-2F superconductor (Tl4Ba)Ba2Ca2Cu7Oy(superconductors.org)
superconductors.org
-2F superconductor (Tl4Ba)Ba2Ca2Cu7Oy
http://www.superconductors.org/254K.htm
6 comments
It does indeed seem to be just Mr. Eck (presumably working in his garage?) but there's more stuff at http://www.superconductors.org/news.htm, including journal papers that confirm previous work apparently from the same person.
More on Eck: http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/view_profile.php?userid=4422 ...sounds like a crank, but also seems to have some affiliation with Wichita State U. in KS.
More on Eck: http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/view_profile.php?userid=4422 ...sounds like a crank, but also seems to have some affiliation with Wichita State U. in KS.
From that link:
Since outer space is full of superconducting elements and compounds, I think they could help explain the increasing expansion rate of the universe (through strong diamagnetism).
Oooooo-kay! (He said, backing away and suddenly remembering a previous engagement.)
Unfortunately, being affiliated with a university is no guarantee that you are not a crank, nor is it a guarantee that you are immune to the danger of misinterpreting your own data. I've met Ivy-League cranks; it is a condition that can arise at any time. And falling hopelessly in love with an optimistic appraisal of your own data is something that happens to everyone, Nobel laureates and freshmen alike.
Since outer space is full of superconducting elements and compounds, I think they could help explain the increasing expansion rate of the universe (through strong diamagnetism).
Oooooo-kay! (He said, backing away and suddenly remembering a previous engagement.)
Unfortunately, being affiliated with a university is no guarantee that you are not a crank, nor is it a guarantee that you are immune to the danger of misinterpreting your own data. I've met Ivy-League cranks; it is a condition that can arise at any time. And falling hopelessly in love with an optimistic appraisal of your own data is something that happens to everyone, Nobel laureates and freshmen alike.
How about this then: "I think there is a strong possibility of extraterrestrial life based on a passage in the Bible. The Lord talks about gathering His creation from the ends of the Universe.
As ham radio operator, I sent some radio signals into space on my own over 40 years ago. Of course, they were on frequencies not likely to be tuned in by another civilization. But, they're on their way!
I am disappointed we are not putting the same effort into transmitting that we are into receiving signals."
As ham radio operator, I sent some radio signals into space on my own over 40 years ago. Of course, they were on frequencies not likely to be tuned in by another civilization. But, they're on their way!
I am disappointed we are not putting the same effort into transmitting that we are into receiving signals."
Well, either he's got a Nobel in Physics coming his way or he's going to look pretty silly.
Not much standing room in between there.
Not much standing room in between there.
[deleted]
My limited experience with people like this is that they actually believe what they are doing. My question is, where does he get these plots, etc. Is he just wildly misinterpreting it or is he in fact just making it up?
It is entirely possible that he is just making it up. Far more high-profile cases of deliberate fiction have happened.
But it is more likely that the plots are real, that he really did make some high Tc material in his personal lab and do some measurements. It's not rocket surgery, to someone with a bit of training. It's just chemistry, electronic equipment, and liquid nitrogen, none of which is especially expensive.
The problem arises in the interpretation. He points at some random squiggles and calls them a Meissner transition. I see squiggles. It would sure be nice to have a control, yes? A curve traced from a piece of boring commercially-available YBCO, plugged into the same apparatus, and showing similar squiggles at the known transition temperature of commercially-available YBCO?
Similarly, if you take any data enough times you will get some odd discontinuities now and then. Your chart recorder software will glitch, you'll leave a switch in the wrong position, your sample temperature is changing during the measurement in a way that is being missed by your apparatus, your sample is in the middle of disintegrating, etc. The initial impulse is always to suspect that each glitch is an amazing new discovery, but they almost never are. So it would be nice to know if the results were repeatable. How many samples did he make? Can he show me the data from all the samples?
Where did the stoichiometry data and the structural data come from? Mixing up a batch of a compound is one thing, but analyzing it is something else: That actually does require equipment, and money. How was it done? Where was it done, and by whom? What is the margin of error in the results? Has this material really never been made before? If someone else has made it before, why didn't they publish this first?
I should stress that, compared to many cranky projects (cough cold fusion cough) this is a highly believable report. It's not as if high-Tc superconductors are unattested in the literature. It's not as if this guy's results require throwing out established theory. It's not as if he couldn't have gotten lucky and built a one-off sample with an amazingly high Tc in his basement -- most good physics is done in someone's basement, and most reproducible results start their lives as barely reproducible results. But, because he's an incredibly sloppy publisher, the author forces us to assume that he is a crank until proven otherwise.
But it is more likely that the plots are real, that he really did make some high Tc material in his personal lab and do some measurements. It's not rocket surgery, to someone with a bit of training. It's just chemistry, electronic equipment, and liquid nitrogen, none of which is especially expensive.
The problem arises in the interpretation. He points at some random squiggles and calls them a Meissner transition. I see squiggles. It would sure be nice to have a control, yes? A curve traced from a piece of boring commercially-available YBCO, plugged into the same apparatus, and showing similar squiggles at the known transition temperature of commercially-available YBCO?
Similarly, if you take any data enough times you will get some odd discontinuities now and then. Your chart recorder software will glitch, you'll leave a switch in the wrong position, your sample temperature is changing during the measurement in a way that is being missed by your apparatus, your sample is in the middle of disintegrating, etc. The initial impulse is always to suspect that each glitch is an amazing new discovery, but they almost never are. So it would be nice to know if the results were repeatable. How many samples did he make? Can he show me the data from all the samples?
Where did the stoichiometry data and the structural data come from? Mixing up a batch of a compound is one thing, but analyzing it is something else: That actually does require equipment, and money. How was it done? Where was it done, and by whom? What is the margin of error in the results? Has this material really never been made before? If someone else has made it before, why didn't they publish this first?
I should stress that, compared to many cranky projects (cough cold fusion cough) this is a highly believable report. It's not as if high-Tc superconductors are unattested in the literature. It's not as if this guy's results require throwing out established theory. It's not as if he couldn't have gotten lucky and built a one-off sample with an amazingly high Tc in his basement -- most good physics is done in someone's basement, and most reproducible results start their lives as barely reproducible results. But, because he's an incredibly sloppy publisher, the author forces us to assume that he is a crank until proven otherwise.
Well, a simple test for superconductivity at that temperature exists (if Kamerlingh Onnes could do it then so can he).
The bigger problem here is that his writing elsewhere that you found already indicate he's lost a few of his marbles, that makes it very hard to put much credibility in some amazing breakthrough he reports. Reputation really does matter.
I'm flagging this because I really think it is bull and until there is a report that is reviewed I don't think it deserves this kind of attention.
The bigger problem here is that his writing elsewhere that you found already indicate he's lost a few of his marbles, that makes it very hard to put much credibility in some amazing breakthrough he reports. Reputation really does matter.
I'm flagging this because I really think it is bull and until there is a report that is reviewed I don't think it deserves this kind of attention.
This guy appears to have made announcements every few months with a Tc improvements of between about 8 - 20 K with various materials. Whatever he's doing, he's getting consistently "good results".
I always like seeing this attitude:
Before commercialization is possible, a refinement method will need to be developed to increase the VF.... This discovery is being released into the public domain without patent protection in order to encourage additional research.
Before commercialization is possible, a refinement method will need to be developed to increase the VF.... This discovery is being released into the public domain without patent protection in order to encourage additional research.
Sorry, this cites a previous discovery of a superconductor at -24F (-31C) from May of this year. If that was actually true I guarantee you would have already heard about it from somewhere more prestigious than a self-published website.
A few thoughts and questions:
What does the y in (Tl4Ba)Ba2Ca2Cu7Oy stand for?
Google search for the chemical turns up surprisingly few hits for something like this... http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&r...
What does the y in (Tl4Ba)Ba2Ca2Cu7Oy stand for?
Google search for the chemical turns up surprisingly few hits for something like this... http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&r...
You'd expect the y to be a Y then.
What is interesting in this whole superconductivity business is that in many years of research there actually is real progress in return for all the money spent.
Also the molecules appear to be getting larger and larger as the transition temperature goes up, suggesting that if that trend continues the 'room temperature' superconducting molecule will be something that will take a long time to find because of the number of combinations increasing as the length of the molecule goes up.
The highest temperature superconductor has a whopping 247 atoms in its structure. By comparison, the one before that only had 19 atoms, the one before that 12. And that's for a 46 degree K difference.
What is interesting in this whole superconductivity business is that in many years of research there actually is real progress in return for all the money spent.
Also the molecules appear to be getting larger and larger as the transition temperature goes up, suggesting that if that trend continues the 'room temperature' superconducting molecule will be something that will take a long time to find because of the number of combinations increasing as the length of the molecule goes up.
The highest temperature superconductor has a whopping 247 atoms in its structure. By comparison, the one before that only had 19 atoms, the one before that 12. And that's for a 46 degree K difference.
Except for some work with elements under pressure. I think I remember reading that if we could create hydrogen as a solid, it would be a superconductor.
From the same wikipedia article: "Theoretical work by Neil Ashcroft predicted that liquid metallic hydrogen at extremely high pressure should become superconducting at approximately room-temperature because of its extremely high speed of sound and expected strong coupling between the conduction electrons and the lattice vibrations.[33] This prediction is yet to be experimentally verified."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-temperature_superconductiv...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-temperature_superconductiv...
I'm pretty sure the y is a subscript meaning a variable (or unknown) number of oxygen atoms.
In practical terms, what does this mean?
Well, if it is true then in practical terms energy distribution and storage will never be the same again.
Which is one reason why I won't be holding my breath. 2F is -16.66 degrees Celsius, the current (confirmed, peer-reviewed, reproduced) record is 138K, -135 degrees Celsius. So for this guy to claim a 100+ degree K improvement is nothing short of earth shattering news.
Personally I don't believe a word of it.
This is such a revolutionary breakthrough that if there is only a hint of it being true that within the week there will be major budgets allocated to verify this finding.
The race will literally be on to see if there is a further improvement to be made to get to the holy grail of 'room temperature' super conductivity.
We won't be talking about BC and AD but about pre-sc and post-sc.
--
edited to reflect the status quo in research.
Which is one reason why I won't be holding my breath. 2F is -16.66 degrees Celsius, the current (confirmed, peer-reviewed, reproduced) record is 138K, -135 degrees Celsius. So for this guy to claim a 100+ degree K improvement is nothing short of earth shattering news.
Personally I don't believe a word of it.
This is such a revolutionary breakthrough that if there is only a hint of it being true that within the week there will be major budgets allocated to verify this finding.
The race will literally be on to see if there is a further improvement to be made to get to the holy grail of 'room temperature' super conductivity.
We won't be talking about BC and AD but about pre-sc and post-sc.
--
edited to reflect the status quo in research.
I wonder how big of news this is?
Who did this work, where, and how? The tendency to use the passive voice has always been a bit annoying, but here's it's criminal:
This discovery is being released into the public domain without patent protection in order to encourage additional research.
Released by whom? By one E. Joe Eck, working alone in his basement with no funding, no students, no assistants, no institutional support, and exactly one reference to earlier literature? Citations please.