It’s funny how people were jumping all over Lee et al.'s original paper for not having been peer-reviewed, but these preliminary unpublished failure-to-replicate after a week and a half are “more likely.”
This very thread is about a partial success to replicate Lee et al.'s results.
Come back to me when there’s actual evidence - there’s none now. Levitation does not equal superconductor. No other superconductive properties have been found by peers yet. This is how science works: it’s not a superconductor until it is proven and replicated by peers.
You won’t need me to come to you, there will be prominent headlines.
In the meantime, if that’s what you’re waiting for then why are you in threads like this one? As I said, it’s been a week and a half. You’re not going to get peer-reviewed replication in a week in a half.
It’s funny how people were jumping all over Lee et al.'s original paper for not having been peer-reviewed, but these preliminary unpublished failure-to-replicate after a week and a half are “more likely.”
This very thread is about a partial success to replicate Lee et al.'s results.
Come back to me when there’s actual evidence - there’s none now. Levitation does not equal superconductor. No other superconductive properties have been found by peers yet. This is how science works: it’s not a superconductor until it is proven and replicated by peers.
You won’t need me to come to you, there will be prominent headlines.
In the meantime, if that’s what you’re waiting for then why are you in threads like this one? As I said, it’s been a week and a half. You’re not going to get peer-reviewed replication in a week in a half.
Sure, I’ll take that bet. Full results will be available by the end of the month. You’ll see me back here either way!
About those “prominent headlines”, maybe “LK-99 isn’t a superconductor” wasn’t in your list?
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-023-02585-7