Scientists Create Zero-Resistance Superconductor

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guest
  • Start date Start date
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
There's something odd about this announcement. It's a bit odd to call something a "zero resistance superconductor" because all superconductors have zero resistance. "Negative resistance" is an odd phrase. There's negative differential resistance, but that happens outside of the superconducting state. Another press release described it as no resistance at negative 269C, which is about 4K, which isn't all that warm, and definitely not room-temperature (269K isn't room temperature either, but is a phenomenal jump from the previous high temp record for superconducting). Of course 269C is way above room temperature, which would be pretty odd too. Perhaps the truth is that the researcher has discovered malleable superconductors (because of the reference to wires and iron) at 4K. That may be a step forward but then the headline isn't correct. I'm wondering if this came from some sort of automatic translation? Otherwise it's pretty odd and the differences in the other press releases are pretty strange too.

The article says the researcher is trying to replace the phosphorous with arsenic, but the university of Tokyo announced earlier this year discovery of a "anthanum oxygen fluorine iron arsenide" that superconducts up to 26K, which sounds like they've already stabilized an iron/arsenic compound. The latest record I heard of was superconductivity at 55K

It's also odd to describe something like this as "devastating" -- it would actually be awesome!
 
Room temp super conductors would revolutionize the power grids in the world. Imagine L.A. without brownouts because solar panels in the eastern US and wind in denmark and tidal generated power from Russia would all be available at the same time. (Which would take quite a bit of political agreemnt) But that's just the beginning.
Power transmission without any loss. Even in processors and computers, transistors, capacitors, anything electrical , except light bulbs as they require resistance.

It would be one of the most important breakthroughs to daily living.
 
Sorry, but if something has a negative resistance, doesn't that mean it's producing power? I thought we were talking about zero resistance and no power loss?

Imagine the day when V/I doesn't equal R...in some cases!
 
[citation][nom]frozenlead[/nom]Imagine the day when V/I doesn't equal R...in some cases![/citation]

"Well technically, R=V/I is primarily applicable to standard laws of physics. With something super crazy like a superconductor, V/I must equal 0, which would be quite a strange occurrence. However, with a material like Graphine, the laws of Quantum Physics begin to apply for no real good reason whatsoever."

-My attempt at pulling pseudo-scientific explanations out of my magic hat
 
According to reports, Japanese scientist Yoichi Kamihara has discovered a zero resistance superconductor. Layered in iron and stabilized with phosphorous, the superconductor has a negative resistance at 269º Celsius.
Click to expand...
That makes absolutely no sense. I think you meant to say "zero resistance at negative 269º Celsius." The temperature you stated is well over 500º Fahrenheit!
 
The Resistance would equal zero. As in zero resistance semi conductor. To have negative resistance doesn't make any sense. I like the Electrical theory Frozenlead. You sir, get a +1
 
Ah V/I !=r dose happen in some cases , it called a non ohmic device, such as a diode along with many other devices. Yeah this article is riddle with error though negative resistance would be quite a trick would go along with a perpetual motion machine too.
 
Also...500 Fahrenheit you wouldn't have to worry about cooling because anyone in the room would be dead and I'm sure nothing else would survive those temps either. Zero resistance so no heat but the article said "at 269 C". So 516 degrees F would absolutely make the zero resistance pointless. I love articles that don't make sense. Please tell me, what does proofreading mean?
 
I am curious, would it be possible to teach a complete layman physics, quantum physics, and theoretical physics? Assuming this layman is 25, by what age would he have learned enough to contribute to any one of those fields assuming an educational starting point of...hmm...college algebra? Also, would it be possible to do so without taking any college classes...maybe at the library or online?

Chuck

Please answer, i really am curious
 
Quantum and theoretical would require more math. At a minimum of a firm grounding in calculus is needed. Linear algebra, differential equations and complex analysis would also be helpful.

As for layman physics, there are lots you can learn that from almost any introductory physics text. For quantum I would recommend Into to Quantum Mechanics by David Griffiths. For classical I would recommend Classical Mechanics by John Taylor. Both of these book will assume calculus based understanding of layman physics.

To get to a point where you can contribute to the field...hard to say.
Generally one can go from high school physics to PhD in about 10 years.
 
[citation][nom]nickster05[/nom]I am curious, would it be possible to teach a complete layman physics, quantum physics, and theoretical physics? Assuming this layman is 25, by what age would he have learned enough to contribute to any one of those fields assuming an educational starting point of...hmm...college algebra? Also, would it be possible to do so without taking any college classes...maybe at the library or online?ChuckPlease answer, i really am curious[/citation]
In fact, yes. But that layman needs to start studying during high-school. The physics given at the university isn't different from the one taught at high-school. Just a little more detail.
 
[citation][nom]nickster05[/nom]I am curious, would it be possible to teach a complete layman physics, quantum physics, and theoretical physics? Assuming this layman is 25, by what age would he have learned enough to contribute to any one of those fields assuming an educational starting point of...hmm...college algebra? Also, would it be possible to do so without taking any college classes...maybe at the library or online?ChuckPlease answer, i really am curious[/citation]

There are plenty of good layman's books regarding the implications of quantum theory, but the actually theory itself is much more rigorously mathematical than conceptual. You need to go far beyond calculus to get the mathematical language to understand it. At a minimum, just to understand the Schrodinger equation, which is the fundamentals of quantum mechanics, you need to know how to work with partial differential equations, eigenvalues from linear algebra, wave functions from mid-level physics courses, and taylor series expansions, to name a few. The worst part about it is that quantum mechanics don't work the same way that physics you deal with in your everyday life does. It becomes harder to visualize because it doesn't jive well with the reality you see. Unless you are a genius, It's unlikely you will explain all of this to yourself without help. Most people spend 8 years in school being told how to think about it and they still never contribute significantly to the field.
 
Let me help everyone with a better summary of this topic: Some superconductor thingy or something happened in Japan or something. Some kind of metric temperatures are involved and some of those element thingys too. Its phenomenal and devastating and I would add more, but I left my thesaurus at home, so I can't add any more cool but irrelevant adjectives to pad out this article.
 
I thought we only lost about 7.5% of juice on the line on average. I'd call Tesla and AC + high voltage a revolution... this would just be an evolutionary gain, at massive costs unless they just used it in new installations. At least as far as general transmission. How this might effect internal components of say a PC I have no idea, maybe less heat and more reliable juice would certainly help.
 
This discovery has no bearing at all on high-temperature superconductors. Its unfortunate that the author of the article apparently misread -269C as 269C. Maybe the author comes from deep space. :O
 
Well, at -269C we would all get frozen solid.
Maybe they can create a case for it that includes an ice maker. You don't need to know quantum physics to know that the power required to cool the thing would be far more than any power saved with the 0 resistances.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom