Room Temperature Superconductors?

>>8418306
I want my flying car.

>>8418306
He's either delusional or lying for attention.

>>8418306
my EE prof mentioned this last week. very casually.

apparently the breakthrough research was basically inevitable, just a matter of time. no one is excited because everyone saw it coming.

Normally you have to chill the superconductor with liquid nitrogen. What would happen if the entire room was as cold as liquid nitrogen? Would it still work? Or do superconductors only work when they're changing temperature from supercooled to room temp?

>>8418306
first the memedrive, now this.
Surely we will get an efficient fusion reactor until christmans

>>8418315
The normie science press has zero interest in this paper. There's not one article on this guy's research in any of the big pop sci websites I can find-if this is attention-seeking behavior,it's a miserable failure.

I think it's possible he's hunkering down with some lawyers and trying to get as rich as possible off of this. There's not a tech company on earth that wouldn't want a piece of RTSC.

File: 1345576537386.gif (2MB, 310x176px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 310x176px

>>8418306
cant wait for this to become incorporated into technology. good times ahead my friend

>>8418306
>Talk about keeping a low profile! The fuck is he waiting for? a public demonstration of these materials would make him into a living god. how hard is it to get your patents and trademarks straight? Could he be lying? but why?
>"Due to a pending patent, the exact chemical characterization and technological processes for these materials are temporarily withheld and will be presented elsewhere."

>>8418345
How long do patents take, its been good while since this was published

>>8418322
This is much easier to show an effect off with, emdrive is probably bullshit but this might not be

>>8418345
perhaps he has been already taken out by oil companies and shit

>>8418356
Thats nonsense, this would benefit oil companies

>>8418328
>There's not a tech company on earth that wouldn't want a piece of RTSC.
Honestly though, what exactly is the application here? There are many other things about conductors than just how well they conduct, i.e.
>Mechanical properties, can you make cables from them?
>Fitness for mass production?
>Price?
>Chemical properties, i.e. toxic, inflammable, inert?

It is actually pretty likely that one of those fucking suck, just like it is the case with most high temp superconductors at the moment. It's useless to have room temperature superconductors when it costs a million dollars to produce a few grams of this material that is extremely brittle and oxidizes in minutes. It is very likely only appropriate for very specific use cases.

>>8418362
This lowly professor made numerous washers of the material, i doubt it costs that much

>>8418348
>>8418345
patent applications should only take a few months to get published, I'd call bullshit on this one since I can't find any patent on that guy's name on any database, nor any recent patent application on the subject.

>>8418328
>if this is attention-seeking behavior,it's a miserable failure.
And yet here you are giving it attention. Just because it failed to get mainstream notice doesn't mean he didn't try. I've seen multiple threads about this guy. And I've seen plenty of crackpots and con men playing the same game. Until we see tangible results, he's just another one.

>>8418368
https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/originalDocument?CC=BG&NR=51468A3&KC=A3&FT=D&ND=4&date=19930514&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP#

found an old patent of his on the topic (from 1993), sadly it's in bulgarian I think, so I can't read it. Note how unusually short it is, though.

So at least the guy has been working on the field for more than 2 decades, I'd say we give him the benefit of the doubt for now.

>>8418378
Forgive me from wanting to have a critical look at new reaserch on a science imageboard, im clearly feeding the media circus for this man by letting tens of people know he exists on an ignored section of a goofy imageboard.

>>8418306
OK, let's take a look.


>Experimental evidence of superconductors with critical temperatures above 373K is presented.
OK, that is boiling water. Pretty comfy room temperature.

>In a family of different compounds we demonstrate the superconductor state, the transition to normal state above 387K, an intermediate 242K superconductor, susceptibility up to 350K,
That is a pretty wide deltaT (transition temperature width) which traditionally indicates you do not have a pure phase going. Variation in oxygenation in YBCO gave such effects.

>I−V curves at 4.2K in magnetic field of 12T and current up to 60A, 300K Josephson Junctions and Shapiro steps with radiation of 5GHz to 21THz, 300K tapes tests with high currents up to 3000A and many THz images of coins and washers.
He talks about *currents* but what is traditionally quoted are *current densities*. This is strange.

>Due to a pending patent, the exact chemical characterization and technological processes for these materials are temporarily withheld and will be presented elsewhere.
That could easily take 18 months and with a shaky grasp on what is actually superconducting (ref "green phase" or "221" of YBCO) his application could get into trouble.

The author does not seem to have much else going in te way of high Tc but another patenting guy was doing the circuits earlier. Same group?

>>8418318
>inevitable
I like his optimism. High Tc brewed up in 1986 but 10 years later the search for room temperature superconductors was pretty much dead.

>>8418319
>Normally you have to chill the superconductor with liquid nitrogen.
For HTS, yes. LTS is cooled with LHe.

>What would happen if the entire room was as cold as liquid nitrogen?
Your heating bill would kill you.

>Would it still work?
Sure.

>Or do superconductors only work when they're changing temperature from supercooled to room temp?
No. You just have to be below the critical temperature Tc. Implicitly you also have to be below a critical field strength too but that goes normally without saying.

>>8418348
>How long do patents take, its been good while since this was published
Normally 18 months from priority date. Applicant can chose early publication.
Getting it granted, however, is a quite different question. That could take years. Unlike what some think the USPTO et al do not just rubber stamp applications.

>>8418362
>Honestly though, what exactly is the application here? There are many other things about conductors than just how well they conduct, i.e.
Superconductors are not just perfect conductors. Ref. Meissner effect.
Applications are wide ranging
- power
-- motors, generators, transformers, power lines
-- gigantic electromagnets with 800 T fields have been proposed for YBCO, this might to better. That field strength is deadly. Useful for ore separation, MRI at cell level and even on atomic nucleii
-- weapons like EMP bombs
- electronics
-- analogue: sensors, microwave strip lines and lossless RF devices, SQUIDs
-- digital: ultrafast computers, ultra fast ADC

>>8418391
>https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/originalDocument?CC=BG&NR=51468A3&KC=A3&FT=D&ND=4&date=19930514&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP#
Good find, anon.

I don't speak the language but I speak some chemistry. Look at claim 1 on page 3. Put simply, this is Pb substituted Thallium based superconductor Tl1Ba2Ca3Cu4O10 (TBCCO-1234) with a dash of Sb, seemingly in the same style as Pb was used to stabilise Bismuth based superconductors.

Since Tl is a horrific material to work with this would not really take off.

>>8418306
>One Author
>Private research institute

Am I the only one seeing some red flags here?

>>8418306
someone did write a blog post about it -

http://nanoscale.blogspot.com/2016/03/unidentified-superconducting-objects.html

he has an interesting take. I'll leave this here.

>>8418582
lol moron

>>8418306
Undergrad with the superconductor lab here, I know many of you hate me, but this researcher is lying.

If he really had something such as this he would win the Nobel easily. However, he clearly does not. If these were room-temp he could have simply demonstrated the Meissner Effect with a thermometer next to it. This simple demonstration would easily prove his work.

I think this may actually be a joke/troll.

Ah, this takes me back to my undergrad days - Fleischmann and Pons had published their work on room temperature fusion and the possibilities seemed endless...

>>8418306

>coins and washers

I'm calling bullshit here

>>8419230

Everyone knew it was bullshit then, except for popsci magazines.

I kinda miss those days....

>>8418306
without the actual compound, and prefrably the synthesis method (patent pending on that one) independent verification is impossible.

a room temperature superconductor is amazing, simply amazing, a room temperature superconductor that costs the same as a fucking carrier to make per metre and is more fragile than a wet kleenex is significantly less amazing.

>>8418306
>the exact chemical characterization and technological processes for these materials are temporarily withheld and will be presented elsewhere
>no link, or anything, after 7 months
k

>>8418345

Ahh... "The Cold Fusion" excuse.
"
I would love to show the world proof of my amazing experimental results, BUT my lawyers say I can't until patent/trademarks are cleared"...

Years and tears later, says the same thing anytime someone asks for proof of the AMAZING results

>>8419203
What a well-structured input.