Room Temperature Superconductor Pb & Cu

[JimBoot]

Full paper. chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://arxiv.org/pdf/2307.12008.pdf


The document titled "The First Room-Temperature Ambient-Pressure Superconductor" by Sukbae Lee, Ji-Hoon Kim, and Young-Wan Kwon from the Quantum Energy Research Centre, Inc. and the KU-KIST Graduate School of Converging Science and Technology, Korea University, describes the synthesis of a room-temperature superconductor, LK-99, which works at ambient pressure.
Here is a summary of the process: LK-99 is described as having a modified lead-apatite structure.
The superconductivity of LK-99 is not derived from external factors such as temperature and pressure, but from a minute structural distortion caused by a slight volume shrinkage (0.48%).
This shrinkage is caused by the substitution of Cu2+ ions for Pb2+ ions in the insulating network of Pb2-phosphate. This generates stress and concurrently transfers to Pb(1) of the cylindrical column, resulting in distortion of the cylindrical column interface.
This process creates superconducting quantum wells (SQWs) in the interface.
Heat capacity results indicated that this new model is suitable for explaining the superconductivity of LK-99.
The unique structure of LK-99 that allows the minute distorted structure to be maintained in the interfaces is the most important factor that LK-99 maintains and exhibits superconductivity at room temperatures and ambient pressure.
To validate the superconductivity of LK-99, various tests were carried out such as measuring the critical temperature (Tc), zero-resistivity, critical current (Ic), critical magnetic field (Hc), and observing the Meissner effect. Above summary of the process provided by ChatGPT Code Interpreter.

Members here Gotoluc & Tinman have shown what is possible if we had such a tech. Get the tools out.

I then asked CI about the manufacturing process.
The document does mention the synthesis of LK-99. Specifically, Ji-Hoon Kim is credited with the main responsibility for the synthesis of LK-99 and is said to have developed the synthetic method of LK-99 through the study of reaction mechanisms and X-ray diffraction (XRD) data analysis. However, the document does not go into detail about the specifics of the manufacturing process.


It's worth noting that, in scientific research, initial lab-scale synthesis of a new material is often a complex process that may not be directly scalable to industrial production. Transitioning from lab-scale synthesis to large-scale industrial production can involve significant technical challenges, and may require new processes and equipment, all of which can take considerable time and investment.
In addition, while the primary elements used, Pb and Cu, are not rare or exotic, their specific arrangement and the process to achieve the LK-99 structure could still pose challenges. The document mentions that the superconductivity of LK-99 originates from a minute structural distortion caused by a slight volume shrinkage, which is achieved through the substitution of Cu2+ ions for Pb2+ ions in the insulating network of Pb2-phosphate. This implies a level of precision that may be difficult to achieve consistently at an industrial scale.
To fully understand the potential challenges and feasibility of adopting this technology in industry, more detailed information about the manufacturing process and material properties of LK-99 would be needed.

[JimBoot]

Is it diamagnetism?

the debate between superconductivity and diamagnetism typically revolves around several key experimental findings.

Superconductivity is a quantum mechanical phenomenon where a material can conduct electric current with zero electrical resistance. This usually occurs at very low temperatures. Key evidence for superconductivity includes the observation of zero electrical resistance and the expulsion of magnetic fields from the material (a phenomenon known as the Meissner effect).

Diamagnetism, on the other hand, is a type of magnetism where a material becomes magnetized in opposition to an applied magnetic field, and thus, the material is repelled by the magnetic field. All materials display some diamagnetism, but in superconductors, the diamagnetic response is strong enough to completely cancel out external magnetic fields, leading to the Meissner effect.

In the paper, the authors claim to observe several key indicators of superconductivity in LK-99:

Zero electrical resistance
A critical temperature (Tc) below which superconductivity occurs
A critical current (Ic) above which superconductivity is destroyed
A critical magnetic field (Hc) above which superconductivity is destroyed
The Meissner effect
Critics who suggest that the observed phenomena could be explained by diamagnetism might argue that the observed zero resistance and Meissner effect are not definitive proof of superconductivity and could be caused by other phenomena.

To determine whether the material is truly superconducting, more specific tests could be performed. For example, a type of experiment known as muon spin rotation (µSR) could be used to detect the spontaneous magnetic fields within a superconductor that are indicative of the Cooper pairs of electrons that are a hallmark of superconductivity.

[Classic]

I wonder what properties could have an amalgam doped with graphene, or a chunk of pure iron melted when is cooled with 1000 celsius degrees per minute and looked like a chunk of glass ... some few examples of easy to achieve technology

[Excelsior]

Can someone please point out the value of this discovery? What am I missing here?
I can already make a broken neo levitate diagonally in the proximity of a whole magnet, with some fiddling (that's all this appears to be, but on the face of the mag )

Is it "flipping the spin" or, does it possess both polarities on the same face?
Diametrically magnetized RE's can already do this, iinm?
(It's not self oscillating as such, like Sweets' was said to, so what's the value of this for us?)

Will this allow for new methods to be devised with regards to frequency modulation, etc?
Or is it more to do with the material qualities offered, and their potential applications in SiC devices etc ?
A simplification would much appreciated (likely by other readers too)

[Paul-R]

Can someone please point out the value of this discovery? What am I missing here?

Huge electrical/magnetic power for less  effort. Look into body scanners and the lengths those people have to go to.

[panyuming]

 

[Verpies]

Can someone please point out the value of this discovery? What am I missing here?

MRI scanners in doctor's offices would be a nice development, ...if the maximum flux density can be increased.
More efficient electric motors and generators.
Cheaper maglev trains.
Perfect shields for LF interference, e.g.: 50/60Hz power hum.

...but most importantly, If we all can experiment with superconducting coils on our workbenches at room temperature (without LN or LHe) then I will not have to go into long discussions every time some Dunning-Kruger case claims that the magnitude of an induced current in an ideal shorted coil depends on the rate of change of magnetic flux which penetrates that coil 

[Chet K]

A you tube vid from "two bit da Vinci "
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=PLr95AFBRXI

Gives a bit of layman and scientific insight

[panyuming]

Can someone please point out the value of this discovery? What am I missing here?

This forum is of course most concerned with OU devices.
A simple example: DC motors like hand drills have a superconducting coil in each rotor slot and a magnetizing coil.
Commutate the superconducting coil at the commutator.

Each time the commutator turns, it only takes a short time to commutate the superconducting coil,
and most of the rest of the time,
the motor rotates and does work by the current and magnetic field maintained by the superconducting coil.

Conventional motor COP=0.9   
An electric motor with a superconducting coil must be an OU device.

[Verpies]

Commutate the superconducting coil at the commutator.

Commutating is hard to do because the commutator is not superconductive and partially negates the advantages of the superconductive coil.

Each time the commutator turns, it only takes a short time to commutate the superconducting coil,

Yes and afterwards the current persists in the superconductive coil indefinitely but only if that coil is shorted.

... and most of the rest of the time, the motor rotates and does work by the current and magnetic field maintained by the superconducting coil.

Yes, up to the TDC, but if you do not open and decrease the current in the superconductive coil, then this coil will attract the rotor back as it departs the coil, thus negating any kinetic energy gain.

An electric motor with a superconducting coil must be an OU device.

Even if you could open the superconducting coil at the TDC and drain it of all its circulating current, thereby reducing its intrinsic magnetic flux to zero so it does not exert any force on the departing rotor, why do you think you could extract all of the input energy and make the motor OU ?

[JimBoot]

Another announcement. https://patentcenter.uspto.gov/applications/17249094 and patent.

[panyuming]

 Thanks Verpies!

You are already talking about a more specific structure of the motor.
There are actually many possibilities, just as there are thousands of electric motors in use today.
I'm just imagining one possibility.

I envision a motor rotor slot with a turn of superconducting coil, of course it is closed.
This turn superconducting coil can have a large current inside. So it takes up less window area.
The rest of the window has a winding similar to the current rotor coil.
This winding is equivalent to the primary of the transformer, and the superconducting coil is the secondary.
Therefore, there is no need to disconnect the superconducting coil,
and it is easy to induce current in different directions in the superconducting coil.
The commutator should also have a suitable structure. This should be easy to design.

There may be something wrong with my assumption. Someone must design experiments to improve practical structures.
I think that in contrast to the COP=0.9 of a normal motor, it will be an OU device.
If ordinary motors require a continuous current of 1A.
Superconducting coil motors require 1A current, but only 1/10th of the time.

Thank you!

[Verpies]

...and it is easy to induce current in different directions in the superconducting coil.

Yes, it is easy to induce current in the shorted superconducting coil, but it is not possible to change the magnitude of the magnetic flux penetrating that coil after it freezes.
This also means, that as soon as the current in the primary stops, so does the current induced in the superconducting shorted secondary.
This is similar to a behavior of a permanent magnet falling into a superconducting loop which you can see in this video.

Doesn't that throw a monkey wrench in your OU motor design ?

[Verpies]

Here is a video debunking their video
https://youtu.be/QHPFphlzwdQ?t=483

Dave is right about this one.

[panyuming]

This also means, that as soon as the current in the primary stops, so does the current induced in the superconducting shorted secondary.

Thanks for the guidance. I don't understand this.

[panyuming]

 

The difference between the diamagnetism of superconductivity and Lenz's law is
that when the magnet is stationary, the superconducting sheet is still pushed away.

[Verpies]

The difference between the diamagnetism of superconductivity and Lenz's law is that when the magnet is stationary, the superconducting sheet is still pushed away.

No, a diamagnetic sheet is repelled from a magnet (and vice versa) even when the sheet & magnet are stationary.
If it was not so then a diamagnetic material, such as Bismuth, would not be able to levitate the magnet.  Bismuth is not superconductive (far from it).

See the following video as evidence of the statement above:
https://youtu.be/A5pZZJ23rDM

[Verpies]

Thanks for the guidance. I don't understand this.

Perhaps that is because you are conflating two cases:
1) when the shorted superconducting loop is frozen while being subjected to an external  magnetic flux penetrating it.
2) when the shorted superconducting loop is frozen without the external magnetic flux penetrating it.

...It does not matter whether the external magnetic flux is generated by a magnet or a primary coil.

In the first case, the magnetic flux penetrating the superconducting loop will persist indefinitely and the electric current will circulate in the superconducting loop as long as the original source of the external flux has changed (including disappearing completely).
In the second case, the total magnetic flux penetrating the superconducting loop is always zero, but there will be a current circulating inside the superconducting loop as long as it is subjected to any external magnetic flux.  When the source of this external magnetic flux disappears - so does the current induced in the superconductive loop (in case #2).

[JimBoot]

Two separate papers confirm the theoretical possibility of the method working as described contd here. https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=4490.msg105949;topicseen#msg105949

[Excelsior]

EVBlogs' video explains how, as he sees it, it's just the copper that's producing the observable effects.

[Verpies]

EVBlogs' video explains how, as he sees it, it's just the copper that's producing the observable effects.

Yes, copper will be repelled by an approaching magnet.  Not only because it is slightly diamagnetic by predominantly because it is very conductive (eddies).  Silver is even more so.