Re: Room-temperature superconductivity?
Posted: Mon Mar 11, 2013 11:45 pm
I also pushed no.
a discussion forum for Polywell fusion
https://talk-polywell.org/bb/
He (or his web admin) could be doing it as well. Counters are usually just a text file on the website, and if someone is cleaning up pages it could get removed either intentionally or accidentally (I've accidentally deleted the counter file for a website aI maintained before; forgot what the file was because I hadn't had to mess with it in over a year). The counter script would then recreate it. This, of course, assumes the script is running on the same webserver as the rest of the site.DeltaV wrote:Someone also seems to be hacking his web page's hit counter.
It went from ~15000 back to zero recently.
The same thing happened a year or two ago, when it was at ~30000.
"This result is telling us that the physics cannot be described by electrons alone," Phillips said. "This means that the cuprates are even weirder than previously thought: Something other than electrons carries the current."
The origin of superconductivity in bulk SrTiO3 (strontium titanate) is a mystery several decades old.
...
In this experimental paper, we find that SrTiO3 is in fact a superconductor with the lowest mobile-charge density currently known in all superconductors—in other words, the most dilute superconductor—and is also a new and interesting candidate for non-BCS-type unconventional superconductors.
...
The mobile electrons in the superconducting SrTiO3 are too slow and too far apart compared to those in conventional superconductors. This poses a serious challenge for the standard BCS pairing scenario, which relies on phonon-induced electron-electron attraction.
These results, which beg for a fundamental theoretical explanation, add new motivations and new information for solving the decade-old puzzle.
Waves? Where have we heard waves? <sarcasm>The discovery of charge-density-wave order in the high-temperature superconductor YBa2Cu3O6+y places charge order centre stage with superconductivity, suggesting they they are intertwined rather than competing.
Pretty much everywhere in pretty much everything related to electromagnetism and quantum mechanicsDeltaV wrote: Waves? Where have we heard waves? <sarcasm>
DeltaV wrote:http://www.researchgate.net/post/What_a ... nductivity
Johan posts from September 2013.
Here Johan Prins confessed doing something that is as anti-reductionist as possible. He confesses that he is trying to derive his theory of superconductivity from non-fundamental solid state physics equations, which is absurd. Solid state physics is a science of useful, but non-fundamental, equations, if you want to design devices, you can't really start to calculate all the individual electron interactions because computing power runs out really fast, due to this, you need to make assumptions, simplifications. Basically these equations are like ideal (physical) gas law. Ideal gas law is good at giving useful results for certain calculations, but because of it being idealization, it totally breaks down when you get out of it's working regime, it really doesn't represent some fundamental wholesome truth of the physical world, it is just a nice tool. The ideal gas model tends to fail at lower temperatures or higher pressures and it also fails for most heavy gases, for example.Johan Prins wrote: Applying accepted Solid State Physics of interfaces which is used every day for chip design, proves that the electric-field within this pahase must be zero:
The fundamental trait of ideal electron gas/ideal metal/free electron gas assumption is that the calculations show the electron density to keep on increasing to infinity. That electron gas assumption is included in those accepted standard equations that describe electron transport. The electron density increasing to infinity it isn't actually physically happenig, but it is one of the mathematical limiations of ideal electron gas model. But Prins seems to imagine that this is actually happening, and that since the electron density keeps on increasing to infinity, the electrons have to form BEC to avoid Pauli exclusion.Johan Prins wrote: By applying the accepted standard equations that describe electron transport, it is shown unequivocally that the extracted electron density has to keep on increasing, while at the same time, the differences in the respective energies of these electrons must keep on decreasing until a Bose–Einstein-type condensate consisting entirely of electron pairs has to form