Language
Country/Area
No result found
What did the Korea University team discover? What is the research story behind LK-99?
In July 2023, a research team from a Korean university published a material called LK-99 that claimed to be superconducting at room temperature, which instantly attracted widespread attention in the scientific community. However, with subsequent research and repeated experiments, completely different results emerged as to whether LK-99 really possesses superconducting properties. What is the story and research process behind this?
LK-99 is a gray-black polycrystalline compound that has been studied for decades as a potential superconductor. It was first described by scientists Li Shuo-pei and Jin Zhixun in 1999 and was not studied again in depth until 2023.
During this research process, the chemical composition of LK-99 is undoubtedly the core issue. The material is believed to be copper-doped lead-oxyphosphate, with the basic chemical formula Pb9Cu(PO4)6O. The researchers suggest that the internal pressure caused by the partial replacement of lead ions by smaller copper ions may have promoted the formation of a superconducting mechanism.
According to the experimental results, LK-99 exhibited certain abnormal DC magnetism in small samples, including a "partial suspension" reaction, which was preliminarily interpreted as a sign of superconductivity.
These announcements sparked a surge of excitement and interest around the world, with many research groups immediately setting out to try to replicate the results. However, as time went on, research from various places showed that LK-99 did not exhibit superconductivity as claimed, but was instead confirmed to be an insulator.
In mid-August, the scientific community gradually became clear about the consensus on LK-99. Many experiments showed that some of the material's properties, such as strong anti-magnetism, may be due to the influence of impurities such as copper sulfide, rather than true supermagnetism. Guide behavior.
After the initial report was published, Li Shuo-pei said his research paper was incomplete, while co-author Jin Xuantie pointed out flaws in the paper, which showed that the team reflected on and revised the initial results.
Outside the academic community, this topic has also sparked heated discussions and various reactions on the Internet. The heated discussion on social media about LK-99 continues to spark all kinds of imagination and speculation, even after subsequent studies pointed out that it does not have superconductivity. Some people have compared this to previous superconductivity research, especially the research of Ranga P. Dias, which was withdrawn after being questioned, which dealt a blow to the trust of the scientific community.
South Korean society also responded quickly to LK-99's claims, and some investors even caused fluctuations in the stock market because of this incident, which indirectly reflects the huge influence of scientific breakthroughs on the economic world.
"This is a storm in the new material research and exchange community, and many people are looking forward to something that can bring about a conditional breakthrough." The words of a practitioner show both expectations and doubts about the future of this material.
Several recent studies have shown that LK-99 fails to exhibit any of the predicted superconducting properties even under the best synthesis conditions. Although some studies have attempted to demonstrate its superconductivity using different experimental methods, they ultimately failed to fully meet the standards of the academic community.
Against this backdrop, the Korean Society of Superconductivity and Cryogenics even set up a verification committee to address various questions about LK-99 and determine its authenticity. The move is intended to respond to the potential social and economic impact of unverified research claims.
As various research institutions and academics work on LK-99, the question arises: With so many challenges and results, can the scientific community remain rational amid the excitement and over-promotion of specific studies? ?
