LK99 Is BACK! Researchers FINALLY DID IT! (LK99 Superconductor UPDATE!)

Today, we're revisiting the world of superconductors with a thrilling update on LK99. After previous uncertainties, groundbreaking new research has brought LK99 back into the spotlight. We're diving into the latest findings that suggest LK99, a copper substituted lead apatite, might actually exhibit the elusive Meissner effect at near room temperatures. This discovery could revolutionize our understanding of superconductors. So buckle up as we explore how LK99 is challenging the boundaries of modern physics and potentially opening doors to technological advancements we've only dreamed of. So what was LK 99 and why was there such a controversy surrounding the initial claims? The controversy surrounding LK 99 revolves around the initial claims that it was a room temperature superconductor. These claims were met with a mix of excitement and skepticism in the scientific community due to the potential implications of such a discovery. However, subsequent attempts to replicate the experiment yielded mixed results, with some researchers reporting similar findings while others failed to reproduce the claimed superconducting state. A significant part of the controversy stems from the fact that the initial claims about LK 99 were published on a pre print server where papers have not undergone peer review. This led to a wave of attempts to replicate the findings, such as some of which were even live streamed on social media platforms. However, a body of evidence has since accumulated that contradicts the initial claims about LK 99. Several research groups have released studies that counter the original claims, with some suggesting that any apparent superconducting properties were likely due to impurities in the samples. The University of Maryland's Condensed Matter Theory center, for instance, stated that LK99 is not a superconductor even at room temperatures, and described it as a highly resistive, poor quality material. Another study pointed out that an impurity in the initial LK99 samples, cuprous sulfide, could explain some of the observed properties. Despite these counterclaims, some researchers caution against fully dismissing the original claims as impurities, and optimization of factors like composition or firing time may still reveal superconducting properties. However, the consensus among Experts is that LK99 is not a superconductor, at least that was until recently when this new paper was published. The paper is titled Possible Meissner Effect Near Room Temperature in Copper Substituted Lead Apatite. In the abstract, the researchers discussed their observations on LK99, a copper substituted lead apatite. They found that at temperatures below room temperature, LK99 shows properties of a superconductor specifically under a 25oe magnetic field. It exhibits diamagnetic behavior, repelling the magnetic field. But this changes to paramagnetic attracting the magnetic field at 200oe. They also noticed a unique memory effect during cooling. Importantly, they detected hysteresis loops below 250k, suggesting the presence of the Meissner effect, a hallmark of superconductivity in this material. Then we have this section and this part of the paper explains that for a material to be considered a superconductor, it must show the Meissner effect, which is perfect diamagnetism. This involves specific behaviors in magnetic field and temperature tests. LK99, a type of copper substituted lead apatite, is a potential room temperature superconductor, but previous studies haven't fully demonstrated this effect. The paper details the creation of modified LK99 samples to avoid unwanted magnetic properties and describes the precise steps taken in their experimentation to observe these superconducting properties. So now let's take a look at the rest of the paper to see what actually happened. And after that, we will take a look at what others are saying about this research. The researchers were studying how a certain material reacts to magnetic fields at different temperatures. They did this by measuring how the material's magnetism changed under two different strengths of magnetic fields, light and moderate, and at various temperatures ranging from cold to warm. Findings from the magnetism tests when exposed to a light magnetic field, the material generally repelled the magnetic field, a property known as diamagnetism. Under a slightly stronger magnetic field, the material started showing attraction to the magnetic field known as paramagnetism. This switch happened around a specific magnetic field strength, giving them a clue about the material's magnetic properties. They noticed that at around 173 degrees, the material remembered the magnetic field it was exposed to earlier, showing a memory effect. Another important observation was made around 23 degrees Celsius, which they think could be related to the temperature at which the material becomes superconducting conducts electricity without resistance. Magnetization patterns observed. The researchers also observed how the magnetism changed when they increased and then decreased the magnetic field strength. They found that the material's response to the magnetic field was different at higher temperatures compared to lower ones. They noted some irregularities in how the material reacted to the magnetic field, which might be due to the material's internal structure. Remembering the previous magnetic field, it was exposed to initial magnetism observations. When they first applied a magnetic field, the material showed a negative response repelling the field under a very light magnetic field, which was unusual at room temperature. They noticed that the material's magnetic response changed at a certain point when they varied the magnetic field strength, suggesting complex magnetic behavior. Examining the material's structure they used a technique called x ray diffraction to study the material's structure. They found it mostly matched a known structure as appetite, but with some minor differences, possibly due to impurities in the material. Overall Conclusion the research indicates that the material has interesting magnetic properties, including potential superconductivity, zero electrical resistance up to 23 degrees Celsius. However, the effect they observed was very weak, so they need to do more work to make a material that shows these properties more clearly. Now let's take a look at some of the discussion surrounding this Announcement on Twitter professor of Inorganic and Materials Chemistry at UCL Robert Palgrave expresses skepticism about the creation and characterization of a sulfoapatite material described in a study. Here's a summary of his key points. Questioning the synthesis method Palgrave starts by examining the synthesis process of the sulfuapatite. The method involves using a mixture of phosphate and lead sulfide, but he notes uncertainty in the exact composition, particularly regarding the source of copper Concerns with synthesis conditions. He points out that the hydrothermal method, used essentially a high pressure cooking process, is unconventional for creating sulfoapatites. Specifically, heating under pure oxygen at 500 degrees Celsius could easily oxidize the sulfide anion to sulfur dioxide, which deviates from other known synthesis methods for similar compounds. Analysis of characterization techniques Palgrave comments on the use of powder X ray diffraction for characterizing the material. He observes that the XRD pattern fits almost perfectly with the expected structure, but he is concerned about the lack of detail in the presentation, such as whether background subtraction was done in the XRD analysis. Lack of compositional analysis A significant issue he raises is the absence of compositional analysis in the study. He stresses that while guesses can be made about the presence of sulfur from the XRD data, more definitive techniques should have been employed to confirm its presence. Overall skepticism Palgrave concludes by expressing doubt about whether the researchers have successfully made the sulphurpetate as claimed. While he acknowledges the idea behind the study is interesting, he emphasizes that the execution and evidence are lacking, particularly in terms of detailed characterization and verification of the material's composition. In summary, Palgrave is critical of both the synthesis approach and the lack of thorough characterization in the study, leaving him unconvinced about the successful creation of the sulfoapatite material as described. Christian Kyle, chief of staff at Astranis Space Technologies said. LK99 season 2 update A researcher behind the new potential room temperature superconductor just gave a new interview. Highlights they have only synthesized a few hundred nanometers of the new material so far. They recognize the limitations of their data to draw a final conclusion and they are continuing to be careful just calling it data that potentially indicates superconductivity. They believed they have fully ruled out ferromagnetism as a potential explanation of their results. The next step is to get up to micrometer scale or larger in their synthesis to give them more to test. After they do, they will continue testing with the other more normal tests of superconductivity. Common ways to verify superconductivity include four probe DC resistance measurement, vibrating sample, magnetometer for Meissner effect, specific heat jumps, Josephson effect, scanning tunneling microscopy and photoemission spectroscopy. So what's next for LK99? Well, the original LK99 South Korean researchers will present March 4, 2024 at APS March Meeting 2024.