# Wait, what? Superconductivity at 20C? **URL:** \ **Category:** Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share\ **Created:** [October 26, 2011, 12:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wait-what-superconductivity-at-20c/600801 "2011-10-26T00:57:46Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 17\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Giraffe](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/giraffe/32/129_2.png) [@Giraffe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Giraffe)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2011, 5:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wait-what-superconductivity-at-20c/600801/21 "2011-10-27T17:27:16Z")
> [@Sunspace](#): > > So, you’re saying looks count for more than content? The whole point of science is to test things! If it gets tested and it doesn’t work, and they don’t acknowledge the testing, _then_ you can scoff your heart out. Yes, I’m saying looks count more than content. _That’s_ my problem with someone claiming to have solved one of the holy grails of condensed matter physics and yet for some reason was unable to get it published in any peer reviewed journal. If he’d self-published it on a prettier website, I’d be all over it. :rolleyes: Anyway, there’s nothing there that indicates they actually did anything apart from mining noisy signals for random patterns that they ascribe deep meaning to. In this case, attributing a relatively small fluctuation of the measured resistivity as an indication that a portion of the sample is undergoing a [Meissner effect](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meissner_effect). There is no reason to make this assumption, especially given their low signal to noise ratio. Which I’m guessing is resulting from the fact that they’re just sticking probes in random powdered compounds, rather than carefully growing thin films in a vacuum chamber under clean room conditions. I’m reminded of [O.E. Wagner](http://darkmatterwaves.com/article.html), a crackpot from Oregon who claimed to have found celestial waves by sticking oscilloscope probes in trees and waiting for blips. I saw a talk from him where he (a) worked out that the speed of these “W waves” was magically about the speed it takes a guy to walk from one oscilloscope to another (he didn’t make that connection, of course) and (b) showed a power spectrum that had nothing but peaks at 60 Hz and multiples thereof, i.e. all he was detecting was the overhead power lines. > [@](#): > > We need to see who else has tested this, and what the results were. No, actually we don’t. The people who understand infinitely more about high-T[sub]c[/sub] superconductivity than you or I do are light years ahead of Internet crackpots. Our attempts to feed them things to test is just going to slow them down and waste their time. ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2011, 5:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wait-what-superconductivity-at-20c/600801/22 "2011-10-27T17:42:07Z")
> [@Giraffe](#): > > Yes, I’m saying looks count more than content. _That’s_ my problem with someone claiming to have solved one of the holy grails of condensed matter physics and yet for some reason was unable to get it published in any peer reviewed journal. If he’d self-published it on a prettier website, I’d be all over it. :rolleyes: He can’t help it that that’s exactly what you said. Get mad at yourself for something stupid. ---
**Author:** ![billfish678](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7bcc69/32.png) [@billfish678](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/billfish678)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2011, 5:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wait-what-superconductivity-at-20c/600801/23 "2011-10-27T17:46:39Z")
> [@Giraffe](#): > > I’m reminded of [O.E. Wagner](http://darkmatterwaves.com/article.html), a crackpot from Oregon who claimed to have found celestial waves by sticking oscilloscope probes in trees and waiting for blips. I saw a talk from him where he (a) worked out that the speed of these “W waves” was magically about the speed it takes a guy to walk from one oscilloscope to another (he didn’t make that connection, of course) and (b) showed a power spectrum that had nothing but peaks at 60 Hz and multiples thereof, i.e. all he was detecting was the overhead power lines. I remember a guy who swore bats emitted actual EM radar. And somehow the fact that it happened to also be 60 Hertz or some multiple/fraction of that in his measurements didn’t ring any bells in that guys belfy either :rolleyes: Also the fact the bats all appeared to be in perfect synch would IMO make their radar use a bit problematic… ---
**Author:** ![davidm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/davidm/32/225_2.png) [@davidm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/davidm)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2011, 7:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wait-what-superconductivity-at-20c/600801/24 "2011-10-27T19:00:30Z")
> [@user\_hostile](#): > > He was a participant in SETI. Here’s his [profile](http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/view_profile.php?userid=4422). A man ahead of the curve. That proves nothing. Anyone can be a participant in SETI@home. _I’m_ a participant in SETI@home. You can be too. All you need is a computer. ---
**Author:** ![Cheshire\_Human](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/5f8ce5/32.png) [@Cheshire\_Human](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cheshire_Human)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2011, 9:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wait-what-superconductivity-at-20c/600801/25 "2011-10-27T21:10:51Z")
I’m a participant in [Einstein@Home](http://einstein.phys.uwm.edu/http://einstein.phys.uwm.edu/), so clearly I’m an expert in gravitational physics. Want to hear my latest theory about the Quantum Gravity? ---
**Author:** ![Giraffe](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/giraffe/32/129_2.png) [@Giraffe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Giraffe)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2011, 9:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wait-what-superconductivity-at-20c/600801/26 "2011-10-27T21:37:50Z")
> [@BigT](#): > > He can’t help it that that’s exactly what you said. Get mad at yourself for something stupid. No, _you_ get mad at yourself for something stupid! Seriously, I have no idea what that means. ---
**Author:** ![Hari\_Seldon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hari_seldon/32/5173_2.png) [@Hari\_Seldon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hari_Seldon)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2011, 9:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wait-what-superconductivity-at-20c/600801/27 "2011-10-27T21:41:46Z")
> [@Snarky\_Kong](#): > > Depends on how easy it is to make. It also depends on how much current it can carry before the magnetism destroys its superconductivity. ---
**Author:** ![Ludovic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7ab992/32.png) [@Ludovic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ludovic)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2011, 9:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wait-what-superconductivity-at-20c/600801/28 "2011-10-27T21:42:03Z")
In Soviet Russia, MAD gets YOU for something stupid! ---
**Author:** ![Robot\_Arm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/robot_arm/32/18280_2.png) [@Robot\_Arm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robot_Arm)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2011, 1:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wait-what-superconductivity-at-20c/600801/29 "2011-10-28T01:00:05Z")
> [@Cheshire\_Human](#): > > I’m a participant in [Einstein@Home](http://einstein.phys.uwm.edu/http://einstein.phys.uwm.edu/), so clearly I’m an expert in gravitational physics. Want to hear my latest theory about the Quantum Gravity? I have a new theory about the brontosaurus. ---
**Author:** ![Cheshire\_Human](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/5f8ce5/32.png) [@Cheshire\_Human](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cheshire_Human)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2011, 1:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wait-what-superconductivity-at-20c/600801/30 "2011-10-28T01:27:27Z")
> [@Robot\_Arm](#): > > I have a new theory about the brontosaurus. Oh, yeah? What sort of Brontosaurus@Home project are YOU a part of, eh? ---
**Author:** ![armedmonkey](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/d6d6ee/32.png) [@armedmonkey](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/armedmonkey)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2011, 3:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wait-what-superconductivity-at-20c/600801/31 "2011-10-28T03:06:03Z")
> [@Cheshire\_Human](#): > > Oh, yeah? What sort of Brontosaurus@Home project are YOU a part of, eh? It’s a little known fact Brontosaurus@home has little to do with dinosaurs. It is chiefly concerned with the modeling of large animals with the wrong heads such as the elephamoose and the [sharktopus](http://bhorrorblog.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/sharktopus_just-keep-swimming.jpg). ---
**Author:** ![user\_hostile](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/user_hostile/32/474_2.png) [@user\_hostile](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/user_hostile)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2011, 3:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wait-what-superconductivity-at-20c/600801/32 "2011-10-28T03:20:24Z")
> [@davidm](#): > > That proves nothing. Anyone can be a participant in SETI@home. _I’m_ a participant in SETI@home. You can be too. All you need is a computer. I, for one, welcome our new SETI@home overlords! See, **davidm** what we’re talking about goes beyond “proof”. It’s a new kind of thinking… Joe has created a new scientific philosophy: Eckistentialism. 🆒 ---
**Author:** ![Maserschmidt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/maserschmidt/32/18829_2.png) [@Maserschmidt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Maserschmidt)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2011, 10:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wait-what-superconductivity-at-20c/600801/33 "2011-10-28T10:40:49Z")
> [@Robot\_Arm](#): > > I have a new theory about the brontosaurus. Does it have to do with their morphology? If so, please share! ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2011, 11:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wait-what-superconductivity-at-20c/600801/34 "2011-10-28T11:27:22Z")
I watch _Little Einsteins_ videos. Does that count? (Actually, considering they’re called “Little Einsteins” it’s odd that they do virtually no theoretical physics at all, unless patting and clapping count somehow.) ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2011, 11:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wait-what-superconductivity-at-20c/600801/35 "2011-10-28T11:40:32Z")
> [@Gyrate](#): > > I watch _Little Einsteins_ videos. Does that count? > > (Actually, considering they’re called “Little Einsteins” it’s odd that they do virtually no theoretical physics at all, unless patting and clapping count somehow.) Hey, I’d say being able to power a rocket ship with nothing more than some kids patting and clapping is a pretty major breakthrough in physics, wouldn’t you? _June is patting! Quincy’s patting! Annie’s patting! But we **need more power!!** _ 😃 ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2011, 11:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wait-what-superconductivity-at-20c/600801/36 "2011-10-28T11:54:13Z")
> [@Giraffe](#): > > Actual scientists who discovered room temperature superconductors would have published the information in Science, not a website that looks like it was made in 1995. The front page has a visitor counter and a rotating gif of the word “email” for crying out loud. These days, actual scientists who discovered anything reasonably important would likely release their findings on the Web, like those guys who thought they had the FTL particles a few weeks back. They’d _follow up_ by publishing their research in the appropriate peer-reviewed scientific journals, but if you do that first, it just creates an unnecessary lag time before the wider scientific community can critique, poke holes in, or build on your work. But the flip side is that just because something’s published on the Internet and not in a scientific journal doesn’t mean it’s legit. Real scientists publish on the Web, but so does everybody else. This one’s clearly a crank. ---
**Author:** ![Giraffe](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/giraffe/32/129_2.png) [@Giraffe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Giraffe)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2011, 6:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wait-what-superconductivity-at-20c/600801/37 "2011-10-28T18:59:53Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > These days, actual scientists who discovered anything reasonably important would likely release their findings on the Web, like those guys who thought they had the FTL particles a few weeks back. > > They’d _follow up_ by publishing their research in the appropriate peer-reviewed scientific journals, but if you do that first, it just creates an unnecessary lag time before the wider scientific community can critique, poke holes in, or build on your work. You’re of course correct, but I’d argue that the channels of communication legitimate researchers use are simply modern-day extensions of the peer review system. Had these guys submitted a preprint to [http://arxiv.org/](http://arxiv.org/) or written up a summary of their findings on their institution’s front page ahead of their submission, no big deal. Like you say, that’s science in the age of the Internet. Tucking them away on a subpage of a badly-formatted personal web page, on the other hand, should automatically raise red flags. Particularly when they’re short on data and long on conjecture and dramatic claims. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wait-what-superconductivity-at-20c/600801.md?page=1)