Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Saturday March 11, @09:52PM   Printer-friendly

Results come from a lab that had an earlier superconductivity paper retracted:

On Wednesday, a paper was released by Nature that describes a mixture of elements that can superconduct at room temperature. The work follows a general trend of finding new ways of stuffing hydrogen into a mixture of other atoms by using extreme pressure. This trend produced a variety of high-temperature superconductors in previous research, though characterizing them was difficult because of the pressures involved. This new chemical, however, superconducts at much lower pressures than previous versions, which should make it easier for others to replicate the work.

The lab that produced the chemical, however, had one of its earlier papers on high-temperature superconductivity retracted due to a lack of details regarding one of its key measurements. So, it's a fair bet that many other researchers will try to replicate it.

The form of superconductivity involved here requires that electrons partner up with each other, forming what are called Cooper pairs. One of the things that encourages Cooper pair formation is a high-frequency vibration (called a phonon) among the atomic nuclei that these electrons are associated with. That's easier to arrange with light nuclei, and hydrogen is the lightest around. So finding ways to stuff more hydrogen into a chemical is thought to be a viable route toward producing higher-temperature superconductors.

The surest way of doing that, however, involves extreme pressures. These pressures can induce hydrogen to enter the crystal structure of metals or to form hydrogen-rich chemicals that are unstable at lower pressures. Both of these approaches have resulted in chemicals with very high critical temperatures, the highest point at which they'll support superconductivity. While these have approached room temperature, however, the pressures required were multiple Gigapascals—with each Gigapascal being nearly 10,000 times the atmospheric pressure at sea level.

In essence, this involves trading off impractical temperatures for impractical pressures.


Original Submission #1Original Submission #2

This discussion was created by janrinok (52) for logged-in users only, but now has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1)
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 12, @12:19AM (8 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 12, @12:19AM (#1295721)

    not only that, but impractical currents for anything useful

    • (Score: 1, TouchĂ©) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 12, @02:57AM (5 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 12, @02:57AM (#1295738)

      s

      You're absolutely correct. Nobody should ever attempt any experiments or try to learn anything unless they are directly in the process toward a 100% useful and practical end. Any and all interim learning is rubbish.

      /s

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 12, @05:36AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 12, @05:36AM (#1295744)

        maybe they can use this superconductor in a 10x better battery involving fusion power and fly us to mars yaaaaaaay

      • (Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday March 12, @07:28AM (3 children)

        by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Sunday March 12, @07:28AM (#1295749) Journal
        What's weird about the complaint is that a superconductor at practical temperatures, pressure, and current would check the box and be a huge improvement for us. Are we not supposed to look for stuff that is 100% useful and practical in the first place?
        • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 12, @07:20PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 12, @07:20PM (#1295802)

          Jesus, what backward school did you guys go to??? We are meant to sit on our asses and demand High Standards and More Effort.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 14, @12:50AM (1 child)

          by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 14, @12:50AM (#1296022)

          Whoosh!!

          Did you totally miss the "s" and "/s"??

          Re-read.

          Unless I'm misreading or misunderstanding top parent's post, it seems to complain about wasting time and effort on useless results. If that is his/her/it's complaint, that complaint is idiotic at best, and the person is stunningly unrealistic at best.

          My point is: development is an iterative process, by definition. Look up what Edison said about his process of getting a good incandescent lamp to work.

          • (Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday March 14, @01:30AM

            by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday March 14, @01:30AM (#1296026) Journal
            Wooshback!!

            Did you totally miss the "s" and "/s"??

            Nope. Now think about my reply in that context.

    • (Score: 4, Interesting) by Immerman on Sunday March 12, @03:04PM

      by Immerman (3985) on Sunday March 12, @03:04PM (#1295778)

      Extreme pressure is a lot cheaper and easier to maintain than cold though. Maintaining super cold needs thick insulation and substantial active cooling, there's just no other option. There's lots of tricks to passively maintain extreme static pressures though.

      As one of the simpler examples, you could heat a steel pipe to expand it enough to just barely fit a shrunken super-chilled superconductor rod inside, and as the two return to ambient temperatures and their normal sizes, the pressure on the rod will go through the roof and stay there. No active systems required.

      10,000 atm is probably a stretch (Google offered me no examples of typical shrink-fit pressures), but it's moving in the right direction. Industry standard steel pipe is available to handle pressures pushing 1,400atm, and there's probably much better materials than steel to make an extreme pressure shrink-fit sheathing out of. Even if you need a 1m wide pipe to exert sufficient pressure on a 1cm rod, that'd still be dirt cheap compared to keeping that rod cooled to even slightly cryogenic temperatures.

      And if there's overlap between the two strategies...? We might not be too far from superconductors that require a combination of affordably achievable pressure and temperature to do their thing, and open up a vast range of new applications.

    • (Score: 2) by driverless on Monday March 13, @06:03AM

      by driverless (4770) on Monday March 13, @06:03AM (#1295856)

      Is it this week's diamond-anvil paper where they claim to have set a new record temperature/pressure combination?

      [Pauses to read]

      Yup, it is.

  • (Score: 4, Interesting) by Swervin on Sunday March 12, @04:58AM (1 child)

    by Swervin (2444) on Sunday March 12, @04:58AM (#1295743)

    One thing I've wondered, if it would be possible to encapsulate something like this in carbon nanotubes to reach the required pressure. This article says you can contain 40 gigapascals in carbon nanotubes, and they can be expanded and contracted using electricity: https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.1124594 [science.org]

    So, maybe you could get this material inside the nanotubes and have filaments of this room temperature superconductor contained at the required pressure.

    • (Score: 2, Informative) by khallow on Sunday March 12, @08:02AM

      by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Sunday March 12, @08:02AM (#1295750) Journal
      Superconducting was claimed by the study at about 10k atmospheres. Normal high pressure containers can achieve 1k atmospheres [eferest.de]. So right there, they're within an order of magnitude. As noted in the article, silicon can achieve greater internal pressure and one might even be able to achieve that pressure for years with a thick metal cladding (Say steel, aluminum, or copper alloy). While they're thinking about embedding it in integrated circuits where it could greatly reduce power consumption, if it can be so clad, it might be possible to create long beams with superconducting cores that could transport huge power loads, perhaps even over continental distances (depending on the prevalence of the materials, structural stability of the beam over long periods of time, and cooling needs). I think on the electricity infrastructure side, a superconducting channel that can be passively cooled and is competitive with aluminum wire in cost would be an enormous improvement over the present day.
  • (Score: 3, Funny) by Gaaark on Sunday March 12, @02:26PM

    by Gaaark (41) Subscriber Badge on Sunday March 12, @02:26PM (#1295771) Journal

    forming what are called Cooper pairs

    Otherwise known as 'Wheeee-tons'.

    --
    --- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
(1)