Anonymous at Sat, 7 Sep 2024 17:43:52 UTC No. 16366172

>>16366168
The temperatures and pressures conducive to the chemistry of life may have no overlap with the temperatures and pressures where superconducting is possible, that may just be how the universe was written

Anonymous at Sat, 7 Sep 2024 18:24:48 UTC No. 16366231

>>16366168
CHIRAL INDUCED SPIN SELECTIVITY

Anonymous at Sat, 7 Sep 2024 18:32:28 UTC No. 16366246

>>16366168
There's no science we know of that says they are impossible.
> I'm trying figure out if they could live up to the hype
They would.
> why isn't everyone and their uncle trying to find such a material?
Because material science is hard and progress is slow. If a room-temp SC does exist we currently have no ideas what kind of materials or chemical structure it would take. It's like trying to find a grain of sand in a dark room whilst wearing a blindfold.

Anonymous at Sat, 7 Sep 2024 19:21:44 UTC No. 16366355

>>16366231
>CHIRAL INDUCED SPIN SELECTIVITY
Explain how this relates to the topic especially for non-material scientists. Google search doesn't give me much so I'm lost here.

Anonymous at Sun, 8 Sep 2024 16:14:47 UTC No. 16368325

>>16366168
Scientists are still searching, so it is considerd plausible. Of course, whoever makes the discovery will win a Bobel Prize and possibly become increadibly rich.

Anonymous at Sun, 8 Sep 2024 17:35:01 UTC No. 16368426

>>16368325
>Scientists are still searching, so it is considerd plausible
it's only plausible as a grift to transform investor greed into a salary for masturbating soientists just like quantum computing and cold fusion.

Anonymous at Sun, 8 Sep 2024 21:42:57 UTC No. 16368761

>>16368426
How many scientists do you know?

Anonymous at Mon, 9 Sep 2024 20:32:36 UTC No. 16370355

>>16366168
They are (probably) not possible. It's why I was one of the people constantly expressing skepticism about LK-99. The thermal-excitation wave function of the electron at room temperature rules out certain superconduction mechanisms without applying enormous pressure to compensate. Any STP superconductors we ever manage to make will probably use quite a different mechanism than anything we have right now.

Anonymous at Mon, 9 Sep 2024 20:33:36 UTC No. 16370359

>>16368761
Ad-hominem fallacy.

Anonymous at Tue, 10 Sep 2024 00:56:11 UTC No. 16370853

>>16366246
Every possible room temperature superconductor which would be industrially useful has already been tried and was tried over 40 years ago.

Anonymous at Tue, 10 Sep 2024 01:40:01 UTC No. 16370904

>>16366246
>we currently have no ideas what kind of materials or chemical structure it would take
wasn't part of the whole 99 debacle that the structure was validated by calculations?

Anonymous at Tue, 10 Sep 2024 02:04:33 UTC No. 16370931

>>16370359
NTA, but your father made a mistake nutting inside your mother.

Anonymous at Tue, 10 Sep 2024 02:40:04 UTC No. 16370973

>>16370359
>Ad-hominem fallacy.
Not a fallacy.

Anonymous at Tue, 10 Sep 2024 03:04:29 UTC No. 16370998

>>16370904
No. The calculations if correct - and not everyone agreed they were - essentially said if the material was a superconductor some particular structures in the material might explain why. But since it turned out not to be a superconductor it was a non-result.

Anonymous at Wed, 11 Sep 2024 13:44:39 UTC No. 16374223

>>16366168
theyre not possible right now because any real RTSC found is gonna be gatekept from the public

Anonymous at Wed, 11 Sep 2024 19:48:05 UTC No. 16374734

>>16370973
I can't tell if you're denying that ad hominems are fallacies, or if you're saying that dismissing someone's argument because of who he does or doesn't hang around with isn't an ad hominem.
I guess it doesn't matter because you're dead wrong in either case.