are tiny, which could be difficult to test resistance.
Reason 2: They could only have very few of samples that can levitate. They want to create more samples before test the resistance because the test may destroy the tiny samples.
Reason 3: Someone might actually test, yet the result is negative (i.e., not zero resistance). However it is somewhat arbitrary to simply make a conclusion now so they are doing more experiments.

 

[ME Starspawn]

Hmmm there is likely such a thing as partial super conductors IE where the super conductivity is only a thing up to a certain arbitary limit IE Mass, Pressure (or lack there off), i'm not talking about the limitations we know about, more that a limited super conductor that might either lose their abilities or see them enhanced due to outside forces like magnetic fields or resonance for that matter.
Thing is as far as i can see the project has already been a succes no matter what, it has forced and inspired people to look in other now plausible ways to find the holy grail.
As some said it would only be behind Fusion and FTL com or movement, of course the little irony is that it is likely a nessecity for either of those potential breakthrous to be even possible or theoretically possible.

People as a group have a tendensy to become narrowminded, it is part of our natural herd mentallity (Talk with Sociologies, Anthropologist and psych majors about that) As it is, historically events like this is extremely rare, one generation in 20 might experience it (Invention of the wheel, safety pin, Bronze Alloy et al) but one othe common things all these events have in common is that people had little idea just how much things would and could change because of it.

Side note, there has been a couple who have asked why not use heavier elements than lead as part of the alloy, like Tungsten, thing is that Tungsten is MUCH harder to worlk with on every level than lead, if you should try a different type of hevy elelment try Gold, gold and Lead have many properties in common besides weight, so there might be more to gain there.

 

[Log082]

Hmmm there is likely such a thing as partial super conductors IE where the super conductivity is only a thing up to a certain arbitary limit IE Mass, Pressure (or lack there off), i'm not talking about the limitations we know about, more that a limited super conductor that might either lose their abilities or see them enhanced due to outside forces like magnetic fields or resonance for that matter.

Click to shrink...

Either I don't understand what you're saying or you don't, because all of these things but mass are already conditions for superconductivity. There already exist materials that superconduct at room temp, they just require massive pressures instead of cold temperatures. Likewise, all existing superconductors have critical currents and magnetic fields at which their superconductivity breaks down.

 

[Basilisk]

Eh, I think people are too open minded if anything. Plus a room temperature superconductor has absolutely nothing on the original discovery of superconductors.

There's a set behavior that proves it is a superconductor, they try to show that behavior, and fail: one sample didn't deflect from stationary magnet and other didn't actually lift off, it may well be attracted to the magnet just trying to align along the field lines for all we can see. But the failure looks partial and we all want to believe, so we take as a "confirmation" what we end up seeing, which isn't what we (or the authors) originally wanted to see from those experiments.

edit: in other words, hanging off a string ONLY demonstrates superconductivity if it is deflected by a stationary magnet in a very specific way. That failed.

Levitation only demonstrates superconductivity if it actually hangs in the air without contact with the magnet, preferably not trying to slide off on the slightest provocation the way diomagnets do.

Now, granted, those qualitative tests can not exclude the possibility that some of the material is superconductive. But nor can they confirm that without completely succeeding. Additionally, the hanging test is a LOT more sensitive than the levitation test, so if the levitation test was actually a partial success, the hanging test should have it be deflected very strongly by a stationary magnet.

 

[Warron]

Hi. One of many lurkers here taking advantage of the attempted replications chart. Someone called out us lurkers earlier, so I figured I'd do my part and join. And I might as well give my 2 cents.

I think this is likely bunk. Unlike most people who came to that conclusion and then went on with their lives I've been following the news with rapt attention. I dove pretty deep into this and I've read explanations by scientists who know a lot more about this stuff then me.

The original paper was flawed. Some commenters say that the original paper makes the scientists look like amateurs who don't really know what they're doing and their paper is full of basic errors. It's probably not much better then any other failed superconductor paper- and these failed room-temperature superconductors are a dime a dozen, you know. They also don't have a plausible theory to explain their results, and don't seem to understand superconductivity all that well (according to scientists in the field). The one thing I guess it had going for it was the magnet demonstration. But several experiments show that it's perfectly possible for this stuff to display that effect without superconductivity. Then there's the Berkeley paper, but scientists have poked holes in that as well. So if the original paper was bad, and the Berkeley paper doesn't prove anything, and the diamagnetism doesn't prove anything, then what's left?

In my very inexpert opinion I think the Koreans found a material that fit their theories and had some odd properties and they deceived themselves into believing it was a superconductor. My best guess is that LK-99 is finicky and sometimes acts as a semi-conductor and sometimes a resistor. Surprisingly, it's apparently fairly common for amateur researchers to mistake resistors for superconductors when searching for the latter, so I'm guessing that's what happened. That explanation fits all the experiments so far, including the "partial successes" that are only successful in the sense of demonstrating diamagnetism.

I don't think this will look much better in hindsight then countless other false starts in this field. People see the diamagnetism and they think "well clearly LK-99 is doing *something* so we must be getting closer to the superconductivity. After all it can't just be a coincidence that this material is claimed as a superconductor and happens to have some other weird physical property." I don't think it's a coincidence either but only in the sense that the diamagnetism is what tricked the researchers down this road.

 

[ME Starspawn]

Either I don't understand what you're saying or you don't, because all of these things but mass are already conditions for superconductivity. There already exist materials that superconduct at room temp, they just require massive pressures instead of cold temperatures. Likewise, all existing superconductors have critical currents and magnetic fields at which their superconductivity breaks down.

Click to shrink...

Sorry about that i should have been more clear, my point is that as it is now it seems that there might be other factors not really considered before that could influence super conductivity, or make it active compared to before, i mena that it is not that unlikely that new avenues of mathematical and physics concerning Super conductivity might be open up, mostly becuase people have had no reason to really look at them before.

 

[Warron]

Of course the Universe has a way of screwing with me, so now that I've gone out on a limb and declared that I'm confident this is nothing it probably will turn out to be something.

Nevertheless here's an excellent comment from Professor Michael S. Fuhrer.


"If I were to report tomorrow that a material with a very complex structure showed superconductivity at a high temperature, within a few weeks there would be N>>1 theory papers on the Arxiv explaining the result...many of them good science but nevertheless many in contradiction with each other. That's expected, it's not exciting. It doesn't have much bearing on the likelihood that this material is a superconductor; it would still happen if it were not."

I wouldn't pin too many hopes on the theoretical papers.

Edit: Also a lot of peopele are saying that even if this fails these theoretical papers offer a step forward because we now know what sort of properties and structure to look for. I think this is putting way too much in those theoretical papers. IF LK-99 turns out to work then those papers MIGHT provide an explanation as to how it's possible. If it doesn't they don't.

 

[RDpirate]

Eh, I think people are too open minded if anything. Plus a room temperature superconductor has absolutely nothing on the original discovery of superconductors.

There's a set behavior that proves it is a superconductor, they try to show that behavior, and fail: one sample didn't deflect from stationary magnet and other didn't actually lift off, it may well be attracted to the magnet just trying to align along the field lines for all we can see. But the failure looks partial and we all want to believe, so we take as a "confirmation" what we end up seeing, which isn't what we (or the authors) originally wanted to see from those experiments.

edit: in other words, hanging off a string ONLY demonstrates superconductivity if it is deflected by a stationary magnet in a very specific way. That failed.

Levitation only demonstrates superconductivity if it actually hangs in the air without contact with the magnet, preferably not trying to slide off on the slightest provocation the way diomagnets do.

Now, granted, those qualitative tests can not exclude the possibility that some of the material is superconductive. But nor can they confirm that without completely succeeding. Additionally, the hanging test is a LOT more sensitive than the levitation test, so if the levitation test was actually a partial success, the hanging test should have it be deflected very strongly by a stationary magnet.

Click to shrink...

Not all superconductors act that way. These are not pass or fail tests.

The reason these tests are done is because they were in the original paper IIRC.
And the biggest factor to all the failures so far is that the papers were extremely rushed into publication and are missing key steps and factors for other labs to replicate. Which has lead to multiple labs just shooting in the dark and hoping they get the right combination.

It's like trying to cook a cake but 1/3 of the recipe is missing and you get told just "get eggs maybe"

 

[Appletank]

Do remember that we have been burned a handful of times already, people are willing to fake data for reaching the holy grail. Popping the champagne on every claim will result in a lot of angry people who no longer trust you.

Side note, when did we switch from LK99 to TK99?

 

[Basilisk]

Well the

That explanation fits all the experiments so far, including the "partial successes" that are only successful in the sense of demonstrating diamagnetism.

Click to shrink...

I think it's actually worse than that. The hanging sample doesn't seem to be repelled by a stationary magnet (there's a moment when he's not waving the magnet around). It only demonstrates conductivity, of the gold plating (a moving magnet creates a current in any conductor, but if the conductor is not super the current dies out).

The sitting at an angle sample, I think it's paramagnetic (weakly attracted to the magnet) and is just trying to align with the field lines (with a ferromagnetic or paramagnetic material the net force is towards the magnet but there's a weaker force pushing the far part away from the magnet). If it was diamagnetic they could use that sample to do their hanging demonstration with the expected behavior when the magnet is stationary.

TBH i'm fairly confident that they tried several things, and if they did and these videos are the best they got, then it got to be weakly paramagnetic (and can only appear to be repelled from the magnet when pivoting upon the magnet).

edit:

Not all superconductors act that way. These are not pass or fail tests.

Click to shrink...

They could have passed, that's the thing.

They threw a sample onto a magnet, expecting that it would literally fly in the air (without sliding off the way a diomagnet would if you just put it on a solitary round magnet). It did not fly. It could have actually flown. It just pivoted.

Then, post-factum, there's arguing that there was no failure at all because, maybe it's just too heavy. Maybe it's an 1D superconductor. Well yeah you can't actually prove something is 100% non super conductive, that's not what you are throwing a sample onto a magnet for, you're throwing it on a magnet so that it would fly and prove it is superconductive. You can succeed, and you can fail.

They also hung another sample off wires. Expecting that they could deflect it with a stationary magnet. They could not. The standing up on a magnet sample should have been deflected very strongly away from the stationary magnet, at least demonstrating diamagnetism.

edit: note also that of course you could have a bulk paramagnetic material with little bits of superconductor in it, and all sorts of things like that. If this is what you got then it's on you to invent some sort of test to demonstrate that it is superconducting. The flying test would still be a failure. And you don't get to on one hand measure bulk 3D superconductivity, up to 300mA, with 4 wire probe (meaning your material is mostly superconductive), and on the other hand be using the "tiny specks of superconductor inside another material" excuse.

 

[kaoswreck]

Do remember that we have been burned a handful of times already, people are willing to fake data for reaching the holy grail. Popping the champagne on every claim will result in a lot of angry people who no longer trust you.

Side note, when did we switch from LK99 to TK99?

Click to shrink...

Honestly, if this was a deliberate scam i wouldve expected a far more elaborate manufacturing process than what was in the paper. You dont want your scam to be easily checked after all. Im still relatively in the cautious optimism phase though.