Either the scientific report on this superconductor is wrong, or it will change the world

Time will tell whether the two Indian physicists have changed the physics we know, thereby bringing technology one step further.

When it comes to applying quantum mechanics, people will mention two of the "holy grail" of the industry.

One is building a large-scale quantum computer. Second, achieving superconductivity at temperatures higher than the freezing temperature of water, simply called superconductivity at room temperature . Superconductivity is a material with no resistance, meaning that electrons can pass through superconductors without any problems. Currently, new physicists can achieve superconducting states when they bring materials to extremely low temperatures.

If we have superconductivity at room temperature, we can transmit the whole energy without being hindered by physical factors. We will have faster computers, more accurate sensors. The world we know will change as we get more energy to use.

Superconducting material.

Last July, Dev Thapa and Anshu Pandey, two well-known chemical physicists from the Indian Institute of Science in Bangalore presented a study confirming that they created "superconductivity at room temperature conditions." with pressure " , made up of a matrix of gold and silver particles. The entire scientific world was stunned by the statement for two reasons: one was superconducting at room temperature, two were superconducting in gold and silver - something that had not even been achieved at supercooled temperatures.

Physicists delve into the scientific report, realizing that something is not right. Last August, physicist Brian Skinner of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology wondered about a point in research, which he considered unreasonable: there was a strange connection in the results between the two. Different test times.

The chart below has blue and green dots, representing the sound measured in two separate experiments conducted by Thapa and Pandey, two experiments that test the sensitivity of superconducting matter. The sound generated during the experiment is random, so it is not possible to have two identical random elements. However, the green and blue dots are nearly the same, only moving up and down.

There is a strange link in the results between two different tests.

"If you do two different tests, with two different timelines in different test conditions, but have the same result. That will be unusual," Skinner said. Motherboard. "It is unclear what these same repetitive sounds mean. It may be a natural phenomenon that we don't know yet, but it can also be an artificial product we haven't realized yet. But this difference is enough. Great to focus on what it is ".

The researcher responded to Skinner's findings, that when conducting the study, they did not recognize the similarities between the two sounds, but they still claimed that they had witnessed superconductivity. at room temperature. It may or may not be true, the two Indian scientists must first explain the existence of the other two sounds.

A few days later, physicist Pratap Raychaudhuri at Tata Basic Research Institute in Mumbai posted an article on Facebook, trying to figure out why the study might be true. One of the possibilities is that the resulting sounds are not sound, they are part of the signal that appears when the particles react in the magnetic field. As Raychaudhuri explains, two equivalent signals can be produced in a magnetic field of less than 3 Tesla. Under this landmark, material particles will not really separate from each other, there are still certain connections that can re-create old forms.

If researchers do two different experiments but still use the same magnetic field of the same magnitude, still include the number of old matter particles, they can reproduce the signals in question. .

However, just as Raychaudhuri himself said, his explanation still cannot explain the whole other problem that the study encountered. The tracks not only lie in two sounds / two signals are equivalent.

Pratap Raychaudhuri.

The most surprising thing is that at the same temperature, the nanostructures of both gold and silver that are both electric and magnetic can turn into superconducting state. According to Raychaudhuri, this only happens if two tests are done on the same gold and silver samples. The team claims they didn't do it that way.

The two sides can solve the problem simply: Thappa and Pandey send the samples they have made to the scientific community. But they still refused to do so.

Also in Raychaudhuri's post on Facebook, he said: "The purpose of these words is not to justify Thapa and Pandeu, but to raise the circumstances that may have taken place. For reasons of transparency. and the importance of research, Thapa and Pandey, provide the scientific community with what they have done. "

When reporter Motherboard asked Pandey about why the two did not give her a sample, Pandey replied that they were asking "independent experts to understand the industry's results".

"This process is very time consuming," Pandey told the motherboard. "Without confirmation, the specific information about the process and the results we make will confuse the community. We will publish the results as soon as possible."

Samples of superconducting electric cables, however, cannot be applied in practice because the cables must be stored in extremely cold environments.In the above sample, scientists use liquid nitro to keep it cold.

Everything hasn't stopped yet. Drama or superconductivity is still long and ambiguous. A few days after the incident, Raychaudhuri received an email from TV Ramakrishnan, one of India's most famous physicists, asking "don't criticize Thapa and Pandey on social media and please wait patiently for the results". Attached to the email is a long string showing Ramakrishnan conversing intimately with Pandey, discussing the study. Raychaudhuri answered, please Ramakirishnan don't "comment on unreliable sources".

But when Raychaudhuri answered, he noticed something strange: Ramakrishnan didn't use the usual email account. Raychaudhuri contacted Ramakrishnan by phone to find out that the email he received earlier was completely fake. Raychaudhuri traces back from a fake email, seeing that the message was sent from the wileslicher@protonmail.com account.

"What makes me wonder is why someone is careful to create a real-looking email chain, sent through an encrypted email server to prevent me from posting on Facebook" , Raychaudhuri questions on Facebook.

On the same day the post appeared, Skinner also received an invitation to make friends on Facebook from an account called Wiles Licher. The account does not show any friends, there is only one post that is difficult to understand. Skinner thinks that someone has "troll" him, but when he learn more, he discovers that the other Licher account was created 16 days before the study of superconductivity appeared on arXiv.

All the confusing things revolve around research that if exactly, it will change humanity. Did Thapa and Pandey really do that? Nobody knows until they give evidence. There is a remarkable point: this event is very much like a famous scam that happened in the scientific world.

In 2001, a famous German physicist, Jan Hendrik Schön, published a report to Nature, claiming he created transistors - transistors at a molecular level. Similar to the results of Thapa and Pandey's experiments, Schön's research is revolutionary: electronics that use silicon will disappear, instead of organic electronics, operating at the molecular level. Schön will open the limit of Moore's Law infinitely, reducing electronics prices to unprecedented low levels.

But when the researchers carefully analyzed Schön's data, they found that the sound intensity measurements in many trials were the same. The sound nature comes from different experiments that are random, that number will have to be different. Schön's "world-changing" studies fall into question.

Brian Skinner.

Schön denied all allegations, but when investigating further and discovering that physicist Schön had deceived both the scientific community, falsified the results of the research, the community had deprived Schön of all degrees, removed many of his studies from famous magazines.

If Thapa and Pandey also caused the same case, they would receive the same penalty. This may be a fraud study, but it could also be a measurement error in a study that could change the world. Thapa and Pandeu are still keeping what they have done, to see how this story will end.