Kin-Dza-Dza watch party - let's talk LK99 and its effects on the world

Hello. Hello, everyone. It's, 3 minutes past the start time. and we're waiting for a few more folks. and I just didn't wanna interrupt the music because on the x, once the music stops, I don't think it goes again. try if it goes now. I like it all goes again. welcome to yet another one of these.

we're gonna try and summarize and then also interview several folks, who have invited to give us some opinions about this whole, okay, 99 thing. and I'm personally not a scientist. I found myself in this kind of haphazardly, partly due to some folks here, that already joined the space. And I just started collecting folks in the Twitter list.

folks who are talking about this before, you know, this blew up and before before it's now the number one I wanna build. I wanna think a trending topic for a while? Oh, it's not number 1 anymore. Okay. before it was a very big trending topic before it was on the old betting markets, I just really wanted to see if this is, yeah, this is interesting. And having not a lot of ideas of what superconductors even are, I learned to ramp up really quick. and so within one space, I wanna say time time is difficult right now.

So, like, I only say Sunday, maybe Sunday, and many people came. And just kinda before we actually get started, just to give you, like, a brief, why am I here? Why are you listening to to me while while while folks join is, We started another space. Many folks joined, and we organized kind of a green room, like a DM chat to start talking about with the folks on stage. and kinda started adding their folks. And now there is at least two people with active replication attempts.

I think 3 material scientists, look at a very high signal room right now. which, if you are a scientist and you're working on this and you think we can contribute to this DME. if you're a lurker who wants to just sit there and watch the DME, many of those deals, and I'm not sure what to do with them. but, you know, you're welcome to the space. And the world kind of watches, and waits until there's full replication attempts.

So I think I'll just get started with just explaining, and I see some folks in the audience. I will invite here to cohost. And if I don't know you, I don't think that I will let you up not in this space. maybe not the spaces. Maybe we'll have a space with, like, questions. and just general requests. Alright. So I wanna say hi to my co host for this evening. He came in first out of the of the group. So, hey, hey, Dubai. How are you?

Hey, Alex. It's good to be here.

so, a dubai is one of the first folks I think that I saw writing things. And, I definitely followed your stuff with interest. And how has your few last few last days been trying to follow all this craziness?

it's it's been interesting. I mean, as as as, you know, I I I won't say, I would I will I will I will say I have, like, minimal, very minimal scientific, back ground. and I I was just kind of like doing creative writing, honestly speaking, and testing. testing out various theories on, like, social graph and, like, you know, what would actually work on the social graph. And it took off, and somehow, like, I have enough of little bit enough of a scientific background to follow what's going on. And so I kept writing, and that's what the graph selected for. And, I found myself, sleepless for, like, 7 days and finally got some sleep a couple of days ago.

Yeah. I I had, I think, 1 or 2 nights that I I tried just couldn't just wasn't able to. there's in addition to watching kinda humanity potentially change its course. Right? Like, we're gonna talk about what the superconductor means, and we're gonna add some more color to this. And, hopefully, know, there's gonna be both scientific and entertaining and also verified because, there's a lot of folks doing a lot of work. Do not believe kind of different videos that come up.

but not only ingesting so much information at once, but also processing all of this, but also trying to to cram up all of the interesting scientific stuff around this for for some folks who are not scientists. I will say, based on kind of my interactions with many folks, there there's so much here that you know, there's chemistry involved. There's physics involved. there's material sciences, that kinda combine something. And I've seen many scientists from different fields also kinda try to collaborate because even they don't, hold all of this information. And so holding all this information at once processing this, trying to follow multiple countries.

I won't say at this point, multiple countries replicate was definitely very interesting. I think we'll start with just the basics, and I think we'll repeat the basics, but definitely folks, keep keep in mind that we will give you updates here. this is kind of a recap space in addition to, some some funny things And as as we give you updates, we'll also bring some subject matter experts that can explain, hopefully, simply or simpler than then a very in-depth scientist on this. Hopefully, we'll we'll be able to explain some of the science behind us. just wanna say hi to Eli. Eli.

You've been with us for a while. How are you doing?

Alex, pretty good. How about y'all?

Good. Good. just trying to prevent disinformation and create great spaces for folks to kind of learn and keep update. And, also get get excited. Get a little bit excited. I posted about this. I am excited. I think that's okay. I get excited very fast for for for a bunch of reasons, but this seems like after a long time processing and after a lot of there's no replication, like, a full room temperature ambient pressure, superconductor application yet. We haven't seen yet one.

However, we've seen quite a lot of evidence moving towards the positive, and I personally haven't seen a lot of kind of negative. And, maybe, like, maybe I'll start there. last page we've talked about, this has a lot of room to be proven positive, and it's really hard as well because material scientist, material scientist is hard to think the the the current team from Q center, Q center, quantum center for for research, they said they've tried something like 8000 different samples throughout the 10 years. So it's really, really hard, to to generate.

And, Someone mentioned that it's not going to be very easy to disprove just outright. There's not gonna be a very easy, definite no here. However, there's a lot of ways to to to get to a yes. and can you can you talk to us a little bit about, if replication success or replication failure is a defining criteria, or, are there other ways to to find -- Well -- If if -- So -- -- if we have this.

Yeah. Go ahead. Sorry. I mean, I mean, success is when when, you know, somebody else, produces, you know, similar kinds of results in terms of measurements, you know, more more than just levitation measurements of, actual, resistance that that, does not correspond to the parent compound and does not, you know, exceeds, copper and displays other hallmarks of superconductors.

And, honestly, I've kind of been speculating that this might not exactly be a a classical type 1 or type 2, superconductor, they're they're very well could be nuances, which may or may not, limit its applicability in terms of all of the things that we wanna do with superconductors. But the thing is, like, e even with some of the better, established super conduct conductors like, IbCO, YBCO, you know, it it it took a while to improve that from even from the point that they they demonstrated, yes, indeed. This is a real, superconductor.

I think we're seeing this unfold faster in real time all over the world in social media. We didn't see that in the 19 eighties. it would have been a smaller group of people who had been so so keen is keenly focused and riveted in motivated to drop everything and do their own things. But even then, you know, there were people who were doing that just like you know, also, I remember it well at the time, a cold fusion, and and people were on use using that people were trying to replicate that as well. but so so going back to, what constitutes, non replication.

That act to to be able to say, you know, we've really done everything exactly the way Lee and Kim and Kwan did. And we've come up with with the closest thing that that appears to be reproducibly produced, and we've done these thorough measurements. And, no, you know, it lacks this and this and therefore, it's it's not the real deal. that's going to take a lot more work because it's like trying to prove a negative. It, you know, after a while, you just say, well, look, uh-uh, all of these extensive efforts to replicate. Just haven't panned out.

So there probably isn't anything here, you know, short of of really, really thorough. thorough analysis.

and so basically, to to sum up, we have a a way to get definitely yes. And last time we we chatted, there's actually 2 ways to to definitely yes on them's replication based on the the paper and some other papers that since then have come out. And the other is, the folks from QCenter. QCenter is is the lab that, released, okay, 99. just providing samples for other research labs, and those research labs use their equipment to, to basically prove super conductivity.

And I guess I wanna say, and, folks feel free to pick this up, Eli and, and, Let's define a superconductor in, like, the most popular science terms. yeah, you, like, you mentioned there was, like, type 1 and type 2. So I'll I'll start please feel free to to pick this up. We, we, as humanity of science, we know the superconductors exist in nature. I think it was found first, in the sixties, I wanna say, maybe earlier, where a material that is cooled to a very low temperature for for, degrees above, I think, absolute 0.

suddenly stops resisting current. What this means is if you run current through some material, It it it loses some of it to heat. I'm trying to the basic mode that I can, you know, I feel free to start.

I think the wrong place. Think it as, you know, you you you you can think of wires as, you know, regular ordinary metal wires. They're conductors. which means electrons will will flow through them when you apply an electrical potential. But just the same way that, you know, you have a car with wheels and and, you know, it has ball bearings and and they're lubricated and all of that. You You can you can reduce the friction involved, but it isn't 0. Right?

So electrons going through the conduction band of a metal, you know, they they bounce into other electrons. They bounce into defects in the structure of the metal, in in various situations. There there are other, like, dissipative inter actions where the energy, from the moment or the kinetic energy of the electron traveling the wire, winds up, you know, being turned into heat through those collisions, right? So in a superconductor, you don't get that.

It's it's like the the the the the orbitals that make up the conduction band just line up so perfectly that it's it's a straight shot, in different terms, and I I know that some theoretical physicists are gonna, like, grow on when I say this. But, think of ballistic conduction of like just a bullet going through through not even air, but through vacuum. There's just nothing nothing restraining it. It, you know, when it stays in the right band, of a superconductor. And and and along with that, there's the opportunity.

Therefore, be whenever you have a charge in motion that creates a magnetic field. And one of the really important things about this is if it if it turns out, you know, behave like a classical type 2, superconductor or maybe even not, that you can use this to a fish create much more powerful fields, magnetic fields, you know, without losing energy in the process. Right? That's that would be really a game changer for for, at least some types of nuclear fusion, that, you know -- Yeah.

We're we're gonna get the use because it's I I just wanna highlight the different types. Sure. And the fact that superconductors exist, we know that superconductors exist today. It's not like a new physics thing. type 1 was invented back back then, and it was, like, very low temperature, I think, pressure, yeah, long ago. And, I think 86, is that also the the time 86, 1986, IBM released, or, I I wouldn't say, found, right? In in this area, this is like a very vast, field of research and very much like, space of opportunity to find. And in 96, IBM researchers, I think, found another type of superconductor, with different properties, which I'm not gonna speak to.

There will be folks here on stage that they could speak to them.

Well, just just the the really short description is that they're, quote, high-tech temperature, which compared to to the the ordinary, superconductions at the time, which required, you know, around liquid healing temperature right, 4 Degrees Kelvin, really, really cold, only slightly warmer than space. Space is 2 Kelvin. so the quote high temperature ones meant that you could cool them with liquid nitrogen, which is just, you know, you're you're much you're you're much happier to have to use liquid nitrogen than liquid helium. Absolutely.

And, We now have type 1 and type 2, and they're being used in multiple applications. And now comes this fairly obscure team. and post, a paper on ARCside, which, I hope I'm pronouncing this correctly outside, which I'm familiar with from ai Papers and suddenly I saw this paper and I saw people talk about this.

and they're announcing a room temperature and ambient pressure super conductor, which for a longest time was considered the Holy Grail of a lot of things. And we're gonna get the reasons why, but, basically, The first paper is released by, a gun, a guy named Quan, and it names 3 authors. Aetna Pike, can you take us a little bit through kind of the the the paper release cycle and, and then the follow-up paper and kind of tell the first story of this?

Right. So I guess, Quan, you know, puts in, his, paper roughly 5 PM, I think, soul time. I I I forget you can see my timeline. I have the canonical canonical record on my timeline, but yeah, so roughly 5 PM, he puts it in in Seoul. and I am guessing at this point that, you know, human talk Kim on the other side of the world in Virginia. and I also don't know that he was in Virginia. I'm guessing again, but I'm guessing he gets a early early morning call.

that the paper a paper has gone up from some other members of the team. And, he's like, okay. I should I should get something in because, you know, Kwan has put a stake in the ground. So, he rushes out a paper, which goes in. And later on, our, Korean internet sleets find that, it was using the Korean version of of word, and it even had, like, you know, like, graph not found in Korean. on some parts of it. So so it's missing graphs. It's missing data.

-- And it's a paper that's uploaded 2 hours and something. after the first paper, which inside in scientific terms, preparing a paper that wasn't due to get released in 2 hours, that's insanity. That's, you know, it's a molasses field.

And suddenly, like, 2 hours later, there's a new paper on the same time. And and just and just one last thing. you know, the the other interesting thing is that, you know, archive papers are submitted in the name of the author submitting. So you can actually see the name of the other other submit. Of course, you know, you could have a or a graduate student summit on on your behalf, but someone is using your ID. Right? So you can actually see the name of this mirror. and so and you can see the time, the UTC time. you get you get kind of a lot of information from that. You get the paper. You get the submission time, and you get the ID, the the user ID, you know, of the pay of the person submitting And that, you know, in that timeline, establishes that, you know, something. Right?

and and that's where I kind of I kind of left it. I actually I actually didn't I actually didn't do anything non factual on that, on that, on that, for post which caused which started this kind of like dramatic fuhrer. a lot of it was implied. I I I do admit I did I did a lot of illusion and and and sleigh of hand, but it was implied by the reader. And it was implied by the Internet too. A lot of stuff actually came in from the Internet was implied my reading of the internet, and it was kind of like, you know, summarized in there.

So after these two papers get released, and we will cover some stuff that we found out way later. using, like, like, some some Korean friends and sleuths on the ground, which I I don't know if they can join. However, there is a a member of the quote unquote, green room, Sam Young, who really got excited by this, and then we kinda connected. And he was in the previous yeah, space as well.

And I recommend you guys to go and check it out. So so just I just wanna invite one moment and, say that some young basically started to have a conversation within my thread on the on the paper release. And I was, scrolling and reading every single comment on every single, you know, thread. And that and that thread has, like, thousands of comments at this and liking everyone. And I found it. And he was, like, you know, very low follower number. And I found it, and I kinda, like, looked through and I thought it was credible.

And basically, the next the next post that went out was basically the the TS chair or TS Choi how are you transliterated story, which I did a little bit of background checking on that, you know, that, you know, and and talked to So that actually came as a result of the first post that went out and the the the the kind of PR around that first post created so he can come into the field.

I wanna focus on on the kind of the papers and and, okay, 99 story. And if you guys are interested in kind of the full breakdown as we kinda saw to develop, I just pinned a tweet from, you know, Suncan Sale, our friend, and partner in this, the guy on the ground, the guy who understands the language, and the guy who, helped us understand that there was a third paper, published already before these two papers I believe, and it was a paper in Korean. I also think that this paper was, submitted for peer review, I wanna believe, and apparently there was a a patent as well.

And This creates a huge step because of the -- It turns out there were 3 patent applications. And, apparently, I'm not sure when they published, but, you know, they seem to have gone unnoticed, which is not surprising because, like, you know, anybody can file any patent and a room for some temperature superconductor that doesn't make it real.

In fact, I wanna just shout out We do have some folks on Twitter trying to say, hey. We have a button. Do we have this with no evidence as well? So I wouldn't go and chase that. I will not name any names. However, also our correct, you like. Anybody can upload the paper. you need to be cited differently, but, like, there's nothing preventing anyone from uploading a And, I think the most relevant thing here, and I will later mention why this is relevant, the first paper, the the kind of the abrupt surprising English paper, we call the the 3 author paper.

And the reason why we call this 3 author paper, because some folks speculated that a Nobel Prize can be only awarded for, 2 to 3 authors, which, was one of the earliest things that this in fighting could be because this is so big that those will get a Nobel Prize. And I think at this point, we're saying, if they found out, that we have a way to synthesize a room temperature, superconductor, then it is a Nobel Prize worthy discovery. the first paper is published with 3 authors. And Kwan, the guy who submitted this, is 1 of the 3.

The other 2 is suqday Lee and Jihoon Kim, and their last name is, Kim and Lee, is the the part of the name LK, and 99 is when they started to work on this. and this kinda brings them to the fold 8 to buy and, their professor Choi or or chair. It depends on the translation who essentially based on his theory, the these guys worked for a while, and it didn't work. I don't want to do a whole detailed thing about this as well, but generally, this is kind of the sleuthing that gets us to this. And the reason this clothing happens is partly because, like we said, anybody can upload the paper. It's there's no, you know, nothing prevents.

Anybody can submit a patent. However, the scientific world rejected this almost outright, at least some parts of it. namely because of the mess. The first paper was raised by young Kwan, and the other 2 LK folk. And Kwan At this point, we later discovered no longer is affiliated with Q Center. Right? So, we're imagining a person who wasn't working for kiss center for a while. I don't think we've contract when he started, but he's no longer affiliated with the center. And he raises this paper.

Essentially, you know, you can only speculate why, but you definitely can definitely know that he doesn't have access to, to all of the latest research and doesn't have access to all of the latest graph and insights. And, 8 to 5 can speculate why. And I'll just say, 8 to 5 does great work in in covering the chronologically, of all of this, with some endorsement of details because it also needs to be interesting. and if I do have an estimation of Ygrene releases this?

so I I I just wanna say again, like, I'm starting to back away from embellishment of the of of the early part because, honestly speaking, you know, it was a super low era. I had a 2000 follower account, and, you know, the average post would be hurt by, like, maybe a hundred people. And now this is, like, a 20,000 follower account, and there's, like, you know, a million people, like, million views on every every post. So I'm kind of backing away from some of the embellishments. so I I and, you know, I think I think it's fair to say that there was a falling out between the two parties. I would actually, question whether he was actually fired fully.

because the only evidence that I know of is a newspaper, briefing given by Lee, to Yonhart. Now, because the 2 parties are fighting, you don't really know what happened between the 2 parties. and this is a historical moment. there could have been so many other permutations of things that happened. you don't know whether he was properly fired, whether he's given given severance, whether He signed a contract, whether he was still the principal investigator on the study, and he couldn't be fired anyway. Like, you don't know so many things. so I would and and, you know, these things are so messy.

Like, I've been, you know, when you when you let go an employee, like, when you try to fire someone, it It's not that easy. You know, it it doesn't just like, oh, dude, you know, bye bye. It does it doesn't work that way. And then not especially not with the World Historic Discovery at you know, there. So I am, like, super, super doubtful. And and having some legal experience, I'm super, super doubtful that all the the contracts were properly signed. that he was properly let go, that he has no claim on the discovery, that he has no claim on Q Center. So I would say that, you know, to be to be fair, something happened, we know, and that, you know, Lee gave that press conference. quan showed up, you know, on his own to the MMC.

That that those things we know for everything else, we don't know.

Yep. we also know who's not going to second paper, and and Quam is not appearing as authors on the second paper. He's barely, I think, referenced as a thank you in acknowledgement. And the second paper is released by this guy, HyunTech Kim. and it's very important to talk about HyunTech's Takim a little bit as well because not only he's the guy who actually releases the paper. He's also, a very well cited scientist. He has a age score, I believe, of 40, 40 something.

age score is basically how many papers So I will I will interrupt there again one more time because I see Robert Paulgrave in the audience, and he has been pushing back on the age score. And I will point out that once Lee and Kim actually received a Nobel Prize, they will have a score of 0. So let's let's push back against this idea that the score means the guy's reputable scientist.

I saw the recruit and, thanks for interrupting. Let me continue with this. a score does not imply that they're, like, great scientist. It doesn't imply that there's a reputation attached to this. Right? So both Lee and Kim, you're correct. There's, a very, very low rate for. However, he's a reputable scientist with connections to other, like, big institos. I don't remember exactly, Martin, I think. and he he is coming into this team, and he's releasing the second paper. He's not naming the first kind of, rogue author. And this this points to kind of infighting well, potentially points to whether or not somebody somebody wants to release this. And, the importance of Edgecor, as I highlighted, is not the like, is that genius?

It's just the fact that there is a reputation attack, and this is a huge claim. There's a huge claim. We're gonna talk about applications of why we're gonna talk about, you know, all the all the ways that this could change humanity, but this is a huge claim that if, if you release and then nothing of this is proved or if you actually release, you know, we've seen some evidence before that, some folks really superconductor in room temperature and it was, like, fabricated. The data was fabricated. Rhonda Rhonda Dice I if if this name triggers you, you know, we're talking about it. I believe Rhonda dice is the name. but, however, I think even science, magazine published the paper, and then, like, retract.

It was whole thing that many of the scientists that, like, reacted negatively to, like, this obscure paper messiness we call messiness, this claim was retracted, and now that person's reputation is is fake. So it's important to know that, like, it's not just an obscure team. There's this game with nowhere, that's that's saying these claims. There's also scientists that's, like, well cited in this field.

it also points to fact that, like, when people have a gut reaction or, sorry, a knee jerk reaction of, oh, this is just a Diane Magnism, the person with, like, 40 paper sided, at least some of them about the magnetic, materials, he probably knows how to test for dynamicnessism in those difference between this and and and the superconductor. and then the world starts to go into a friend Right? So we now have 2 papers that differ in also, charts and data. You like, correct?

I I don't know if you can speak to, like, differences, but generally, Generally, I think there's, like, significant differences in how the papers are even presenting and definitely, like, what theories are behind there, behind it.

So so for the the experimental papers. I mean, you you you take what you get. There are some some basic expectations, that, like, not all of papers have have totally met for for, good good or questionable reasons. the the theoretical papers, the computational history or quantum chemistry, papers. That's a pretty standard field, and and and they do tend to usually follow at least, the main parts of the paper till the discussion, you know, a pretty pretty standard format.

and then, you know, social media picks up on the story, and I believe many other pick up on the story. And a potential clue as to why this was released when it was released, nothing is confirmed is, Friday. So almost a week later after Iran decides to raise this paper, Korea has, is hosting, I believe it's the University of Korea some other establishment is hosting MML 2023. So this is, a huge international conference held in English. that is talking about materials and material science. And, we know that Kwan was not part of the, you know, there's a website you go there.

not part of the prepared speakers. However, he's giving, I don't know, hit the keynote, but he's definitely there's there's folks on Twitter, which we never heard since. I think there's, like, one dude on Twitter today. here's a presentation on, like, the super connectors, and then that person never visited Twitter never reacted. but we then have more confirmation. The Quan actually presents you know, these findings and paper, I don't think it's clear yet whether or not he actually had some of the materials, examples with him. but he presents this.

Some folks really don't understand why presenting and not do like a show and tell because there is a very easy way to show you have a, room temperature superconductor, and that's the meissner effect. you know, I if you'd like to the mice and effect and and explain this, feel free.

So okay. So I'm I'm gonna try and simplify it enough. in in, at least a type 2 superconductor, because the electrons, you know, have no resistance, no friction, so to speak, in terms of how they respond to any forces on them as that goes into a magnetic field that, you know, puts forces on them. So they move So they create their own magnetic field that exactly counters the the applied magnetic field.

And and that means that inside a superconductor, the magnetic field totally cancels. And the result of that is that instead of of, go, you know, just pushing to, you know, if if you try to push towards the magnet, it it wants to resist. It it it I shouldn't use the term resist. It wants to to, not go into the force of the field of the magnet. Right? because the magnet itself does also have its own energy that that magnetic field.

So to minimize the energy, the system, it wants to have as little do with it as possible. Now it is in gravity, so it'll just kind of settle where those forces balance. And that's the classical, pinned levitation that that we've seen the demonstrations of.

Now in the LK99 material, it might it might be a real superconductor, but it might not behave, the same way iris, had a really good, diagram show telling this that because of the structure of appetite where there are one dimensional channels that are the the presumed a superconducting, a part of the crystal structure. that is isn't the same as, an anisotropic like that is equal in all direction, superconductor.

And therefore, it that in a, in a magnetic field would likely just rotate so the field would put a torque on it, to minimize the field that is in the d channels.

So, just to connect dots for folks who have no scientific background like me, the float iracks me you may have seen the the have the rocks flow. This is what they're talking about. And the reason why I'm talking about this because in type 2 superconductors like Eli said, you would see the if you have a supermassive material. And I bet, even now if you fold this, but even before, I bet you've seen, like, super chilled, kind of vapor coming out, packs or, you know, pieces that people kinda put on top of magnets, and then they kinda walk in place. And even the you, like, you can even put like rails almost, and they're gonna kinda go around, right, and with no resistance?

yeah. So it's there are some nuances there, but roughly.

Yep. And so this is the demos to to super connector. And, we do know that LK99 has some of this property, at least, because, I'm actually not sure how the videos were released. I know there's, like, one unlisted video on, like, your centers, YouTube channel. with, like, a magnet trying to move the material around. And there's another video. This is the one that, if you follow the list, that I posted. This is the one that you know, there's a meme without this, like, I wanna believe there's missing a magnet and a piece of, lead, and it kind of floats.

And then there's the guy with with a pen or something just to move this, and then we see, like, a partial, essentially levitation or partial magnetic, exposure. And, potentially, this also will have, the mice in effect. And and this is what what people hope to see. People hope to see a locked in place piece, a rock, or whatever, from replication attempts, even though potentially this may not have and still be a superconductor. Is that right? Like, this this could not have the mice in effect and still be potential superconductor.

Yeah. And and, I mean, especially with with, the anti isotropy, before I said, I said, anisotropy was, equal in all direction. No, it isn't. It's it's, not equal in in all directions. Isotropy, ISO equal in all directions. Sorry about that, everyone. but with with with the anisotropy, it's it's a little bit more complicated because, you don't know the the not just is it is it are not just are there these one dimensional channels in in each superconductive domain. but the domains can be randomly oriented.

So some samples might appear, you know, at at least theoretically, we could have all of these things be true at the same time where, some samples appear to levitate and others just appear to have torques on them. It it starts to get really complicated, but The biggest complication of all is that we do not know anything yet about the phase behavior, the the, specific, crystal structures and lots of other details.

so far as I know, there haven't been any scanning tumbling mic microscope images of this, which I'm really eager to to to see because that will probably tell us a lot and could also, possibly, be part of verifying superconductivity.

So this is when we talk provide, a a piece for, like, independent research, and we we know that I think Argon Labs. In in the United States, there's a different, like, other national labs that they're testing this potentially trying to replicate, potentially have even samples. don't think we know necessarily that the team ever provided samples. I think we know, for a fact, and I think I've been this in the top tweet, that we know that the interview that they had with the Korean media during the same Friday with the MML conference, Lee, one of the operational, both papers that they're willing to work with research institutes. And we do see this as well.

So we do see folks, from Q center correspond over email with different, replication, labs. We see 1, one left from, I won't say, somewhere in India. I think school of let me see if I can find this. No. Unfortunately, I can find this. I'll find this later. So we see, a professor from an Indian university trying to replicate, and they he posts in his comments, like, correspondence with Lee. And we also see, I think, correspondence with human came, the guy, the relief, and the guy, the the the the sourced person.

And this all shows us that these are not some attempts at a fraud folks. They stand behind their claim. However, the claim is not necessarily easily replicable. 8 to 5.

You were saying no? Yes. sorry. So I I just wanna clarify because the the kind of, like, I I wanna separate the fiction from the fact and I don't know some of the facts. So I just wanna clarify again. So number 1, Quan at the conference. we don't know we don't know whether he has the sample, like, that that was implied, by kind of like, you know, chatter. We don't know. I don't think having the sample and showing floating a floating thing would have helped. Because honestly speaking, when you're speaking to a group of scientists, like, this is one sector where there has been, like, basically thousands of hoaxes, and so you would not even believe your own eyes. You'd be like, you know, maybe it's magnetic.

Maybe you did something with them. You, you know, maybe you, you know, did something to magnetism. I don't know. Right? Like, you'd wanna take it back. You'd wanna take the sample back. You'd want the guy who gave you the sample not to be You'd wanna test it in your own lab. You wanna have, you know, X-ray diffraction. You wanna have a scanning tunnel, tunneling microscope. You wanna have and then after you do those things. You want an independent confirmation from someone else because you wouldn't know whether you hypnotized yourself into believing something. Right? So I think I think it's it's unfair to say that, hey. You know, if you just brought it on and, you know, had it there, and showed people and the and the rock floated, it would have created a difference in the perception of truth. I don't I don't think so.

With with the with the audience of, you know, scientists, no, 0, 00, 0 there. And then the the other thing is Argon. Argon is implied. I think Maiser at Argon is working on it because they're all kind of like, you know, hymn Tak, Kazubash, Maser, the guy at APS at, at Aragon, they they've all been, like, one team for maybe about 12, 13 years now. So I find it very unlikely, given that Kazubhash is listed on as as as having reviewed the, 6 author paper. I find it very unlikely that Argon did not already know. And, Maser just keeping quiet for now. So I implied Maser.

I don't I don't know if anyone's reached out to Maser, and a Maser hasn't confirmed as far as I know in print. Right? So so I just wanna clarify the historical record. I, you know, Argon is implied by me. I am the person who implied. I'm I'm the one who found the connection. but I I don't know. And I I'm the one who took Nasr's name. I'm not sure whether that is actually true.

So -- What I know for a fact that the the true, and I think that, folks are expecting Argon to be kind of a a defining voice in whether or not the claims are true and whether or not this actually has, like, superconductivity. the the floating rock piece, I think it's it's a good job, but I think you're exactly correct. And I think he will imply this as well that, you know, taking this back to the lab with proper equipment with way more and better equipment, but also saw screenshots from the actual women they used and folks who are not impressed, they didn't have a lot of funding for this.

and we actually saw somebody think it actually needs YouTuber try to go there and knock on their door in in Korea, and they work from, like, a basement. It's not like a huge lab or anything. It's a basement with other shops around and, not that great of an equipment. And the point I was trying to highlight, again, they're cooperating at least over correspondence and presenting the case where, like, they would cooperate with labs, and they email, back and forth with researchers, I think, from China and from India, at least, And, they're accepting they're accepting LinkedIn invites. I think we have Andrew in the audience, Andrew McAlte, who will talk up in a second.

I think, Jim talked, accepted his, invite. So it's not like -- -- and mine. -- folks are hiding. And, also, well. Sorry. Like, has he answered?

well, he he accepted the connect request. I I haven't prepared something to, you know, I I I wanna have something nice to nice and and well formed to to ask him about That's right.

I haven't seen any, like, a correspondence from Hintech, through email or, sorry, through the Amazon LinkedIn, like, no screenshots. However, I do know that many of these folks kind of started deleting a few of their LinkedIn pages, which some folks found interesting, but then I think someone posted it, like, the staff that they posted before is being, spread without their essentially agreement from the LinkedIn page that they deleted. and the race begins.

And so one one one other thing, and, of course, this does not constitute, verification as even some of the authors of of the papers have have said, but they're, you know, in in a very short period of time, there there are some really, like, well done, papers for now. I've only I can only say well done about 2 because I've only, looked at 2 of them, and in detail, only the first one, Shanae Griffith, I think. I'm I'm blanking on her last name at at atlbl.

and, you know, she says herself this does not cause to prove, but it shows some really interesting, results in the band structure that are consistent with it, it having you know, superconductor like properties. And, an important thing that comes out of her work is that, it depends where the copper substitution winds up, whether it causes the super conductivity or not.

And, that, you know, that would be a very, very, clear explanation of why even if you're doing everything right, this might be difficult to produce, which doesn't mean either that it can't be worked out. It just might, you know, take a lot of time and effort, or that, it might not lead to other related materials, you know, that that are the same, but with different elements in, in different places that turn out to have similar properties but, are are not as difficult to to synthesize.

And so, these two papers are in addition to several other attempted replication. The paper to use this reference, I think she's in Berkeley. Nate shouldn't you Griffith? this is a simulation of some of the parts of the material. Right? So is that a, full simulation? It's really hard to do a full simulation for every aspect this material, but simulation that that shows that, like, there is a possibility. So we're we're looking at a, directional green light rather than the confirmation. And I think at the same time another simulation comes out again from China.

also, I'm not sure what exactly the difference between the 2 simulations also comes out with, like, a directional green light.

I wanna point out folks. It's just be before before we leave this topic, there was a bit of a thread about, running these kinds of calculations. I I do molecules and nanostructure is not, crystal and solids like this, but, you know, there's a lot of overlap. like, this is the the that paper was, density theory, specifically, DFT plus u. And, that is something that, you know, can even run on on at least decent gaming rigs.

I haven't started running any of these calculations myself, but the idea that that I'm kind of like, incubating and, and I think others are thinking about this similarly is, a folded sort of approach where where we, can, you know, let people do modifications, different substitutions, etcetera.

And you know, if if LK99 doesn't pan out soon, like the whole world can work on the problem, and and, just by by having more people exploring a huge combinatorial space, you know, with potentially some applied intuition because the folded effort actually did wind up doing better than than, you know, machine learning and and and various approaches until, you know, the the recent, revolution in in, aiML, but, I think that's that's one direction this could go.

Yeah. I'm trying to find, Mike is thread that says, hey, if you wanna help, here's how. and, essentially, he's gonna yeah. I'll find it and post it later. They're not gonna interrupt the flow here. However, we start seeing after those, papers come out and after the confirmation, not confirming, sorry, the fact that a sleuth find another Korean paper that also has it's written more like a a journal, less than that, like I scientific paper, but definitely there's more details there. Some folks start a rush to replicate.

And these two papers come out proving that there is something worth looking at, definitely, simulation of something. And, I think she made was very careful with saying is definitely not a confirmation. Correct? Like, it's a very well worded paper. We had some of our colleagues on on the previous space as well. and they talked about, you know, the does she know what she's talking about?

She's very well respected in in the field, and the paper is doing very well, but definitely not a 100% mentioned, but a a a sign to assigned to be -- So so just the the thing about about DFTU is is a a respectable method, but, this is the thing.

there are assumptions that go into into the method itself. and, they're it it's it's not something that gives you quantitative, predictions, right? you can explain experiments with it because you, you know, you have the experimental results to compare to, and then you have your your your quantum analysis of the system and, and you, you can point out, you know, how the overall observed results breaks down in different different features, the theoretic Right? That's that's one, you one way these calculations are useful.

But, and and the higher levels of theory, which, you know, could be more accurate, usually wind up being just intractable in terms of how much compute they require. you know, eventually, I'm sure that if there's enough interest and this hasn't been being disproven, there there, you know, there could be higher level of theory type calculations, coming out on this site. I think that's more likely than not. but, is the the thing in computational chemistry in some areas, the the accuracy has really, really improved.

It used to the whole field used to be just dismissed as video games by experimental chemists, right? but it has gotten a lot better, and and it it it it is a very useful tool. but it's not a substitute for real measurements and real experiments.

And, we had, Renee's, colleague joined us and definitely talked about the the vastness of of the research here, and it's really, like, very hard to to to find, like, a durable needle in the face stack. And this is also something we're seeing. Right? So so this result, the simulation result, the other definite attempts that we're gonna talk about soon from from Houston Institute in China.

even we can say at least you know, I I take this position after, like, talking to many of these folks and and managing some of the spaces that even now without, like, a complete revolutionary rock that that holds current with no resistance and floats and, you know, potentially applicable to many, many things. Even now we can say that this isn't a very great direction towards finding stuff in, right, because, it does not look like the same areas type 2 superconductor. And, just to add to this, I mean, like, feel free to to expand on this type 2 superconductor is actually, have improved with time.

So temperature at at which the, this phenomenon could be found in this material rose kind of throughout time. As folks found different ways to approach these different methods to to create some of these materials.

So -- -- different different, you know, totally different classes of materials as well.

And, you know, one of the things that that, you know, came out in in the last couple of years, or so you know, much higher than the previous high temperature, superconductors, that were at liquid night temperatures, a sulfur hydride, that, you know, came close to, the freezing point of water, right, which was, you know, just, like, fabulously higher than liquid nitrogen, temperatures, but that was, at at a very, very high pressure. Right?

So so this is why, you know, the first thing in in in the title of the paper is at ambient pressure. Right? but the thing that that, like, made me really think that there is something to this when I first saw the paper, was that they were talking about the copper substitution distorting the ladder, the the lattice, the crystal structure, and that is kind of a way of internally stress it to get the same type of pressure. And additionally, so copper is an element with, a not completely filled d shell of electrons.

And when you have that and you have different things distorting its geometry, like pressure, you get you get changes in in the electronic structure, both the copper and the things it's interacting with. And whether or not that's happening here, that is something is really interesting to potentially exploit in in, trying to produce, you know, better superconductors.

And so to to to sum up, like, we've seen progress in superconductors, the the wood, like, high temperature, but definitely pressure as well. both these things are making it harder for the current, superconductors that we do have type 2, to be used in real work application. And, I I wanna talk about at least one of the things that they're being used at currently, and then we can talk about applications of if we do get you know, a room temperature and ambient pressure superconductor out of this, but, there's a few things that are very expensive to run.

However, humanity decided that, like, there were for us to to spend money and time on, to use these superconductors within them. And they need to be, like, super super chill. They need to be held in in pressure, and there's, like, different like Eli said, one of them is MRI machines, MRI machines, magnetic resonance imaging. They basically read magnetic signals from the brain. and, and it's very basic. Right? It's way more than this, but essentially, the huge magnets, that exist there, they're electrical magnets. because, you know, the the running, electrical current and getting your magnets in there that detect, signals on your brain.

And There is -- Well, not not just your brain, just, you know, any any of your your issue where it basically, it's, differences in in the density of water is is a common, type of, medical MRI.

Oh, my bad. maybe I was referring to FMRA, and, definitely, the kind of the the brain that -- Yeah.

F functional magnetic resonance imaging.

Where yep. so MRIs, F MRIs, those used to cook and duck with it now, they're really expensive. They're huge, and they need, like, a lot of energy to to run them. And, the the other place that, superconductors being used at now is the exciting area of fusion research, Ayta, but go ahead.

I I'm I'm just gonna, you know, because I I kinda wanna know too, like, and, you know, what is it gonna do for our phones, which I do, which is basically what everyone wants to know. Right? Are you gonna get, like, you know, long, long, very long power, cycle? Are you gonna get more compute on your phone? really, like, what is it gonna do for that digital piece that we are also dependent on? Like, what, like, what are the things that you could see capacitors, wires.

Potentially, potentially, yes. the the the first thing that'll do is, if you can use, Wids, superconducting quantum, interference device, as as part of your, your reception. Right? That that means your antenna is is way way more sensitive. And, so that's one way it could improve, if if we have integrated circuits with, superconducting interconnects, then some, not all of the power usage of would, would go away.

there there are some caveats and some challenges that that might introduce as well.

And -- So it's a really good phone reception.

So no no no more like, hey, I can hear you. So so you accept, you know, it it could wind up that, oh, okay. phones are now now a lot better and then that, you know, we're on 7 g by then. Right? So we only need to put the the the powers, you know, 10 miles apart. Right? or, you know, you can have the equivalent of code below where we have better chips that people are just using not so efficiently. Right?

but in terms of of what's possible with the hardware, yes, can improve improve a great deal, and it it, you know, that's I'm just saying that that's not the same thing as as how, like, people, in a in, you know, probably a market economy, right, wind up using it.

The additional thing that applies to personal. One second. the additional thing that applies to a personal use electronics is battery technology. And it's unclear whether or not this could be used in the battery. However, the main property of a superconductor is it holds current, and you can essentially run it, like, in a circle in there. And until you interrupted, it's in there. this is how they're staying magnets. And, essentially, the current, the current patterns that we have, like, I think the one most performant is lithium ion batteries, and the the lithium ion has a lithium in it.

what we're looking at is with LK 99. One of the main things that, like, it affects so many so many people is basically lead in copper and some other materials very, very easy to obtain very easy fairly cheap as well. And, they're not like rare earth materials, which is, I think, one of the other points about the previous superconductors in use. And, Okay. 99 is lead in copper, and lead in copper is, like, fairly abundant. And if we can even get, let's not go all the way crazy. This is, like, a if we just get, like, the same amount of current, like, much cheaper batteries are possible.

but, however, much smaller batteries as well, which depends on how much they're in the connection.

But the the thing the thing is that that also depends on not having any magnetic field interact acting with the current that's that's, circulating. Right? So I I think that that that is still, you know, potentially really useful things like utility scale, storage. In other words, we have photovoltaics, and they're only, producing power on day, but, you know, we, we can, we can charge large, batteries of whatever is formed, but, you know, superconducting batteries. and and then have, you know, 20 fourseven, electricity. That's, you know, one one way or another, we're gonna superconductors can help that.

I, I don't know whether portable devices where you can't necessarily ensure that, there's no interaction with any other magnetic fields. Yes. Yes. You can shield it, but it it gets that's when when when you're dealing with super years, I think that there are some things that might not you might not be able to take for granted.

For sure. And none of this is yet proven as well. we're gonna adding to the hack a little bit. However, holding magnetic current, it's definitely one of the one of the benefits of of these type of materials. And we know for a fact that, you know, one of the problems with renewable energy is how to how to move this. I think 10 to 15% of all energy generated in the United States gets lost during through, during transmission. And, one of the main problems with renewable have a good way to store it. So putting portable aside, this will also give us a potentially a lot of, like, storage well.

It's it's worth it's worth breaking down what you just said a little bit because, you know, high high voltage DC power lines are pretty efficient, you know, better than 95% efficient. So, you know, how much how much is that 5% gonna do but the thing is that you first of all, you have some kind of, dynamo, whether it's it's a steam turbine or a wind turbine or whatever else, you know, steam turbine in a nuclear, reactor, a fission reactor, right? so the efficiency of that first dynamo or motor, improves.

And then you have a transformer most likely. The efficiency of that improves. The efficiency of your power line improves. The efficiency of the transformer on the other end proves. And depending on on what the end uses, the efficiency of of, you know, the motor that in your refrigerator, for example, that you're using also improves. So you put all those things together, we might see on the order of 50% in improvements of of, energy efficiency, you know, overall, you know, once the whole infrastructure, has made the shift. Right.

and so what do we so we see this kind of, you know, potentially quite, you know, a transformative you know, technology. but we still have to deploy. Right? Like, what what do you what do you think the obstacles to deployment? I mean, because I think I think one of the big things that everyone asks is lead. Right? Like, we just got lead out of our pipes. We're still, you know, we still have lead ins in, you know, 30, I think, 20 or 30 percent of the pipes in the United States? Like, what what do we do? Like, or how how is it possible to use this, like, effectively, or is this, like, impossible?

Well, so I I I think that that's that's a a a good it's an obvious question, but it's a really good question. And I think that encapsulating, this in a way that, you know, makes it very unlikely that that you get, you know, just, you know, the equivalent of rust happening and and leaching out lead. I would imagine that if if this if this winds up being the superconductive material, then then things like that are are gonna get a lot of attention. now, again, you know, could just be the inspiration for, you know, something that turns out to be better with different, substitutions.

That's one scenario. another issue that we have to confront, before this, you know, this is a feature of our, a fixture of our daily lives, is that it has to not I mean, not only does it have to work and get through all the issues that we still haven't gotten through yet, but we have to be able to produce it, re adusively, efficiently, and economically. And, there aren't any fundamental barriers there. if if the world wanted to make it a priority provided the physics co operated, the physics on the the physical chemistry of the phase diagram cooperates.

you know, it it it's it's then it's just time of, like, construction projects to change infrastructure. you know, it it would it would, you know, say say say we we absolutely had the superconductor down today, right, you know, how to how to produce the exact structure picture and and the the fabrication techniques to use it. It would be a couple of year. Well, at at least 18 no, probably at least a couple of years before there were chips on the market.

Right? Just because -- I I won't push back on this a little bit.

Yeah. Yeah. I mean, let me let me go first, Alex. So so I think I think I will push back on that. and I will say that you know, J. H. Kim, you know, blessed be his name. You know, he he found this thing, but I don't think, you know, I I think the I I, you know, I I deal a lot with, like, taking science into production. And when you go into production, you have, like, 90%, 95% die off rate, especially in biotech, you know, 99% die off rate. Like, something works on a mouse model doesn't work in a human being.

So I think I think what's gonna end up happening is you're gonna see, like, enormous effort on getting this thing into production, and you're gonna see, like, a huge range of, different peoples with different skill sets entry. And I think you've already seen that with kind of iris. Iris was a soil chemist. She took one look at it, and she was like, these guys don't know what they're doing. She basically, you know, improvised. and she got a, a much better with it. And that was within, like, a few days. Right? She decided, look, you know, I'm not good. I don't have the tools to do what a big lab would do. I'm not gonna subject it to X-ray refraction anyway because I don't have those tools either. I just wanna see the minor effect. So she's like, okay. I'm just gonna improvise.

Use what's kitchen. and she shortened the synthesis time. And, she managed to get a result, and she posted, right, So and and I think we're all tending to believe now that Irish managed to get an actual -- Yeah.

Like, let me let me get to present virus because the name of the face, Ginza Zai is actually kind of a a hint, a joke towards why Ivy FedEx started doing this and how insane this is that, you know, a Russian, I wanna say chemist, he identifies as a as chemist within animal picture.

I think she says structural biologist, actually.

Structural biologist. so why why, like, why do we believe, like, a, a very pure account on Twitter that now has a lot of following, but back then, 300 people, started posting, and, she's only part of the replication attempt. So we have, Andrew in the in the the audience and worked out for market space, that also started, tripping at this, from where he sits. I specifically started talking about, hey, I have some time instead of streaming, which we'll talk about maybe the the the importance of this. Instead of streaming, to my girlfriend or something.

She's busy, so I'm gonna try and hack this together. And, the first picture has come out of her kitchen working on, like, on the 12th, essentially.

and this looks ridiculous. And and I got I got it. Just interrupt here. It's it's like you know, a so Soviet science and and and Western science safety standards are are like 2 different things, and just don't don't try this at these are dangerous things. I mean, she knows what she's doing, right? She's, she's sharp. She has, has extensive lab experience. this is not for for anybody to try it home.

And we know this now that she has because, you know, she's she's in the group just when we're talking and literally not a lot of scientists can say, oh, this doesn't make sense, but definitely the the folks we talk about confirmed it. Like, she she definitely knows what she's talking about. however, what she takes, problem with is the the method, the synthesis, right, the setup. And, I think what she starts with is like, hey. can prove that their setup wasn't that great. and I think I don't know if this is day or today, but if you remember how how fast saw kind of the 2 pipette pictures of of tiny tiny specs. but I think within a day or 2 days, I was supposed to picture.

Yeah. And so Iris basically posts, pictures of this thing. She gets, trolled by I I I didn't know this, but there's an entire host of American chemistry trolls who, like, troll each other on what they post. So she gets scrolled on, online, on on Twitter. And she basically sits around, like, you know, commenting on them, and they want her to do a video And she basically doesn't wanna do a video. Later on, I learned this. She doesn't wanna do a video because she doesn't wanna get exposed to Lead Foons again, which is which is perfectly perfectly fair because you already 100%.

you know, this is the these are dangerous things and, you know, people get lab safety train and, you know, it's, it's one thing to, to know what you're doing and, and make informed, decisions. It's another thing for, for people on the internet how heckle you and and demand more.

Yeah. And and so she's like, you know, if you guys wanna do it, you guys go do it yourself. Right? Like, this is all I'm posting. I'm not gonna post anything else. And, like, this is it. Right? And but luckily, she stays I mean, she's excited too, I guess, even though she's, like, you know, cursing at everyone. She's excited too. She stays online with us. And, basically, we are, you know, we we come to where we are today. I think we're all lean towards believing that she actually bit.

Right? No. She she told us straight up, and I think she's all Twitter, and she's very responsive. And, folks, I really recommend going to the thread that's now pinned on the top on the jumbagong and just reading through this because it looks ridiculous. Like, if you don't know and you don't have a lot of confirmation of, like, actual material scientists, and people, who know, do a PhDs and this were like, oh, yeah. She knows what she's talking about, and very, very quick. She knows what she's talking about. It doesn't make sense that somebody just cooks this up in the kitchen. Like Eli said, those are, you know, dangerous, dangerous processes. You have to take care of them. There's a bunch of stuff.

And she goes, like, very in-depth to tie an and provide, a proof that the process wasn't that great because the folks who work on this in Q center, maybe this is not necessary their expertise. she has a lot of experience with with the lab. And since then, I wanted to say a to buy any light. The haters have zero basis. Like, we we we at least here, we can say this for certain. Correct? There's, like, 0 basis for there's, like, 0 sciency things that can be said that she doesn't do correctly. But, yeah, you're better than this than me.

Is that correct? Yeah. And and I will I will go ahead and say this, like, as look, at at the end of the day, you know, in the last century, you needed to post a paper to claim bragging rights. Nowadays, you do it on the internet. iris is gonna, you know, as a result of writing the historical record as we as as it happened, and as a result of posting everything online, she's gonna claim this. She's gonna be the first independent application, of this of this effort. and that's and that's exciting.

Well, then she she actually kind of pushed back against she said, you know, this is not about replication. This is about the method. And, her method does appear to potentially. I mean, it it's, it's still early days, and, and, you know, we'll we'll see how things, shake out in the long run, but her, her method does look appealing. It certainly takes less time. And, she, you know, she said what I was thinking that Like, they made some odd choices on on the compounds that they started out with, though.

I don't necessarily fault them as much because material science is is kind of voodoo and and or or can be until you really know what you're doing and have worked on something for a long time. And, you know, potentially back in 1999, you know, they did a series of experiments, and this was just like one variation. And it yielded something that look very promising so they stuck with the formula that they had then. You know? And that's entirely reasonable, but when you know that it's, you know, lead phosphate oxide with a with a little bit of copper, substitution.

It's like, well, you would choose different, different starting materials and, you know, may maybe you'd run into problems with them and wind up with something like what they had, but uh-uh, Ira certainly did hit on something that that that did work out.

And and I will I will I will go one step one step further and say that right now, I'm guessing that there are, engineers in ceramics companies KES era who have looked at, you know, Iris process and the process online. And they're like, well, that's not gonna work in production. This is what you do in production. And and so because I don't, you know, I I think I think, like, crystals, growing ceramics for our, production is often a little bit different from what you do in the lab when you wanna really like mass produce. there's a set of different processes that you have to use.

and, you know, I I think the core the core chemical process is the same, but, you know, the the way that you do it is different. you know, the the the the materials have to be, you know, in larger quantity, etcetera, etcetera. So I think I think right now, you'd that there are serious people looking at this everywhere.

So if folks look at the jumbotron again, you see two pictures of Pittets with a tiny black stack in there. And, now after many people doubted this and many people guessed out, and after we started with iris and multiple, like, false confirm that, like, she has the process, the chops to actually do this. Yeah. First in the kitchen, and then in the living room, did not know that many people have living room films. Apparently, she does, and apparently some other few people done as well. so the tweet, the actor go down in history is the fan service tweet. Literally, she's just supposed to do pictures at fan service.

And in the alt description of both of them, kind of describes it like this is a pipette, and the pipette is there just like to hold the material or something together, but it's definitely, I don't think she she mentioned Meissner effect. You're like, I I don't know, but, like, she definitely says that this is a reproduction of, LK99. This at present right now, there's a Wikipedia page that tracks all the replication events. the Wikipedia page does nothing to do better. We all of Ada Pike or correct me if I remember, like, all of us who follow this, this is the first replication that we saw outside of the Korean image or, sorry, the 2 videos.

And, I just wanna, like, you know, just take this to the ground, and we'll go down with this. This is the first replication that we've seen online. This may not be the 1st, like, in lab, but her process is definitely is is fast and, the lack of video, you know, we'll get a video eventually.

And and this this came out. I think if I remember correctly, like, right after a lab in China was live streaming, attempts with 4 samples that that didn't work.

Correct. I think he used or maybe that's the the other lab. There was a, there was live stream on that as well. And I think eventually that they did achieve another replication, and it did something with also, like, a tiny, tiny spec, which we need to go and find. And so this replication starts, this replication process starts, I wanna do everything that I can, and we all wanna do everything we can to make sure that, like, the the the proper folks get the proper creds. I know that, like, Kwan without him potentially none of this would have happened. Maybe, maybe, yes, maybe, no, but, like, definitely now.

Juan released this, you know, on on, on a surprising release, and, definitely, Iris' place should also be noted because this is the first replication attempt. and since then, we've seen multiple replication attempts is privately and publicly. again, I refer to Andrew, Andrew from, a varda space in the general varda space, been on the spaces. I think he's in, if you wanna come up and do feel free, you don't have to I've I've actually multiple questions all this time.

Andrew is streaming his, like, what he calls quote unquote the most boring Twitch stream, which I disagree with, like, many thousands of people just trying to watch whether or not this replicates. They just speak to, like, how much, how much excitement there is? The top tweet, I think, is 3,500,000 views. I expect it to go, expected to go higher. I wanna give Andrew McAllen a second to come up. He's gonna be muted for a second. Andrew, if you can hear me now, Andrew.

Hey. How's it going? I see some familiar faces out there.

Hello. Hello. Hello. so, Andrew, you looking at this. I think we've discovered kind of the history as well. feel free to give a brief introduction kind of where are you right now? what are you doing right now? Is you guys through this exciting floating rock?

Yeah. Sure. So, I had, read the paper. I think it was July 25th. And within about 30 minutes of reading the paper, I'd figured out that it was actually physically feasibly possible for me to go and try to replicate it. I was really shocked at how simple the synthesis was. it looked like something from the 1900, you know, you typically, you're used to these papers being full of exotic materials and exotic processes. And this was a 4 materials and a 3 step synthesis in, you know, a very primitive furnace. it had a couple exotic elements, the the high vacuum, quartz ceiling was a little bit tricky.

So that kind of precludes some of the hobbyist garage setups.

and so just just a quick quick aside it's not high vacuum. High vacuum means something specific.

and this is a very this is a very dirty That's that's true. That's true. to the semiconductor crowd, certainly not a high vacuum. is a vacuum that you could achieve with maybe a $1000, single stage pump. So it'd be one times 10 to minus 3 tour. So, yeah, it's it's a very achievable vacuum, but certainly a little bit better than, something you would typically see in a with the regular vacuum pump, your your air conditioner supply guy probably has a, a pump that's capable of doing this.

But anyway, ordered all the materials. I before Sigma crashed, I got a bunch of orders in. And so, proceeded through the synthesis. So the quick update is that we've done 2 batches of the, lander kite And we have 2 batches of the copper phosphate arriving from different sources tomorrow. So we got a little bit held up on the, red phosphorus side of things. it is a bit of a controlled substance in the United States, and so it's tougher for your smaller labs that didn't happen to have the right paperwork in place to go and do that.

we could have done it, but there's, quite a waiting period. So it would have been about 30 days to go through the paperwork to get it. So we, found some partners to do that. some overseas, some local in town. And so we expect to have both parts ready tomorrow, and we'll start the final synthesis that's, the lander kite and the copper phosphides will do that synthesis and run it the, procedure says between 5 to 20 hours to complete this, not a lot of specificity in either the patent or any of the papers.

so we don't really know what the sensitivity is to overall duration or ramp rates, So that's, you know, concerning because our goal was to really try to just do a straight up replication of the process as described and not really do a lot of off roading. we're we're engineers. We're not subject matter experts, so we don't have the theoretical basis to go and make a good first principles informed, judgment on how do we improve this, but actually So all that said, we're gonna be running the first trials tomorrow. We'll we'll smash the rock. We'll see how it does.

Don't predict a whole lot of success, but Hey, we may get lucky. But, actually, that brings me to me.

Hey, Andrew. K. Just just one second. I'll I'll ask you a few questions. first of all, thanks for coming up. Thanks for being kinda the the guy who who kind of posted about this publicly in English. Like, I know many, many people, like, started giving you a lot of, like, positive energy to do this. I definitely one of them. I love the effects. I I I think you're doing great service to, like, folks who wanna become engineers and, just like a great place in history and, like, I really appreciate it. And I hope I hope, Maiser Effector Busk catches on. can you talk about that meme as a meme?

yeah. Just, it looked like how it how it got started or, what is the the effect that we're looking for?

Yeah. So we talked about Meisner effect, but, like, how do you get started and and how, you know, you're not a natural research lab. Like, the point that you have is not to put this on the old micros. a 100%. Right? You you you wanted to see the rock flow. You wanted to show us the rock flow.

Yeah. Yeah. This is, this is this very weird combination of the Twitter, meme side of the internet combined with very serious professionals that are experts in their field and decades of of experience. So we were just looking for something to sort of, bridge the gap. We we knew that it would, you know, giving a little bit of the, the humor would, really make it, attractive to Twitter. And so it I you don't see, like, topics like this really trending on Twitter.

so we wanted to make it a little bit funnier, a little bit more, a little bit more shareable. So we're trying to walk a fine line between serious and humor. So it's the internet seems to like it so far.

I think, and I can speak from my place in this where I kind of got up in the, you know, information if you wanna say highway and trying to help folks who kind of understand what's going on, I think what you're doing is incredible just because of the like, a lot of these things happened in papers with a lot of, unreadable for many, many folks at least like me, graphs and charts and and material signs, etcetera. and you're doing a lot of, like, approachable stuff. You're doing this the way Twitter does this, and I would wanna say also both you and Iris are in in the greenroom chat and, like, very much information that happens openly on Twitter as well.

And, there's a lot of people who're collaborating on this in one way or another, not only teaching one each other, but also like talking methods packet and potential applications. And so I think, you know, the the fine line that you're walking, I think you're walking through.

so, yeah, 22 comments on that. 1, one interesting and serious idea. I'll comment on that later. But the first part is is a really interesting effect I've noticed is that you cannot post a graph on the internet, with a chart and not tell people how to feel about it. Like, the instant response is tell me how to tell me how the squiggles are supposed to make me feel. it is, just like this interesting phenomena where nobody is really equipped to make value judgments on some of these results.

That's really been the difficult there's probably a thousand people worldwide that are really, really well equipped as you as I've sort of, like, peeled back the onion and talked to people that are experts in, true experts, not just surface level, it the they're always, referring to, well, you know, the previous group is a surface level knowledge, and this is really the effect. I get the feeling that the actual community that is qualified to pass judgment is so small. And so I was realizing, like, we, we need a way for people to comment on it. that's not speculation.

I don't I didn't want to, like, engage in, like, passing judgment on the graphs. That that seems like the most dangerous thing is to pass judgment on the on the, the squiggles without being well informed. So, you know, walking that fine line But the other thing, I I had an idea. And so I was just considering how to go about doing this because we're we're gonna get to the end of this experiment. And the odds are it it probably won't be perfect. It probably won't work, even though there's been a lot of success, probably 10% or less, but I was considering, how do we go forward from here?

And so I was considering, what what if we, put up a spreadsheet and we just had a a call to all the laboratories that, don't have the facilities or the ability to produce this in house. and we just put up a big sign up list. And we said, hey. You know, 1st batch, we have 50 grams material. 2nd batch, we might have a couple 100 grams Can everyone work together and, collaborate and figure out, okay, who wants to run what test? You have various resource Universities and groups will have different instruments. So somebody gets Xrd. Somebody gets SEM. somebody's gonna run a test in the squid.

It would be interesting, and it would help, like, coordinate the dispersion of all these samples. But then the second idea is what if we brought together people to inform the next set of trials? So, obviously, we want to do a bit of a design of experiment. We want to change some variables. sign we'll change 11 per experiment.

We'll send the batches out but I would like to have the input of all of the physicists, around the world to inform, okay, you know, we wanted to make this change or that change, because I really have no idea the sensitivity of some of these things.

So It'd be interesting. If if you don't mind, let me let me interrupt and and say that this is the place where folks in the audience if you are in, I think, Los Angeles, Andrew?

yes. Los Angeles.

If you're in the later LA, and we're going to, like, come down, hit and drop because, you guys are alive. Like, you have lab in the back of VARDA. Right? This is where you're, like, developing all the stuff. This is where you're baking. This is the live Twitch, but it doesn't necessarily mean that you have all the equipment that a lab that's fit to test super conductivity, has. however, you can you can make stuff. You can like, invite folks. this is a call out to everybody in the audience who works with the staff who can analyze, whereas ideas about how to analyze or maybe give the different kind of directions or different tweaking of the algorithm. Sorry. Not algorithm. Used algorithm.

tweaking of the of the process and and the baking. I think follow Andrew Givendorfellow subscribe to his updates because soon, hopefully, the 1st batch is going to to release. Andrew will give us an update, but please subscribe and Andrew feel free to post, and we we all will you know, to oblivion the fact that you let's do open source science. Like, in addition to ArgonLab, which, maybe a rumor yet makes sense that they would also look at this, in addition to National Labs around the world, it would be so cool to have somebody like or just like, you know, the he'll tweet. Right? I will know.

so, definitely Andrew, set up set up this list. and, and go ahead. Tell us what you need. Tell us who you need. There's folks in the audience. I've seen some folks with different labs. I've seen some folks look PGs? What what do you need, help with, or who do you need to come come through?

Yeah. That'd be great. We'll get a spreadsheet together. We'll pulling the resources together, that'd be great. We'll get some analysis done, and then we'll figure out what tests to run next.

That'd be fantastic. So so, like, the very first order of business, I think, is, you know, once you have a sample that you're to to pulverize, you know, having some idea of, you know, just what ballpark the yield of particles that respond to, a magnetic field with, with torque or levitation, but with torque. that's really important because nobody has said anything at all about yields.

Yeah. We're I'm really interested in that. We we've been thinking of different ways to do it, maybe put it on the ultrasonic shake or table, and we'll just pass a magnet over, kinda lift the particles up, break friction, use a magnet, and, do gradual sorting. But That's something that I'd like to get to is what percentage of the volume is participating in super conductivity I we've seen these tiny specs. I I know the synthesis is yielding many, many grams. So, yeah, yield number, that would be a really novel piece of information.

Yeah. I think I think one thing that struck me immediately, when I first read the paper, and I and I put this I put this, like, very incendiary post out caveman technology was that there was no seeding process involved. And I was like, how in the world do you think? Like, you're gonna get a perfect chemical reaction where all of the you know, where all of these substances, all of the inputs are getting used up. And there's nothing left over. And then you and then you want a pure a pure and then you kind of feed it through. I'm like, this is not gonna work. So the the so I was like, you know, there there's there's, like, missing steps here.

you know, there there's stuff like, did you did you wash it through a solution? Did you do you see it? Like, what what did you do? Like, it's it just isn't there. And I was like, man, like, what are these guys doing? Right?

Andrew, I wanna ask about the specific thing. You said smash it. I think Eli also said smash it. And we know that iris definitely said, you know, specs of tiny specs. Even though the sample that we saw from from Q Center is like a puck, like a small buck. Right? they moved, like, with with a pen. It wasn't like a tie identical. what is the, what is the importance of matching it to 2 bits?

Just, actually, actually, at, at least in one of the pre prints, they, they talked about pulverizing it and then processing it into a film.

and then -- Oh, was that in the in the Korean? Yeah.

Right. No. In in in And I think it was in the first arcs of preprint.

And Oh, okay. And there there's also a lot of references in the patent, to the physical vapor deposition process. that that's a whole another really interesting topic, which I'd love to get into. That's what we were spending our evening talking about tonight at work was that process. But, but coming coming back to the the smashing of the rock. We'll we'll probably put it in a hydraulic press, possibly and and cleave it or see if it it wants to shatter If it doesn't want to shatter, we'll we'll break out some crude methods.

I'd try to get the grain size down to, a couple 100 microns to something that looks like the deer.

If I remember correctly, they just used a mortar and pestle. I'd have to check, but I think that's what they did.

Yeah. In fact, in fact, I read somewhere that, without using the mod and pestle, they were not able to get a proper mixing of the, of the, of the items of the, of inputs. And that is I read some there's no way in the papers yet.

That's the that's the precursors to the reaction. I'm talking about, the the, copper substituted lead appetite oxide.

Right. Yeah. The the the after the third reaction. You have the final product. It's it's centered. I'm not sure if centered is the right word, but it's a a fairly robust puck that should be fairly brittle. So we'll, we'll probably knock it down to, a millimeter in size, test it, And then if we're still not getting any, like, participation and, with the magnet, we'll reduce it down to a further and further particle size until we can find something that has a a high amount of, superconducting effect in the grain.

And so you guys are, like, assuming, like you said, you're an engineer. You don't have any of the the materials or sorry, not the materials, the equipment, the tools necessary. I wanna just say the the colleague of, who who busted the simulation, he he talked to us about the fact that if this is in fact a new type of superconductor, there may not be the tools necessary to kind of test some of these properties because, like, it, it could be like a completely new field as well.

So, replication is one thing, but like, confirming all the types of, superconductivity and and and may also take some time. So, go ahead.

Yeah. Yeah. And that's, I mean, that's really why I wanted to open it up to the people that have the instruments. It it seems like we're dealing with very microscopic volumes that are actually, active sites. Ma'am, they're maybe they're a grain boundaries, but, this is not gonna be a bulk effect. So really gonna have to pull out the best instrumentation to figure out what what it is that we've actually made. And there's interesting things to say there on the fig physical vapor deposition side because it it doesn't appear as though we know exactly what we've made.

So, Andrew, I think everybody in the audience maybe wants to know how long is left, and will be will there be, like, a live stream of the results?

It depends on when we want to pull it out tomorrow. I if we do it at the 8 hour mark, it'll probably be at about 8 PM Pacific time. that we, pull it out of the furnace. And then it's a matter of how fast do we cool it down? Do we do a fast quench? Do we let it cool down slowly? So it we'll try to get a file out before 10 PM. So it's a reasonable. We'll probably have, 3 or 4 independent vials in there so we can run different times. I'd I'd like to run one time, the entire duration and the entire 20 hour duration.

So maybe we pull 1 out at 8 PM Pacific and then pull the next one out at, 7 AM Pacific the next day.

So, folks definitely give Andrew a follow-up folks in that into who in the field and want to help best come up with test or, you know, use use the process, feel free to reach out and do a post, whatever he'll post. I'm not gonna speak for you, but but want to encourage everyone to do this. in the spirit of, like, a lot of this is happening out there in open source, there's not a lot of attempt. We just wanna some rocks fly. but, also, everybody is holding their breath for replication.

And so I wanna kinda keep talking about the replication in terms of you guys don't mind in terms of timeline and where we are because we've talked about some of this, before, and now we're talking about specifically about, do we know that the statement that they made in the first pretrant, you know, and then the second one and then the patent, etcetera, where they have, discovered a room temperature superconductor with ambient pressure that's able to, you know, have all the properties. And I think also they did talk about their their their samples having some sort of amazing effect, amazing effect. so the next kind of we see a lot of chatter from China.

and, we have some folks in in the group chat who also like, are scouring billy bitty, which is the Chinese YouTube, I believe, and also G, which is like a, I wanna say Twitter. Andrew, you had a comment on this? No. so, so, we have Elsa. I really wanna post because Jose deserves the the the credits for this. I'll post her the threat. She falls along and she kinda slews around and she she explains to us that Yeah. The Chinese interest is vastly different than ours.

And if somebody high up on or I'm I hope I'm saying the correct folks, is posting and saying that they're affiliated with with who's with, like, Huzhou National Institute, I don't believe, which posted a few of the samples, then they're actually who they're talking about. It's not like a a fake, attempt to have, like, the the social. It would have come down if it, like, to any modern popularity or falseness. And, Huzhong University of Science And Technology Hoost. So they're, putting up 2 samples. And then I think eventually they're the ones who show us the first video verification. Right?

So we've talked about iris, potentially enough potentially. As far as we've seen and, you know, feel free to send mediums and links to other application times there earlier. As far as we've seen, at least on on Twitter and on the competing Chinese kind of social media. Iris is, specs of dashboard first, but only in, image form. And, Hoosang is releasing a second video, and, in a few video, and they show levitation, at least a little bit.

And, I won't just fast forward for today because we have to -- Well, it's just just a quick quick quick point quick point. they they they're showing the torque, which is what, what, iris identified.

Can you can you tell us about the torque?

Well, so it's it's the difference between, levitation and just aligning, with the field. So so it it turns it -- Okay. So it's not like -- -- it's not like -- -- float.

Mhmm. Mhmm. So we we don't see kind of the it's not conclusive replication to to what we wanna see. Is that fair assessment?

Well, so I I would say that it, you know, if if this is, you know, one dimensional channels, it's it's the corresponding behavior that would be predicted, which would not be levitation.

And, I wanna talk about I wanna talk about today. I just wanna find this week. We saw let me just go find this real quick. oh, so so there is a video that's floating around that that's blocking, but we don't have a source for it. And we'd, like, supposedly it was leaked. This video came from, like, a a a check speaking to it account and then social media inside gonna like, I'm really, really, really trying to kinda start reposting this, rerecording this.

And now there's like a circular follow where, like, people try to ask for a source and then people post source to Bilibili, which is in Chinese, and she's actually kind of there's a screen cap. There is a video out there, but like a stack of dust, it looks kinda decent. and it looks interesting. However, there's many fakes that we saw and until the confirmation is happening from, does it potentially t l TCL or TLC? as well as in China, but we don't know the confirmation for that. I think many folks are in audience are asking, like, well, is there a implication?

Eli and Andrew, I wanna talk about the the kind of relative ease of use for this and how it applies to, Would would they release these papers? Would they kind of stand behind this if it was, like, code them called fake or check to fabricate numbers with this ease of use? As far as I saw, this is kind of at least also positive. at least part of the excitement. Let me say say state a little like this. At least part of the excitement is how fast we could see results, which is unlike science at all.

Could you talk to me about this, Eli and Andrew? Well, okay. So just really quickly, if if they didn't to believe in in what the, you know, that they had something, it would be very unlikely that they did this. And the only way that that, you know, if if if they were real scientists who decided they wanted to turn to fraud and and try to, like, collect whatever money they could and then disappear for the rest their lives. Right? well, maybe, but that would be an incredibly stupid thing to do.

so I, I, I think I'm, I think it is almost certain that they they have high belief that they really have it.

Yeah. And we talked about it before, that there's a willingness to collaborate and and do I don't know if you have the sense to to to to message or DM here back on LinkedIn. if you gotta reply, but there's at least a willingness to, like, stand behind what they believe in. what they believe in is the full, the holy grail, which we're gonna talk about some applications next.

Yeah. I've submitted a list of questions and so waiting to hear back on those from him, and agree to your previous point Eli, it the least likely outcome in in my mind is that it's blatant fraud. It it is, it it's fraud very poorly executed. Like like you said, it's it's so easily disproved, that It it doesn't make any sense. I I I feel that they personally have very strong convictions in what they've measured.

you know, whether or not those measurements are executed correctly, or if there's just, a series of unfortunate, like hypnosis and in their procedures that they have somehow made measurement mistakes that that's, I think, much more likely than the outright broad case.

So I I wanna add that we have several folks kind of, training this effort to to bring you all of this kind of verify timeline as much as possible. We did post one video that we thought was affiliated with host, Hujang, and then we kinda vector this because, it wasn't affiliated with them. At least, it was like a, a retraction. And I wanna point out that on on the top of the space, I've I've been to Twitter. Like, my my thread talking about some of the folks who are doing the great work of, like, bringing you good and verified news. I wanna shout out, ivory fool.

I think, their work got picked up in some magazines as well. The the the table over there is following at least a few but as much as possible source the replication attempts, and it gets updated very often. there's a similar paper. Sorry. There's a similar table in Wikipedia. It gets update less often. Wikipedia's article is actually very well sourced right now. If you go to LK99, back when we started, like, a couple of days ago, watching this, there was nothing. That was a very well, like, in-depth article. However, as as we said, we're not extremely happy. First of all, some of this looks like lifted directly from my roof.

And second of all, Iris, which, a lot of us attribute the first duplication. And, I know Andrew if if if if you wanna stick on the iris is kind of, on defense here, but, like, when you did the author said that if they add a Russian anime Kim girl to Wikipedia. Like, the whole table will go down, which, you know, personally, I find ridiculous, and I wanna I wanna stand here and say that I think it's is, like, like, attribution should go whether or not, you know, it's the first lap. This is the first one that we saw. However, if you wanna follow along as well, there's a list of folks that have been collecting and, I I I refuse is definitely a a a person to watch.

She updates stable or, sorry, they update the stable, often, and a lot of this is, like, very well sourced. And I think it's also granular there's, like, a bunch of information there. Andrew's there. Iris is there. A bunch of, a Jihua accounts. They go directly, which I can't because I don't know the momentum. So I think we have some folks in the audience who also wanna come up, and I'll try to invite, Robert again. But Andrew. So tomorrow, we, so, is it tomorrow, or are we keeping this on the on the loop? I know after before, but I wanna just verify again.

Yeah. Yeah. We should have the first sample, a, a shorter duration sample at, let's say, 8 to 9 PM Pacific time. And then we'll have the longer duration sample coming out early Friday morning probably 8 AM Pacific.

I will say this, and I've been following this. Like, you guys know, like, all of you on on stage here very closely. I changed my nickname and threw it through, like, wanna believe it. Because at some point, you know, the the excitement that the guard, after they may speak of, like, oh, it's the circle case, etcetera. And I know, like, I'm doing a lot of, public service, and people have told me, like, hey, you, you know, keep on us, and don't don't put your whole reputation on the line, but I'm also here to, like, be positive about the world changing. Most of my day job is I we get folks about AI. We have a space tomorrow to talk about something else. And I jumped in this, like, with with 2 2 Lex because, we're gonna talk about applications next.

And I think we some at least some some time with us. and we're gonna talk with with Joseph as well. The the potential for this is so huge. and the the re the detractions against the theme in Q center, where a lot of this was due to poor kind of quote unquote science process. Right? They're like, the paper release and other paper release was confusing. There's measure they updated the paper because, like, 8th of I said that the copy paste is something that even showed, like, an error in the paper.

The there's a the website went down today there's a whole mess around kind of the process itself, but we're seeing enough evidence of, like, they have something, and that's something is not like any of the stuff that we saw before. And so today or, I guess, yesterday maybe yesterday, maybe today, you guys are losing, a track. we saw a confirmation, including a paper that, while not room temperature conductivity, but that, okay, 99 as as it was, like, written in the pre print paper, is a superconductor.

Not room temperature, so we don't have a confirmation of a room temperature, but we know that it is superconductor. And I think it's also, a Chinese University. And, Eli have seen these results. And, can you talk about the 100 Kelvin compared to type 2, superconductor?

If you guys, double -- Yeah. Sorry about that. Yeah. so so, yeah, I did see the the graph. Right? And it it looks real. And, I I saw actually I was talking about it, and and she said what I've been thinking, going back even to the discussion of grains in the first preprint that percolation, could be going on. Percolation is where you if if you think about, like, dumping a bunch of pine needles down in the paths that would form as they cross each other is is like a really, maybe, oversimplified, description of percolation.

but that explain like, some of the, the, the features of the graphs, there. And it would also yeah. So if if you think about those pine needle lying down, you know, how how far apart they are and how many of them actually, you know, get close enough where you could, you know, think of an electrical contact. if if that's really variable between samples, that would go a long way towards explaining what's going on in terms of difficulty to replicate.

And, the one thing I wanted to talk about here on on the panel, is the 100 Kelvin. So it's our application on the site. by the way, folks, if you wanna see the the scientist, the thing is named Yay, or soon you, there's now been to it on top with, a translation of his live stream. I believe this was from, yeah, 10 hours ago. So to today there was a live stream on Bilibili. I transferred it, put it up, Andrew, sorry, the other Andrew that we have, Andrew Cole, Endercott is his username. I'm dealing with a lot of, names at the moment.

So he also posted this talked about this. So the the folks in, it's not used. It's, the part of physics at Southeast University. They also raised the paper with graphs, but they also raised, like, a live stream where they, they confirmed essentially that, like, what they see is superconductivity at at low temperatures, not room temperature, a 100, 100 degrees Kelvin. However, and I think, Andrew talked about this delay maybe as well. You have something, the type 2 superconductors, this is at the upper range of type 2 superconductors that we currently have. Is that is that a fair assessment to on on the on the call, the confirmation that they have.

Yeah. No. And, I I mean, if if you think about it, if if this had been discovered and set is instead in, in 1980, I mean, that, that would have been really noteworthy.

And specifically because other superconductors are also rare earth materials and really hard to come by, and the process is is, I actually don't know about the process, but this is led and covering some other stuff. This is like, we have a we currently have a confirmation from, like, a respected, you know, I I don't know if there's fucking audience who who talked against the the the recent kind of, Southeast release. However, and I think it's, I saw some people talking about the percolation and some other stuff. But currently, today, we have a confirmation at LK99 is at least a superconductor that's at least as good as current, superconductors that we have.

However, the process is way simpler, and the materials are way cheaper and, like, way more abundant. Right? It's okay. If we stop today and stop, like, confirming everything and everything else goes to but, if this specific thing replicates, this is this is great news. and I think in perfect timing, perfect timing, I think while he comes up, and and, and his microphone and connection is connecting. We've been trying to get, Robert Bell wave on stage. And, I think we can hear you, Robert.

Hey, Robert. Hi.

Can you hear me? I think you need to press Yes.

We can hear you. Oh, meeting. So sorry, guys. I didn't realize, Thank you so much for No problem. No problem. I didn't realize that this this whole speaking thing didn't work on a laptop. I've been, I've been watching my laptop and really wondering why why can't I why can't I speak? But I worked it out.

Thanks. for first time folks. I would love for you to introduce yourself. And then, if we can have a brief conversation about, like, you know, generally the stuff and then the recent events, feel free.

Sure. so hi, everyone. Good to good to be here. Thanks for the invite. so my name is Robert Palgrave. I'm from, University College London. I I kind of trained as a chemist, but I'm really a materials chemist, or you could say material scientists. So I work a lot with, solid state materials, solid state is, thin film deposition, actually. You were mentioning that a little bit earlier. I probably spent the 1st 10 years of my scientific career doing different different kinds of thin film deposition. and yeah, I I'm, you know, as fascinated as you guys are by this this, development. I mean, I'm not a expert in super connectivity.

I've never studied super connectivity before, but, my angle was really just looking at the the synthesis, the way they did this reaction, the the kind of chemistry of it, and, you know, having having a look around there, especially authorization side, you know, they've they've made this, material with perhaps amazing properties, but I think as, Andrew was saying earlier, they don't really know what it is, and I think we still don't really know what it is, which, for me, it's kind of the interesting part because because that that's the kind of stuff I work on.

so I I have a question for you, Robert. you know, there was, this I think part of the patent was a chemical vapor deposition. There was a a a an addition to the patent on chemical vapor deposition. Can you speak a little bit about, like, you know, CVD? Why why why did why did the team kind of divert into looking at CVD so quickly? What are the uses of CVD or thin film? Like, what what would what would they end up using? you know, CVD deposited superconductivity for.

I just wanna clarify real fast. The the patent is dealing with a a physical paper deposition. It's a a thermal, deposition process.

Yeah. I think that was right. I would I would I would look at was gonna think maybe I missed that. So so chemical vapor deposition is definitely a thing, and it's a very versatile technique, but I think I think you're right. Yeah. What what I saw in the pattern, at least, and in fact in a paper in the first preprint, they, they talked about physical vapor deposition. So I mean, the lots of kinds of physical vapor deposition. The simplest one is you just kinda heat something up and it evaporates and then it condenses on your substrate, the thing you wanna make the film on. And if you, get the conditions right, then you can grow a lot of different materials that way.

Normally, you would have to do it in in a vacuum and and kind of perhaps even a true high vacuum or even ultra high vacuum environment in order to stop stop the thing that you're evaporating, reacting with the atmosphere that it's passing through. but yeah, it's a pretty versatile technique. with thermal evaporation, you know, you can you can deposit quite a wide range of materials, so it makes sense to try that you you simply get your material that you, made out of the furnace, you know, in the way that I guess they described and put it on you know, put it into your vacuum chamber and then heat it up and you get you get a thin film perhaps.

Now, there's a lot of questions there. So is the thin film the same thing that you, put in at the bottom of the of the deposition chamber? In many cases, it won't be. There's lots of opportunities for for chemical reactions to happen, because, you know, you're providing a lot of heat and you're putting it in a high vacuum environment. So things can evaporate. things can change chemically, and you definitely need to do a lot of characterization on that thin film to see if it's the same thing as you put in at the bottom. And it's not by any means guaranteed that it will be.

So as far as I've seen, everywhere I've looked, I haven't seen a single bit of characterization on anything film, So that's definitely something that's that's needs needs to be filled in.

2nd, just Well, okay. So so they they did do their their resistivity measurements on the thermally, deposited thin films in the first paper.

Oh, Paul. Yeah. Yeah. No. No. You're exactly right. Apologies. I wasn't very clear. I meant, you know, chemical or structural characterizations. So so something to say that the the the thin film that they made is the same as LK99, the the material that they got out of the the furnace. yeah, sure. They did the they actually did the resistivity here exactly right, I think. but in terms of structural characterization, I mean, it could be something completely different. we really need to find out. So you know, that's, that's that's a, I think, a big task, you know, ahead of anyone who wants to do that. And also just just getting that deposition to work, I think very few details of how they did it. Maybe no details at all of the condition.

So, you know, the pressure, the temperature, was the substrate heated or not? How far away was the substrate from the, from the source of the material? All of these things are gonna be you know, something that you would need to fine tune a lot to get a, to get a decent film.

Yeah. What and I was in the my reading of the patent, I was just going through my mental checklist of, you know, what would I need to know to replicate this, and there's a lot of missing variables. The substrate is simply referred to as class. Yep. There's or definition, the temperature is listed from 900 to 2000 Celsius.

And I, perhaps we can throw it up on the, the jumbotron, but there's a figure in the patent's figure 6 that shows actually a gradient that's being deposited from white, light gray, dark gray to black, it appears as though it's being plating out, gradually, and they don't say where the, SEM figures are actually sampled from, and where the Xrd is coming from, there's obviously differing compositions. And it's not homogeneous in the least. And so who knows what the compositions are of all of these, different regions?

Yeah. A 100%. I mean, I think I think in general, that's sorry. Go go ahead. What's the more what's the more you wanted to say?

well, I just I just wanna write it down.

besides -- the way you're you're breaking up a little bit for me. I'm not sure if for other speakers as well, but -- Uh-uh. Okay.

Let me get my line.

I'll I'll do it. Yeah. Go ahead. I will say, Andrew, can you can you take a look and see if I posted the right thing? The the button, on the jam return? And, Drew, maybe you some. Maybe I'll highlight connecting the interest. Yeah. I hear you fine.

Oh, there you are. There you are. That's it.

That's the right one. Awesome.

So so, yeah, so I just wanted to mention, on on the LinkedIn slide, he he talks about, quote, chromatographing it on it into a film. and analyzing portions of the film. So we know there's a variation. Okay.

yeah, I mean, I think I think in general for this whole, you know, the the whole field, there's a lot of work to be done on on characterization of these things So, and I think I think this this really goes to what you guys were speaking about a little bit earlier with all the all the DFT work that's been coming out that DFT work really, you know, so Chenay Griffith's papers and all the other papers really relies on a pretty accurate model of what this material is. because that's what they have to input into their into their calculations.

So if you don't if you're getting the raw material, if you're putting in the raw material, you're gonna be spending a lot of computational resources calculating something which is not actually the the material of interest. So I I still think there's very fundamental questions unanswered is the copper actually doping into the lead appetite in the way that they say it is? I don't see any evidence and experimental evidence as stated it is. seems very speculative. Is the copper even doping into the lead appetite at all? I think that's still a little bit open. I'm not I'm still not completely convinced that it that it actually does.

what what what is the rest of the sample? So in the pattern, they do actually do a little bit of, quantitative analysis of the Xrd, which is the only one I've actually seen. and there they show that that about percent of the sample slightly over 50% of the sample is actually not the lead appetite phase. So it's not 50% is is other stuff. and they they talk a little bit about what the other stuff is, but I think one of their labels is copper and other copper containing phases. So and not not not particularly.

And we we don't know for certain that there's only one, copper doped lead appetite phase.

Right?

Yeah. I mean, it does I mean, the Xrd, some of the studies do look like, you know, reasonably the the peaks look like there's probably only one appetite phase there. I mean, you might expect if there were, you know, example, a few different copper doping of the appetite, they might be have slightly different lattice parameters that cause the peaks to shift a little bit, and that would just make the peaks kind of double up. look a little bit asymmetric maybe. and I didn't didn't really see that, but, you know, I'm just kinda eyeballing the stuff. I think some of the stuff are being some of the points myself and others have been trying to make on Twitter is really just kind of eyeballing XID patterns is not not the best.

you you kind of have to that, you know, there's there's ways to do the analysis, and those ways have been known for, you know, that 40, 50 years, I'd say. so you know, just just kind of staring and thinking, oh, that looks a little bit like this pattern is is you you can do. We can do a lot better as a as a scientific community, and and I think that's that's probably certainly the next step that I'd be interested in, you know, what, who who can make a good sample is, and actually, you know, have the the yours in, in Xrd analysis in order to, to work out convincingly what this stuff is.

We we work with, titanium dioxide photo catalyst primarily, but our team, you know, we're dedicated to developing what we call essentially, AG API, if you will. So we're really interested in building this ability to model and predict different physics domains and different results and so on. We start with quantum mystery. our team is about 10 people, full time equivalents, 20 plus contractors. We have X Sandia Labs, ex, Oakers National Labs, people, you know, focusing on condensed matter physics and superconducting physics and so on.

what we've been doing is really sort of thinking and taking a step back and figuring out how do we actually improve the existing computational matter, modeling of the system Given the sort of problems that you pointed out, Robert. Right? So, like, we're also, you know, not too impressed with, like, the characterization that's been done so far because essentially, there's a lot of hand waving, I believe, that's going on in trying to guess at the crystal structure.

I remember the on paper with, Cindy Griffin, you know, that she posted a few days ago, the biggest problem that we saw there was that it assumes an ordered structure and there's nothing based on the existing synthesis process that was reported for us to believe that this is an order system in the first place. So one of the first things that we're doing is trying to enumerate over a larger configuration space of like what other sort of configurations can we have with the copper doped in the lead appetite system? What would that crystal structure look like and what would its values be?

So We're currently looking at, like, all the standard measurements, like local density of states, charge density, and so on and so forth, just throw it in there. but, yeah, certainly it's frustrating the lack of characterization on this.

I mean, I think something that as far as I know, I mean, that sounds like a great a great way forward. Something that I I don't think I've seen in any of the DFT papers. I know that I think there's maybe 4 DFT papers out now, is that a an assessment of the stability of copper in lead appetite just compared to to lead appetite on his own. So they all look at, or at least some of them look at, you know, the stability of copper on different lead sites within the appetite, but they're all assuming the copper is there. They're only comparing, you know, copper dope things with copper dope things and saying, oh, this one's more stable.

But what I what I think would actually be really useful from DFT, and it could probably do it now is to see, is it energetically feasible copper to even go into this stuff in the first place, to even go into the, the replace lead in, in the appetite system, because if they calculate it, it's actually massively unstable for it to be there.

That's probably a good indication that it's not going where, you know, the just wanna make sure that the audience gonna attract a little bit as I'm trying to. You guys are amazing, and I'm so happy that this is actually happening. Robert DFT is the simulation part. Right? It's not hey.

Let's replicate the material.

Yeah. So -- -- and actually see it under microscope. Difty is like, we put a computer.

We give the parameters. Yeah. Alex, if you're talking, we can't hear you.

I I think, somebody goes, like -- -- rejoin Ellie. Yeah. We can hear Alex.

Yeah. I could, like, I could do that.

Yeah. Sorry. Yeah.

DFT is dent is density, density functional theory. That's the same theory you guys were talking about a little bit earlier in the in the space. If people are there. And that's what Shanae Griffiths and a few other, I think there's 3 of these papers now. It's a computational method that uses very high performance computers. it's basically quantum mechanics in a box that you take. You put your atoms in a box and you apply quantum mechanical equations with a lot of simplifications and it spits out a whole load of properties it calculates, what the most stable arrangement is it calculates, you know, the electronic structure, how the electrons are arranged in the material, and it can tell you a whole load of useful properties. so yeah, it's not it's not an experiment.

I think I think someone referred to it as playing video games earlier on, and as experimental chemist, I kind of, laughed because that's what I say to my theory colleagues, but it's actually incredibly powerful technique, and it's much more powerful than it was even 10 years ago. so yeah. So it is the kind of vital vital talk for material science.

Couldn't agree more, Robert. In fact, if you're interested in, so we're live tweeting, are current, you know, DFT simulations, we're using VOS, to figure out exactly what you were talking about. You know, we're interested in, are there even thermodynamically, favorable configurations of copper, dope lead appetite. So we're comparing it with normal, you know, non copper dope lead appetite versus the change in the formation energy so on and so forth, with, copper dope, lead appetite. I just posted in the billboard here, I guess. Like, I just reply to, Alex's original thing.

and, you know, just wanted to add some more context for, you know, anyone who might not know, where DFT comes from. Right? So, you know, originated in the fifties, and the initial thinking happened in the fifties, some of the papers came out in the sixties. The idea was to essentially find an approximation the many body shrodinger equation.

Because, just passed around 1935, Paul Durak, you know, determined that if you could actually solve the find the exact wave function for any solution of the Metibody Showding equation representing whatever crystal structure material you're interested in, you could derive many of the sort of material properties that you're interested in. But, of course, calculating the exact function solution for many body shielding equations for systems that are even remotely, physically relevant, as patiently intractable. And so that's where, yeah, this TFT sort of comes in.

and, yeah, it could be -- A question on the simulation. deepen, Robert, and you guys don't mind, kind of, to to bring you back to to popular side level, if you will, the simulations that are happening now maybe potentially quicker to maybe see some of the effects. However, you know, obviously, replication is happening, experiment happening. We'll see a result fairly quick. Right? Like, Andrew's about to to pop his, Kion opened. There's multiple labs. They already kind of confirmed them.

Like, we're waiting for some visual effect or the visual compared for local, like, actual, like, huge labs with papers that, like, replicate and say that what we have you know, let's hope that it is is a room temperature conductor. Is it even helpful to then start optimizing this, like, crazy to bring this to production to actually put in applications. What what what is the FTE use besides, what are you using right now for, and what do you see these simulations used for this specific material or this specific process going forward?

Yeah. That's I love that question, Alex. the way that we're thinking about it is that, you know, we're closely monitoring replication attempts, particularly any characterizations of the crystal structure that has more light on it so that we can make the DFT calculations more accurate At Genmat, we work on something called the inverse design problem, which is that given a set of target material properties, let's say, ban gap information energy just to pick 2. let's say you're interested in working backwards and figuring out what combination of chemical compositions and Chris structures would give you these properties.

That's where I think, you know, some of these efforts, especially, truly using generative models combined with DFT, will be really helpful. So let's say we have successful replications across the board, and we find out that, okay, this process is very finicky, slightly in here, what we could do is and look at is are there better substitutions, better dopants? Is there something even better than the lead appetite system? Again, assuming that we can properly model it completely.

Awesome. And, Robert, I would love to, your take on the wrong. you are, where do you see the fees going? You said it's like, way better than, 10 years ago when it's not more like it's not no longer a game at this point. talk to us about how exciting is is once we get confirmation, hopefully, we get confirmation.

Yeah. I mean, d DFT is, mean, I I don't I don't do DFT myself, but I work very closely with people who do, and it's, you know, it's it's extremely powerful. It it's coming from something, I would say 10 years ago, which could kind of support experiment, to to some place now where where, as we just why DFT can really lead experiments. So you can make, you know, a huge number of predictions using DFT, and then, you know, the experiment is say, okay, I'm gonna pick, the the good ones and go and make them in reality. So, in this case, I mean, it's actually probably gone the other way around in in the experiment has led because the experimental results of our system come from theory, it came from experiment.

But, you know, DFT then experiment or theory and experiment say, more more widely are, very much, you know, of equal footing now. If you see a DFT paper that predicts something, and it's from a reliable group, then, you know, it's probably right. so whether whether that thing can actually be made in reality, there may be some other issues, but, Yeah. I think DFT will have an important role there, and it might be, you know, that once we understand, why this works, there's gonna be a lot of new physics here if this is genuine, it might be that, you know, the lead appetite, dirt, copper, isn't is not the optimum system. There may be many better ones.

Once we understand the idea, we might be able to then go and design for, to to find the same structure to find this thing, kind of arrangement of Athens, which will give us maybe even even better properties with, you know, maybe maybe much more useful. So, I wouldn't I wouldn't necessarily go and put all your money in lead and copper stocks right now, then maybe, it might not be that comes out at the end. but sorry sorry if you guys already have. but, you're probably okay for now. You're probably okay for now. but you know, I think that there's there's a long a long way to go with this.

I wouldn't necessarily see this material as the one thing that's gonna be that's gonna be realized, but if it's true, it's a massive breakthrough, and it's, gonna gonna spur on a whole load of of new research for for decades to come, I would think.

So so just just to add to that, about, let's see, about 1 a half hours ago, Korean media, I have, dropped a, email interview with JunTech Kim, where, he basically he says, like, I believe the characterization is done. And, you guys can go and check, and the other overseas groups can check. and that he's willing to assist people who are doing the characterization, but he himself has moved on to researching new substances.

Wow. Okay.

So so, I'm gonna I'm gonna drop that. I'm gonna drop that to the to the to the to the Yeah.

At the at the the jumper tone, please. We wanna follow, and thank you, 8 to 5 for breaking news. And, like, I I wanna ask Robert. Robert, you, you're looking at this. You're saying if this replicates, less space we had, and I think this was way before I think and iris, Alexandra, showed us some of the complication attempts in the living room. And then definitely before the host is to than some other folks. And I think before Shanann released the the DFT paper, folks gave, percentages. I'm not gonna put you on the spot. sentages, but I I do wanna ask you specifically, what do you need to see to get to?

We have a room temperature to to conduct like, in our hands with the material? What what else needs to be done?

Well, I mean, for me, as a not not a superconductor person, hard for me to judge, you know, is the current, you know, resistivity capacity measurements, or or do we need more? It's kinda hard for me to say anything, you know, basically a layman's a layman's answer to that. what I what I'd wanna see, you know, if we do get something is we we need to throw every bit of characterization at the I'm still pretty doubtful that the explanation that came up within the -- -- characterization sorry to interrupt.

Yeah.

Sorry. Sorry. So what sorry. What I'm what I mean is, okay, let's let's let's, you you use something that I may be setting an earlier week. If you if you wanna, if you design a new material that does a fantastic thing, you know, for example, room temperature, superconductor, what you wanna know about that material from a chemistry, material science point of view is what atoms is it made of? So what elements are in there? You know, is it? lead, oxygen, phosphorus, copper, etcetera. And secondly, where those atoms are in the space to how they're range. So first one's called the composition, the elemental composition, the chemical composition, and effect one's called the structure.

So if you know those 2 things, then thanks to, you know, what we've already been talking about, all these theories that we have, all these conversational power, we can know, you know, almost gonna say everything, but almost everything about the material. You know, if you just understand those 2 things. But at the moment, we don't as far as I'm concerned, we don't understand either of those things about this material. We don't know what elements it contains for sure because actually what they produce is a mixture of a whole load of different stuff. and they haven't really put much attention into understanding what elements are there. And secondly, we don't know the structure.

They came up with some the decent x-ray diffraction, which is like the gold standard really method for understanding structure, understanding how atoms are arranged in in space. But the way they interpreted it is like, you know, I would say, not not not an not at a high level, there's there's a lot more stuff that they could do. They kinda looked at the pattern and say, well, it looks a little bit like this, and then that that's kinda it.

there's there's many, many levels of analysis you could do above that, which will give you very detailed quantitative, you know, numerical information about the the structure and measuring the exact bond distances, measuring the exact composition, the exact arrangement of the atoms, all of these things, which would give you, you know, that that level of detail that we need. So I think in terms of composition, you know, why elements are there, structure, how are they arranged. We don't really know the answer. so that's that's, we're we're basically a point 0 in understanding this this material from a chemistry point of view. I can't really speak about a superconductor. If it's a superconductor, it's a superconductor.

That's amazing, you know. But there's a there's a long way to go in climbing this hill to understand what the material it is. But that's that's kind of fine because if if it's a superconductive, it really is, and people can replicate it. The superconducting properties then every lab in the world is gonna wanna do this. You know, every lab in the world is gonna wanna spend time on it.

So it will get down. Yeah. Sure. Could you please continue with every lab and given the fact that we've seen replications happening in, like, living rooms, and the materials are way cheaper than previous superconductors. Can you start us on the path and then folks on the state will join as well of what this actually means? Like, many folks here for superconductors maybe for the very first time in their lives. Some of them may be, you know, heard from us in previous places, you know, MRIs, MRIs, but, you know, fusion there's all this, like, very space tech and, like, forward. Could you talk at least about some stuff?

And then everybody else can also jump in and, like, what does this actually mean science, what does this actually mean to have a superconductor with these cheaper materials with this ease of kind of baking, given that it replicates and given it's, like, applicable in you know, wire form, let's say.

Sure. Sure. well, I mean, I I think a few, you mentioned a few of the technical samples, I'm I'm definitely not an expert in in applying superconductors to to real life technology, but, you know, all the examples you gave are great, and they're gonna be you know, revolution in lots of different technologies. From a science point of view, I think what we will learn a lot because if this is a superconductor, it's a new kind of super it's not the same kind of sequel activity we've seen in other materials because it just doesn't it doesn't behave the same way, and it doesn't have the same kind of structures that we've seen before.

So we will definitely learn a lot of new physics from this, because we will understand you know, that electrons can actually behave in a in a in a way that we hadn't really considered before in structures that we hadn't really thought about before. So I think I'll I'll probably leave it there because I don't wanna talk too much about the technology that I don't really know too much about, but certainly for physics, there's gonna be lots of knock on effects that we probably can't even, you know, contemplate at the moment, maybe in completely different you know, ideas from this could spring up in all sorts of different areas of physics and just revolutionize things that we don't even know.

We don't even kind of think of at the moment in in 10 years' time. So If it's true, you know, that that's that's gonna be one of the the big impacts, I think.

yeah, I was just gonna add to what Robert said, especially the new physics point. I think that's super important. Other domains impacted. the most recent example I can think of is the S YK model, the severe, severe E Cative model. is a statistical mechanics model, that is essentially used to describe strange metals. So strange metals is a phase of matter that shows up with certain superconducting materials that happens right before you enter the superconducting phase. It's a very, very poorly stead phase of matter.

SYK is fascinating because, essentially, this statistical model of physics that, you know, at least describes for certain, you're able to, analytically calculate, you know, the ground state of this SYK model, which you know, generally correlates in various different excited states and so on and so forth. You can sort of predict or useful make useful predictions of strange matter, if you will, or strange metals is the accurate term for it.

Now the mind blowing part is that the S YK model was discover to also, essentially capture the physics of 2 dimensional, a k, 1 dimensional black hole with 1 mentioned black hole physics. So the sort of implication there, right, and of course, this is still speculative, because these kinds of black holes don't exist. implication is that a lot of the sort of physics that are happening condensed matter systems might actually be occurring right, at at the black hole level or be useful for understanding that.

So that's just an example, you know, to add to Robert's point where discovery of one kind of interesting phase of matter has affected how we think about astrophysics. and I can absolutely see something like occurring here. If these superconductors are real, then it basically implies exactly as Robert was saying that there are you know, unknown mechanisms because we know, you know, there's no way that electron phone on coupling, for example, in Cooper Pairs. are occurring in this kind of material. Right? So we know that has to be something else.

We also know that even till today, since the discovery of the high temperature superconductor with, Ben Norris and Alex Mueller back in the 80s out of IBM. Since then, you know, 40 plus years later, We still have no statistical physics model.

And I could -- Just so to direct, I I would say thanks to Robert, because he needs to go to go start to drop in. I I -- Oh, yeah.

No worries.

Robert. Yeah. Thanks so much, Robert. -- tell you. Thanks. And if you wanna add some stuff before you leave, feel free. but, folks definitely give Robert the follow-up. Robert, will we see more of, like, more from you and, Feel free to -- Yeah.

Yeah. Thanks. Thanks. Thanks. Thanks so much, Jean. Bye. Yeah. We we may or may not have some ovens running at the moment with stuff in, but you'll, you're you're hearing due course, hopefully.

Let's go. Alright. Thanks. That's cool.

The last for joining us.

Oh, yeah. I think we're added you to the to the group yet. So feel free to, you know, we have Andrew. We have, iris there. Feel free to, like, run ideas by there, and then definitely be good this is why we're here for, and I appreciate you for calling. so I I I do wanna I I do wanna and Deep, I'll I'll get back to you in a second because Robert did tell me, hey, the stuff that you covered are great. And we did talk with Andrew previously about, about several applications. And one of them that I do wanna talk about and maybe pop in stage also is the current state of energy in the current stage of fusion reactors.

So one of the current uses of a superconductor as we know them today, right, is you, the the first one, the the older one is used in, tokamak reactor, which is, like, one the biggest ones, and then, it looks like helium energy. The guys that, some, I think, Sam Altman is is backing, and they are supposed to give us something. I I I'm sure the healing energy is, like, scamming. Like, they are not not only Robert and folks on stage have kilns running, I'm sure that folks in healing energy also have stuff running. healing energy essentially moves plasma with magnets. This is kind of how they do this. It's way more than this. Right?

But, like, they have a very nice popular video. If you'd like to understand, like, the, I think, 6 generation of, of, fusion energy and, they essentially move plasma magnets to generate energy. What I heard somebody re referred to, and I I don't remember the exact quote, is that at some point, Right? At some point, right now, it's, the energy that they need to use to run this reactor way is way, way bigger than what they're able to get out of part of the big part of the reason potentially is the magnets that they need to have, like, very, very strong magnets or very a lot of current.

So they actually need to put a lot of energy in to get energy out, but the process is clear. Like, we know how to do this. They know how to do this. And at some point, like, the, the person who reported in this it's boring to even see kind of the flash of the energy that happens when, like, the 2 plasma rings combine and get energy. So This is current. This is what happens today. And even back then, even 8 months ago, Helen Energy said, hey, this is, like, the older format of our reactor.

now we're talking about the potentially, like, way cheaper and way easier and, like, and cheaper because just just to, like, make it very clear, cheaper because the materials that go into LK99 are way cheaper than the previous superconductors, which require like rarer materials, but also because, if, again, if we're getting to the replication, which I'm getting mis incontinence, also because the the the energy to to kinda keep them, super cool to the current, type 2 superconductors, the energy that's required to keep them super cool, and I think pressure as well is also part of the overall number.

And so we're looking at a potential of increasing significantly the ability to generate energy with fusion. And somebody explained this to me, and I'm at at some point, my, like, brain broke you know, the the exploding head emoji. When they told me that, like, at some point, fusion reactors can get to self sustaining. process self sustaining. So the fusion reactor can generate more energy that's required to run it, but also then keep generating this energy. And all, essentially, you'll need is, like, materials and maintenance, etcetera. And that's insane. And so this broke it for me. I was like, fuck. Okay.

So so we were dealing with climate change and potentially now we're looking at a potential solution for a lot of engines in right Well, and some of it was like pulling up.

-You have to stress that, you know, energy has has caught, you know, our the way we've obtained energy has being much of how we've caused climate change. But, if if we had, like, 0 emissions tomorrow, there's so much carbon dioxide in the atmosphere that would continue to drive continued heating, for for a long, long time I won't get into the details, but some of the ipcc, predictions on on how fast that comes out of the atmosphere, might be questionable. I'll just leave it at that.

But either way, we have got the mess that we've made for centuries still in the atmosphere.

And who -- Wait. Hold on. Hold on. so so I I appreciate your comment. This was not the point I was trying to make. And so won't be real and go through, like, a climate change account. There could be potential new applications there. I'm just talking about the current stuff that we have, the current little current technology that we have that's using superconductors right now that this materializes, like, potentially fairly quick because you know, quick quick to produce, quick to test. I don't know about application. I don't know about Wikipedia replicas, etcetera. But the current technology right now for generating energy, the it's not feasible energy wise, and this potentially will be. I also wanna say hi to Joseph. Joseph is joining us via VPN.

I hope you're still here. thanks for thanks for holding, man.

Joseph was -- I'm still here.

I'm enjoying this so much. Oh, thank you. Joseph has been on stage for work And, why don't you introduce yourself, be briefly, and then talk to us about in a different application, then we couldn't even think of the you started. And then, yeah, please please take us take us forward.

Hi, everyone. My name is Joe Douglas. I'm an industrial designer. I focus mostly on innovation and consumer end products. I've been CEO of Machine Learning Companies, but I've also been a CTO and engineering resident, at manufacturing companies producing large scale electronic art installations and motors. I currently work in electromagnetic micro mobility design, specifically next gen electric unicycles. very weird, but my introduction to this space comes from my previous work in small scale magnetic levitation and control systems.

And around 2015, 2016, we were designing subsurface, omnidirectional magnetic robots. that could control things above the surface via an omnidirectional magnetic attractor that would drag essentially an object from a to b. This has applications in manufacturing, but it also has applications in more consumer spaces like factory layout, warehouse layout, home layout for the mobility impaired, etcetera.

But what I wanna talk about today is actually commercializing LK99 or a derivative of LK99, LK99, assuming it's a viable ambient pressure, room temperature, superconductor.

So when I think about this, the way that I think about it is that it has less to do with whether or not it's a real thing and more to do with, is it a manufacturable thing that can be produced in a high enough yield with a yield rate of a viable yield rate that is high enough to justify the manufacturing such as retooling such okay. So yield in the context of manufacturing, not the context of the core physics, like the fundamental I'm not talking about that.

Other people are smarter than me, like Andrew, have spoken to their approach to yield from a production standpoint of producing the material I mean, manufactureable yield. once you have an actual material, say you had, copper dope lead appetite and it's it works. then you have to design a a research and development procedure that determines, can this be integrated into our existing system? like our electronic system, our motor system, our generator, whatever.

Then you have to go through design exploration and validate and then you have to go to manufacturing manufacturing production design, meaning you design the method of of modifying the material into a form that fits the needs of your application. And then you have to go into subcomponent manufacturing, insulation, maintenance, and repair. So that loop, that has to happen for every potential commercial application of this technology if the technology is viable in the first place. And that takes a long time from design to design validation, to design freeze, to manufacturing, to commercialization.

And depending on the results that we get from the fundamental research as to whether or not this is something that actually is producible using standard, like, thermal definite thermal deposition methods, like, or thermal thermal physical vapor deposition methods, that determines whether or not this can be produced in coils that determines whether or not this can be used for superconducting coding coatings. And that determines whether or not that this whether or not this can be used as gates in between other electronic components.

And if it is something that can be produced with thermal physical physical vapor deposition, then it can be integrated into another process to apply that thermal physical vapor deposition onto another component, and all of that process has to get worked out at the R and D stage at multiple points. So there's the R and D stage at the fundamental level, of whether or not this is producible in the first place.

And then there's the R and D phase within the commercial entity that determines, is this producible and applicable to the system that we already have up, or do we have to retool and reengineer our manufacturing plant Or do we have to re re reengineer the core product that this is being a fixed 1, 2? So in the context of, like, say you're using this in aerospace And Defense. You'd be applying like a superconducting coating, on top of, like, on top of other sensors. or inside of a sensor stack.

And the results that you get from the lab determine whether or not that's viable in the first place, and then you have to determine how that fits into your existing manufacturing supply chain, your manufacturing process, and the supply chain.

Now So, Joe, I wanna say one thing you're saying, you have to. You have to. And, like, this is a matter of speaking English. Right? Like, when you talk to the person, like, you have to is an example. However, I wanna highlight this one very important point, and then let you continue, is that once we have a type of material like this, right? let's say all of the stuff that you said are applicable that is, like, reproducible as as much, etcetera. capitalism turns on recession is is fixed. Like, every every, like, so much money is going to get poured into It's not gonna be like one you doing all the things. Right? This, like, this scales up significantly.

There's so much that's restricted by just pure energy that just the energy transfer alone cheaper is gonna make so many things better. But you're thinking about, like, other more advanced stuff. Right? So not only the energy production, but then she's gonna be cheaper or trap of energy is gonna get, like, less lossy. There's more new stuff that's happening. So, so, what's possible that wasn't possible before, Joe? That's that's what I wanted you on stage for.

Okay. What's possible that wasn't possible before are superconductive coatings for turbine generators that can reduce energy loss dramatically. That can increase efficiencies by 15, 20%. And the reason that I brought up all the other things that you have to do is because when it comes to implementation, you're in a battle between efficiency and cost of implementation to acquire said efficiency.

So if that efficiency is marginal 1 or 2% then a manufacturing plant manager or a procurement officer at the US Navy may decide that this may not be worth it. But if it's in the area of 10 to 15%, then they can justify the cost of implementation. And the cost of implementation is usually 1 to 2 years of the benefits of that new newfound efficiency.

So it's not just about new efficiencies that are created, it's about how do those new efficiencies compare to the cost of acquiring those new efficiencies, and it's also about, as opposed to efficiency it's about new capabilities. So new capabilities are very hard to price. and there are things that people advocate for, and that's where all that new R and D money and all of the floratory development money really goes. It's towards acquiring those new capabilities. So if you could acquire new capabilities that that improve the range of a radar sensor by 50% that's it's worth it to make that investment cost.

If you can reduce if you can have if you can have a thin film superconducting component for a consumer device, like, that would go into your battery and increase the longevity of your battery by 20% and make the concept, thermal runaway completely impossible because, yeah, you're not there's no loss, there's no additional heat, So your lithium ion battery doesn't have any thermal runaway, components that are intrinsic to the battery outside of may major damage. that increases the safety of an electric vehicle. And, you know, all of those things are -- Safety and range. -- safety and range.

So, like, safety and range are because lithium ion, lithium ion is, like, way way more expensive than copper on that. I don't I wanna get to, thanks, man. I I wanna get to, Did you have a hand up? And before before you get, to the stage, I wanna say this, like, one. In addition to what we're seeing for the password back days. It was 5 days or 7 days. the guys told us they worked on this for 20 years. Like, okay, 99 more than 20 but in addition to working with last 5 days, for the past year, I, as a person, got, like, superpowers in the eye. Right?

So it's just just literal superpowers in preparing all this to understanding some of the science that's involved in in, like, translating Korea and, like, all of these things, I was able to do throughout all of this. and kind of talk to people at their level just because I have, like, 2 friends in AI. so I don't want to turn this into AI space. That's tomorrow. You guys are welcome to join that. However, we're now meeting a potential exponential curve. I I don't even know if this is exponential. The the the the adds to existing exponential curves that we have in AI and hardware.

And that hardware is technically also improved by power consumption and and and significantly so. think, somebody talked about logic, logic gates. I I don't know who that who that was. gates, just to give you guys an example, the the the field that Deep is going to talk in a second about the runs on, like, GPUs, how revolution this could get. Jensen from Nvidia, the guy that, you know, is down the running, a trillion dollar company, Oh, oh, yeah. 8 to 5. I want to say goodbye, and then I'll continue to have a long speech ahead, 8 to 5.

you wanna -- Okay. I I'll I'll just say, thanks for having me. it's been very exciting. and, yeah, I'm I'm I'm excited. let's see. Let's see if I can squeeze out another another another report for tomorrow.

Cheers. I will say I will say this for folks in the audience, at the I, I followed you, like, from the start here, and you floated the idea of, like, maybe writing a book or write a book that I I think that this is, but in potentially, right, like, where we're seeing more and more cases there. It's so big that the order, that's, like, is gonna be murky. Many people are gonna do their own pay I love your takes, folks forward to find it if I do this, man. This is gonna be very interesting. Thank you. Yeah. Yeah. Go ahead.

Awesome, Alex. you yeah. You know, the computing side, I think it's gonna change superconducting will change computing drastically. Right? So, like, for example, take today's best quantum computers like Reghetti, IBM, Google Sycamore chip. These are all based on superconducting, architectures. And one of the biggest problems with these superconducting architectures is the fact that you need to supercool them to Millie Kelvin's, right, thousands of a degree of Fahrenheit, above absolute 0.

And so we can drive down the energy costs of like just, you know, implementing these superconductors, we'll be able to maintain coherence for longer and easier sort of, states, and, that will improve generally just the scalability of these architectures. And what we're gonna end up thing, is a singularity loop. So, you know, what do I mean by a singularity loop? If you have quantum computers that are at scale functioning let's say, tens of 1000.

Deep, you remember, I I did not specifically want to turn this into AI because me and you can go all night, man. Well, once I get to AGI, but that's the end of it. Right? Don't wanna talk about 2019 specifically. But, speed, generally, we're talking about, like, insane, a 100 x, another exponential curve that joins the existing ones that we currently have. And I still don't want to talk to you about the stuff that you're working on because you're doing what?

Material modeling? Exactly.

We do materials modeling and generated -- And you're restricted by GPU power and GPU power is restricted by literal and from the wall.

Right. Ex exactly. You you got it. Talk to us about this. Now the other interesting application though, that I don't think I've heard too many people talk about with superconductors, is with LK99 is the sensor side. So there's a whole class of quantum sensors that are called, in this case, superconducting quantum interference or interferometer devices. These are magnetometers that detect magnetic fields to up anywhere from 1,000,000 to 1 1,000,000,000 times greater sensitivity than magnetometers that you can purchase off the shelf. So, you know, what would that mean, right, for a humanity?

One is that -- please?

Yeah. Well, it's anywhere from 1,000,000 to 1,000,000,000 times more powerful these superconductor.

And then MRI, let's say. yeah, the -- -- what we use currently?

I mean, MRI all already uses superconducting materials, but this class of these are sensors, though.

Right? So Oh, you're talking about, like, sensors outside of okay.

We'll go ahead. Exactly. Like a handheld magnetometer, let's say. Right? Like, you know, how some people will go weekend hunting for pressure, right, with a magnetometer on the beach or whatever look for. Right? So that's the kind of stuff that I'm talking about. We'll get completely revolutionized. That will change our ability to look for Ferromagnetic minerals for mining exploration. It will significantly drop down the cost of mineral discovery.

mining explorations on Earth is like one thing. And and but also there's, like, material out there. And I don't know if Andrew's still here, and if you wanna AC, but, you guys are work you're working on space stuff. How does this, specific area that Deep mentioned? How does this the a 1000 act, let's say, ability to mine an asteroid and the additional energy to come back from it, how does this affect the space industry?

Yeah. The it it would be absolutely revolutionary to be able to utilize resources in situ in orbit so we don't have to drag them up out of the gravity well. You know, we we expend 99.5 percent of the fuel just to get the mass into to orbit and impart that velocity. So you that it is It it it would be absolutely game changing. but my I don't spend a whole lot of time dreaming that far into the future. Unfortunately, I'm, I'm pretty pragmatic in, dealing with the problems of the day.

So my my imagination is limited as to far it could really, take us and what we could do with, you know, that level of capability.

one one point on that is, you know, space is kind of cold, provide an and, the the superconductors that, have already been established, can probably be really useful. It's just a matter of dissipate any heat that builds up as you're using them, which is kind of the the case for a lot of things in space, like the Apollo astronauts, know, they part part of the challenge to keep them alive was actually keeping them cool, when when, the moon is it can get pretty warm.

So sustainable space exploration. Is that what you is that what you're hinting at?

yeah.

I mean, so -- Sustainability of, like, a colony, let's say, somewhere, gets potentially on that.

It it I I I wouldn't say unlocked in in that, you know, we we can we can still have -- I was just talking with you.

sorry, dude. I literally am, just dreaming right now, and I I think at at some point, excitement is okay. But I think also too much excitement maybe is unwarranted at this point, and I interrupted with something that I dreamed of after you just towards because, like, it's really hard for me to contain the excitement. And, I also noticed that, scan the naval is here. he claims that, also, on his profile, it says PG Jin in in, physics. And, oh, Andrew dropped. Oh, I wanna say thanks to Andrew Folkes. We've talked about Andrew before.

Andrew would like tomorrow, and, the next batches will also good luck with them. we're all gonna the Twitch that you're gonna post, and, hopefully, the Excel sheet that you've talked about folks will sign up. And maybe we'll have folks here that will, like, send them your your way. good night, Andrew. Thanks for coming. And, scanning label, you raise your hand up and your profile is interesting. What do you think about all this?

Yeah. Bike check.

Perfect.

Yeah. Go ahead. Yeah. Hi. I I I'm a fin. I did my PhD actually in the early, early 2000, here in Finland on on superconductors, mainly for sensor applications. looking at, mainly old TCE. So we were working at 100 milligrams up to 10 kelvins. so a lot temperatures. But, you know, during that time, I kind of led the ropes on on the super theory, BCS theory and all that.

And I, you know, obviously, I'm working with superconductors, cooling these things down to 100 milligrams was always a pain in the ass, so I would always been interested in high temperature stuff. We're also working on junctions, so this will be, superconnecting insulator and lower metal junctions for, basically quantum cooling. and I I actually happen to know also the founders of QM, which is a Finnish, quantum compute computing company. but, yeah, this this stuff with the Elgin, I think mine has really captured my imagination.

even though I have to say that, you know, I've read having read the original papers, from archive and and some of the more recent ones for from from China. some of the experimental techniques are, how would I say, rudimentary, the the measurement accuracies are pretty miserable. and you could actually get much higher dynamic range in your D measurements. your your current voltage characteristics if you just do it properly. so so the the data is a little bit fuzzy, I would say.

the most recent paper from, from China where they showed this anomalous transition, between 2203 100 Kelvin is clearly a measurement artifact. you can only see one data point on the transition. That's not real. Stupid inductors. They do have a width in the transition. which is basically governed by laws of physics, and that width tends to get larger as you go up in temperature. it's all to do with know, terrible fluctuations. So seeing a transition with no data point or one data point, that's just a that's a glitch. That's not real. So I would get too excited about that.

that said, you know, so I was kind of ready to throw my, you know, throw of our hope, during the weekend, but then these DFT simulations came out and this flatbed evidence, you know, looks promising. it is well, I mean, it doesn't necessarily mean turbulent activity, but it could possibly do. So if the theory side starts to sort of supporting these things and, you know, the 110 kelvins would for TC is pretty respectable. It's pretty high. It's up there, with, it's a new material. It's a new high TC material.

So that by itself, basically justifies, substantial added research on the topic.

yeah. I think we need to, and I completely view Neville. I I would just, like, you know, temper yours and everyone else's expectations. I know you're already super reasonable about this. I I don't see enough efficient evidence, and Robert was saying something very similar earlier that we haven't seen yet from the theory side if copper doped lead appetite is even thermodynamically stable and favorable. So, like, let's first find, you know, thermodynamic the favorable configurations of the copper at 10%, doping, and then, you know, go from there. think that's a big part of, all this.

Yeah. I I I totally agree that, you know, we we are not I don't think it's well understood where where does the copper actually end up in because, you know, the thermodynamics seems to suggest that the place we think it should be. It's not necessarily gonna get there. with respect to applications, I mean, point of computing, yeah, maybe, you know, but, not a quantum, a Cubic expert to say, but what I do know is that, the big orange types in Cubic's, are quite strongly correlated with temperature It's just that your lattice is vibrating like crazy at 300 kilowatts.

And and one of the key problems in quantum computers to coherence time, so that's basically the time that the quantum superposition is held within the qubit, and that gets shorter and shorter, the more kind of, dego hearing interference you get so I wouldn't hold my breath for room temperature chronically bleeding at this stage. The other thing I should say is that my sweeping doctors strictly speaking only maintain 0 resistivity at DC, so very low frequencies. so all the IT applications processor applications. All of those things are pending on on better understanding on the AC losses of of the material.

which has primarily to do with the kind of the way their current gets configured in the superconductor at, non zero frequencies. I worked myself on on super clean sensors.

this could potentially be quite interesting, which is that the most things of electromagnetic sensors we currently have, or have deployed our smoke will transition as microvolometers or calorimeters so at low temperatures, people have developed sensors that get, like, super high x-ray res for X-ray photons by basically measuring the infinitive infinitivemally small temperature rise at the X-ray volt on causes when it gets absorbed in a thermally isolated absorber, and the the thermometer is basically a superconductor that's maintained within within the middle of its transition.

you can do the same thing with power, and that's what it's called kilometers. Belometer is the most common that you are mostly aware of our thermal infrared cameras. the uncooled ones are actually based on micro millimeters, and they use just a high temperature coefficient material, for the transduction. But if you had a superconductor in, maintain its middle of its transition, could well get, you know, an order of magnitude improvement or maybe even more, for thermal cameras. So that's kind of an interesting application. anyway, that's just my 2 sentence. I just wanted to pitch in and thanks for the space.

Thanks. Thanks. Thanks for coming up.

specifically, at the point. Before you go, actually, you mentioned, cooling, could you go into that a little bit?

oh, yeah. Yeah. So if you have a, superconductor that's connected by a tunnel junction into a normal middle, basically when you apply a voltage across that zone junction, you know, if you look at the firmware distribution or the energy distribution of electrons on the normal metal side, most of the electrons reside on the on the fermi level, but as you apply a voltage, a DC voltage across the junction, you're basically global.

So basically the the hottest electrons on the unconventional side have a finite possibility of tunneling across the the juncture barrier to the Supreme actor where they pair as super, as as Cooper pairs or whatever both, you know, both zones stay warm, and that heat is then basically pumped away from the lower middle. and at low temperatures at, you know, in the early late 1990s early 2000, we were able to show, you know, we were able to cool the normal metal by a factor of 3 basically, from 300,000,000 gallons to 100,000,000 kilos. You know, it's not a big delta t, but it's a factor of 3 in temperature.

but it it gets easier at low temperatures of the, the thermal coupling of the electrons, to the lattice is a very weak it's a very strong function of temperature. Also, t t to the 4th, basically. So so so the electron gas in the normal metal gets completely decoupled from the, from the lattice of of of the metal. so it's kind of thermally isolate the electron gas. So you're basically just cooling the electron gas, but it has some applications and sensors potentially content computing. It's actually some of these things are applied in some of the cubits, to bring down their effective temperature and thus increase their this time.

and there's no reason why you you couldn't do that at higher temperatures, but you would have to engineer the thermal bottlenecks. because you can't rely on the electron phone or decoupling at that stage.

Hi, Mike Czech real quick.

Yes. I'm with you.

Good. So one thing I wanted to ask while we have some experts on here. Ben Shindal who is, in this group kind of following this, was talking about the fact that, in, in the paper that a lot of people have criticized from the, southeast university, that they measured both, the resistivity when they were going down in temperature, when they were cooling it and going up, which would seem to me to answer some the questions around whether or not it was just like a measurement issue, but obviously, this is this is not a, not a view on this. Just just wanted to get your all's take on that.

Would that limit any more credence, the idea that, the the the drop in that paper that you saw at, like, I think it was, like, 260 kelvin. W would that one that any more credence, the idea that they checked it both down and up or can temperature affect the way that these probes that measure resistance, like, interact the material, I guess.

Yeah. In principle, that does, bring some more credibility to it. My hunch is that it's a it's a, It's a measurement artifact. So as you go up in temperature or down, you know, there's a, there's a pre amplifier in whatever voltage we did and using. And I'm I'm thinking that it's probably switching switching range there, and there's something wrong with the amplifier on a different range. You know, it's it's all the ranging as we go in in r. and that those things often generate both sort of artifacts unless you and, you know, it could be that the instrument is maybe not working properly or something like that.

But I I I just find it really suspicious that there are no data points because because it would are going they're going down pretty slowly. I mean, if you look at the density of data points on the way down, you know, there's lots of data points there. And and the transition at 110 kelvin is just kind of a reasonably That's what you expect to see. but, you know, this kind of a, you know, you know, completed this continuous drop down down by 2 others of magnitude. I don't -- Right.

Yeah. That that that's what I kinda wanted to get at is that, like, I I just wanted to know what not the fact that they were able to measure it while cooling. And then while heating it back up, measured the exact same thing, if that's explainable from Well, that's, like, from a, a sort of an equipment defect or or a misuse of the equipment, I guess.

Yeah. Well, I mean, you know, the the amplifier is gonna be all arranging at the same voltage level, whether you're going up or down. so it would reproduce the same glitch whether you're going -- Thank you.

Thank you. I've been just wondering about that. Appreciate it.

what what what, by the way, interesting application, I don't think ever anybody has thought about it.

And it's it's not a lot of ideas.

Yes, Stella. You know, I'm excited. Yeah. 20 years ago, So I think we could have aircraft without engines, which is, you know, you could basically introduce hydrodynamic hydro dynamic drag on air. think about an airplane where the leading edge has some sort of apparatus that ionize the air. and then you caught the wings of the aircraft with a superconductor like this. So you can run crazy currents, you know, over the surface of the air pad, you know, the the wing, which would induce hydrodynamic drag on the ionized, you know, air molecules. just that's basically generating thrust.

So I I think that's, that's a pretty cool thing.

So so I I would just wanna ask you my demo itself. the folks are talking about, hoverboards from back to the future. So let's say very low and they, let's say, are based on some magnet spinning or whatever. You're talking about moving ion in the air. I I just wanna make it to no engines on planes, but essentially, just current?

Yeah. I mean, leading edge, you high and off the air. So we have some some sort of height. you know, I either discharge or high voltage doesn't necessarily need to, dissipate a lot of energy, but it just ionizes the air sufficiently that when you apply a to deduct the current from the leading edge to the trailing edge, that current is gonna basically attract, by electrostatic forces the molecules, to to move along with the thrust, and thus, you know, you have an engine.

That that's fascinating skin enable. How would you imagine hypersonic travel where there's going to be natural ionization simply from the speeds that you're flying at.

Absolutely. Then you don't you don't need to pre ionize at that stage. I'm obviously getting fast. Going fast is easier if you don't have nasils and nozzles and, you know, intakes and, you know, all these sort of horrible aerodynamic shapes in your aircraft.

Love it. I I also wanted to, you know, go back to the space applications too since he brought that up. Another interesting application, right, beyond just, you know, using, superconductors for compact nuclear fusion is you could probably code and love to hear your thoughts on this and enable is, like, you could probably coat your, craft with the superconducting material and then run a current through it and then use that deflect, charged micrometeorites and microparticles in space when you're traveling at Subsea, right, like even the smallest particles can destroy your craft.

So Majoming will deflect at least the, you know, charged particles coming at you.

Do you think that's possible? Yeah. I mean, I can't do the best in my head, but, you know, you probably do that. the ridiculous large magnetic fields in that case. but, yeah, I mean, we're not. And then the other thing is, you know, we're talking about ion engines, are the concepts for interstellar craft is that you generate this magnetic, funnel, for instill molecules or, or atoms, that you then kind of suck into the, the the iron drive so that you don't have to you could get the propellant of the way. So this could be this could be one was face application as well.

I don't wanna interrupt you guys noting out on, like, face application. I just wanna highlight, Scandinavian. scanning naval. I don't know if you're you're for, docsing yourself or if you're anon, but, you're you have a PhD in physics. Right? And when you say, why not? Are you basically, like, saying there's no, like, physics restriction to this? Like, right? We we just need whatever is in front of us.

coming -- Well, I'm -- I I'm just ignoring all of the engineering. You said, you know, even if, you know, this thing gets proven that it it really there is a new mechanism that has, the possibility to I have a, you know, superacting material left ambient temperature and pressures. that's one thing, but, obviously, you know, the we we shouldn't underestimate the engineering challenges. in 1st of all, coming up with a manufacturing method that's sort of industrial. and and then, you know, you know, these appetites are fundamentally really brittle.

I guess the same applies for, you know, Ibico and the some of the other, height easy material, so that we've figured that out. So we'll figure that out too, but, you know, it's not gonna happen over 2 years, I think.

Uh-uh. It's a it's a start though.

Yeah.

Yeah. It's a it's a it's a start of a long road. Yeah. longer road, but forward and accelerating evermore because we also can get AI and AGI to help us kind of design this. AJ is a whole big thing. We're not gonna touch in the space, but AI multiplied by a 1000 can help with many of these manufacturing things and robots that now are able to get powered for a longer period of time can go and do them potentially.

Right? Yep. And then there's some, you know, let's say, different fields of science, which also, you know, becoming more and more relevant, you know, since I think biology, even though you would sort of not immediately think about since I think biology is superconductors, but, you know, but, you know, some microbes, you know, they actually help with minerals so could you could you, genetically engineer and microbe to synthesize proper appetite? I don't know. Well, yeah, just just -- Could be done.

I don't know. Just re remember that, our teeth are are, hydroxy appetite and flora the tights. So there are proteins that template that.

Exactly.

This is something that, iris brought up to. is that, you know, there would be something like microbiology applications if this were to actually, you know, be a superconductor where there are certain like strains of, of bacteria, I think, that that are basically, that are conductive that you could, like, introduce into the synthesis Now this is obviously a very layman's explanation of this, but but she seemed very, very excited about that prospect, I guess.

Yeah. Anyway, guys, this is great. thanks for the space. I need to I need to park a roof. I have a meeting.

So I'll I'll thank you so much for coming. very, very -- That's being understandable. Yeah. Thanks. Good to meet you. We host this more. You're more than welcome to come and turn it. Go for your meeting. I hope it's gonna be a little more boring than this. Folks, I think I think at this point, unless some folks on stage wanna go for maybe a little bit more. I think at this point, I can close this. We started way way early. It's been a while, getting winded. This is the 3rd to Elis. This is the 3rd of the 4th stage that we had. the spend of less than a week. we started doing Thursday. Right? Thursday, you came over?

Yeah. I I I I think the 3rd, I missed one of them live, but I did listen to it.

So we're doing this quite a lot, and the information flow is insane, but also, like, the ability to stand in front of this potential sea change or ocean change and general sort of, like, like, so many things are happening at once. This multiplied by AI, then it's, like, also hard then go fall asleep. but I do wish all of you good night. I think, a very good night if tomorrow we get some more positive news. the more positive news that we get, then the better than I get, and the better the prospects of all of us are.

Wanna say really quickly that, like, I appreciate that you all, I I had some I appreciate that you all were were very, cool, especially you, Alex, and Edapie towards, like, Iris in particular, specifically with regards to, like, you know, her her gender, I I think there there was a lot of, like, negativity around that, and I think that it was heartening to me to see that you all were, sort of fighting against that. And, and I like to see that the tech community. I'm not, I'm not involved the way that you all are. I'm I'm just a coder. But but just there there's a lot of sort of bigotry, I guess.

And I I think you all were were very it it really just made me happy to see that all kind of came to to her defense in a way, I guess. That's my last comment. Thank you.

Thanks, Sam. Thanks for coming up. Thanks for saying this. Folks, Iris is the shit. Like, like, hopefully, it'll become closer friends with Iris because, when she came out of, like, 20 followers, whatever the fuck, and suddenly started spewing, like, the most insane Physics even, and she's a chemist. So she does, like, other stuff. Potentially, folks are starting attacking, like, for nothing from no you know, logic basis from no experimental or science basis. Folks came straight out of person.

And I'm like, why fuck do you care if this moves us forward towards whatever the, you know, the the commute, humanity needs to go? Why do you care? Bring evidence And so I I started getting, like, real annoyed. And, Eli, I correct me if I'm wrong, you also, like, follow someone like this or it's like, the work is impeccable, even though it looks like, in the rush in the parking.

Yeah. No. Tow totally. And and, if I I mean, in the best best and and, you know, given that she's do working with has in her kitchen worst traditions of Soviet science.

Yeah.

It's it's awesome. And I I do think that the fact that she have, like -- So I will say it's, like, a a point in her favor. This clearly for her was not like, oh, I'll just get a bunch of followers by replicating this. You know, she I think this is clearly like a financial project. You know?

I didn't I didn't know that that's like a a feedback even exists. I there, but I'm not gonna be surprised. I will say this. I'm hoping that I, at the time, we will join us in one of these cases, either iris or, Yeah. Hopefully, the communication tau, it's hard to pass a little bit sometimes, but also sometimes the English is impeccable. I I just will say this folks, just to add to the potential genius level, like understanding a lot right, because, like, she synthesized hers in the kitchen without, like, the proper materials, etcetera. And we're gonna see probably some stuff coming out soon.

I think she's moving towards organization lab, like a big lab, not a home lab, but the English level is way above mine. Like, like, leagues above mine. this is a person that lives in, like, inside Moscow. I lived in Ukraine. I then lived in Israel for 20 years and, like, spoke English professionally, and now I'm living in States. I have 2 American kids, and and her English from inside Russia is, like, leagues about my, like, outfits and, like, gueisha speak in addition to the geniuses of the chemistry and all of this, right? How the there's no like, it's hard in Russia. I don't know how many of you are bilingual it's hard. So I I think we're dealing with, like, a unique person here.

I will go to the floor. And, Sam, thank you for noticing this. this is a very important moment where people without, like, big lab credentials, even though she is connected, could just, like, start talking online and This is, like, we'll teach many, many other folks that this is cool. I'm I'm really, happy that she's joining this happen. I think on this step, if you don't mind, real quick.

Alright. Go ahead. You know, I I think the fact that, you know, her con her competence is just so way above the the people who are attacking her, they're threatened to buy it, and they're, like, trying to assert themselves through bullying and, you know, she's just coming out totally on top.

Yeah. And, like, calling out the fact that, like, people were -- This point.

The last point, and I think that, like, her response, that was really cool.

Sam, I -- Yeah. Yeah. But if you don't mind, Sam, Sam, sorry. I I really want to finish in I I don't interrupt, but, I will say, like, this one thing. The fact that Wikipedia is considering whether or not, like, a person like this should be included or not in the table of, like, who replicates, even though she already replicated, is fucking ridiculous. Like, the fact that, like, this is there and you know, people need to go to, like, a blog instead of, like, a well reputed, whatever the fuck source, and not see the person who replicated this first in fucking home. the fact, like, it just means that people have, like, a gut reaction to some of the stuff surrounding her.

I think what we're doing is giving, like, this person, like, a blue check, whatever, even though she doesn't wanna was just, like, the followers and the people who were, like, adding to the science and talking with her. There's a dude, Daniel, something from Israel, a physicist also that I, added to our group, and they had, like, an incredible conversation. And, you know, she replies immediately with, like, insane stuff, percolation Elay saw as well. So, yeah, we're big, big iris done. Hopefully, we'll get her on one of these bases. but other than that, I think folks I will tell you good night. Like, it's it's been more than 3 hours to be in 12.

I think, I really wanna go see what else is out there has been while we were talking. Sanya has been texting me. There's there's a bunch of stuff. Maybe somebody else moved us forward. I also wish you like, go and explore some more of the folks on the list that we've posted. and, yeah, I have a whole space tomorrow about something else about the AI. I see some folks in the audience and over and engineer with that folks. we should see each other very soon, probably AM tomorrow. And, would that good night. Oh, one last thing. One last thing. Important. There's so much info here. Just the insane, like, physicists, we have, let me do a quick recap.

Eli, do you want me to help me do a quick before we go.

No more like new -- Uh-uh. Really super condensed. Sure.

so we had Robert Paulgrave who who, like, many folks recommended him to join, and he was great. we had a new Finnish friend, which, like, I would like hear from more. He's great. we had multiple folks on stage talking about the summary of events that happened in what less than a week. We had Andrew up here. I think he is still in but Andrew's up here at in the middle of a replication attempt on US and, like, talking to scientists. yeah, I think there was a lot. All of the folks on stage also took a a brief knowledge, Eli.

Without you, I wouldn't, like, thank you, man. Thanks. Keep coming. I need, folks to understand me and understand scientists in in in between us as well. and, with that, I think I wish you all a good night. Thanks, Eli.

Thank you all for calling this together, and thanks, everyone, for participating.

I don't know what's going on, man, but I'm I'm happy and fun, so we're gonna continue.

And and and remember everybody -- I'm not prepared for this. Do you remember everybody the the title of the room Kinjja. So so we've got the subtitles on YouTube and and, this is what, inspired iris or it was involved in iris, making her replication efforts.

So so watch it. So we're not closing. Hold up. Hold up. Keep keep talking, Eli. I'm gonna go actually bring this tweet, and, I will have to get this to you because you reminded me and the whole purpose. So so, yes, almost didn't complete.

So, so I, Iris was, was going to watch this with, with her partner, I guess, and, instead was was, you know, her partner bet her that whether she could, come up with a better method. but the interesting thing is that Kimjaja is about you know, this this hypothetical future, were actually phosphorus, is very scarce.

And there's like one match left and, the future of this alternative universe depends on getting the phosphorus from from this matchstick that's left on I've probably butchered it, but the -- In no.

No. You did a great job. It doesn't say superconductor, but it does talk about, like, a crazy space alien, fucking technology that humans suddenly find. And that's powered by, matchsticks, and matchsticks have read customers in them. And this is what triggered her, I think, with the Red Cross First thing. I don't know if, like, I'm remembering all the all the exact parts correctly. However, just the fact that the person, like, instead of doing this thing, oh, I'll just, you know, re reeminent this more than, like, a faster national labs incredible to me. So we're gonna watch this movie together.

I'm gonna quote with the space, I'm gonna call this the space here and oh, the one thing I want to say, Eli, and please take this, while I write the tweets, don't, stutter. The movie was recent 86, 1986. Type 2 superconductor was also released 1986. And I think I was born 96, not to mention this. And I think, Iris mentioned this, like, in other context with, that the researching professor Choi, the guy who kind of inspired Lee and Kim, and the the folks who, like, they worked for him for since 99.

and he also, I think, either went to conference or referenced the from 96. 86 starts to become, like, this lore thing. And I wish 8 or 5 was here to talk about this, but you'll have to know if you know or not, but we're watching, in honor of iOS, Alexandra, we're watching this movie tonight. That's that's the tweet.

Sounds great. Yeah. Looking forward to it. And, so thanks, everyone.

Alright, folks. I'm pinning this right now. If you'll be give me This one last thing is I would love for you to boost the signal and honor of iris. Alright. Let's go. I hope this movie is, like, copyrighted. I'm gonna pin this to the space. I'm watching this movie because if this is what inspired the person who replicated this first, I think it's worth watching. with that, really, with that, I hope you did good night, and we'll see you soon. Bye.