A New Family of High-Temperature Superconductors 113
sciencehabit writes to let us know that physicists are hailing the discovery of a new type of superconductor as a "major advance." The new materials could solve the biggest mystery in condensed matter physics — i.e., how and why cuprate superconductors work — as well as paving the way for practical magnetic levitation and lossless transmission of energy. "God only knows where it will go," says one Nobel Laureate. After the discovery of superconductivity in an iron-and-arsenic compound at 26 kelvin, several Chinese research groups quickly found related materials that are superconducting up to 55K. (Cuprates go as high as 138K; liquid nitrogen boils at 77K.)
Higgs? (Score:1, Offtopic)
They found the Higgs boson? [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
"If it's really a new mechanism, God knows where it will go," he says.
One must at the very least indicate that it is a partial quote, like so:
"...God knows where it will go."
The "..." indicates that the first part has been cut off.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Tough room
Re: (Score:2)
To quote Foghorn Leghorn, "It's a joke, son. Don't ya get it?"
How can you not get that simple joke and call yourselves nerds? Jesus, folks, itt isn't rocket science. It isn't even subatomic particle physics!
The Higgs bosun is called "the god particle". I even linked the fucking Wikipedia article in case there were morons with mod points.
Hot! (Score:1)
I know that from very few over 0k to 55k there is a big difference, not sure how high they can reach, but still, looks a bit too low for "practical" implementation yet.
Re:Hot! (Score:5, Interesting)
The "firestorm" was ignited by the discovery of cuprate semiconductors, which "have critical temperatures in excess of 90 kelvin"[1], which is above the temperature of liquid nitrogen.
[1]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superconductor [wikipedia.org]
Re:Hot! (Score:4, Interesting)
Currently we are in the stage of trying to understand just what exactly is going on at the particle level. Once we move past this research stage (disclaimer: it's been going on for twenty years), the possibilities these materials provide are pretty much endless.
Re:Hot! (Score:5, Funny)
I believe you mean -135 degrees celsius.
That last twenty degrees is what keeps Minnesota from superconducting in winter.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1, Offtopic)
www.youtube.com/watch?v=-RJwqkWawcU
Re:Hot! (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
My understanding is that their lack of malleability as well as their very low critical current density prevents large scale use.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/YBCO [wikipedia.org]
Re:Hot! (Score:5, Informative)
Where do you get $1k/L? A quick google search turns up $3-5 per liter, which is about what I recalled. LN2, of course, is much cheaper -- $0.25 in small quantities, $0.05 per liter or less in very large quantities.
Dry ice is more expensive than LN2, because you have to pay for the CO2, rather than just liquefying air. But if you don't actually need dry ice, then dry ice temps are certainly cheaper to reach than LN2 temps.
Re:Hot! (Score:4, Funny)
Well duh! He's talking about MEDICAL liquid HE which is obviously much more expensive than normal liquid HE. Ever get a bandaid put on at a hospital?
Re: (Score:1)
Does medical liquid HE work like audiophile wooden volume knobs?
Re:Hot! (Score:5, Informative)
You've got the right idea, but your numbers are a bit out of whack
Helium is so expensive, because it is very entery intensive to liquify, and it isn't commercially extracted from the atmosphere like nitrogen
Liquid Neon as a refrigerant (Score:3, Informative)
liquid nitrogen 77K is the goal (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
One problem, of course, is that liquid hydrogen is rocket fuel!
Re:Hot! (Score:5, Informative)
Now, instead of having just one 'family' of HTSC materials to base hypotheses and theories upon, scientists now have TWO. Now they can compare similarities and differences between those two families. This gives them a HUGE boost towards figuring out the exact mechanism involved, plus potential leads on new materials that exhibit similar atomic structure which could also superconduct.
Very Hot! (Score:4, Insightful)
1. "High T_c" is a technical term. Indeed, 55 kelvin is "high" (though not as high as the record for cuprates). You have to compare it with the typical T_c for metals (a few kelvin). The difference is between liquid helium temperatures and liquid nitrogen temperatures (which cuprates have reached already and perhaps the new compounds also will).
2. More improtantly, this will ignite a "firestorm of research". You see, we don't have a good model of high T_c superconductivity (unlike the BCS [wikipedia.org] model for metals). Having several different superconducting systems will help theorists isolate the significant features of the system from the less significant ones.
3. Seeing superconductivity in a totally new material is exciting. This is interesting basic research even if today we dont' have a practical application. If we don't do the research we'll never get to the practical stage.
Re: (Score:2)
There's already practical implementations... (Score:2)
The important point was getting over 77k, where the relatively cheap liquid nitrogen can be used instead of other things like liquid helium.
Re: (Score:1, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not aware of any others and would also love to hear about them.
=Smidge=
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
At this point people are more interested in the physics rather than the practical applications.
This discovery is pretty important, because as TFA says, the exact mechanism that allows high temperature superconductivity to occur isn't widely agreed upon. Another system to study makes it much more likely that theorists will agree on exactly how this works.
Re:US science is dying? (Score:4, Insightful)
China is mostly a second world country, isn't very poor(the USA is spending trillions there), currently is almost able to duplicate just about every technologically advanced device being built.
there was a chinese company called NEC which duplicated the Real NEC's tv's poorly but close enough to work for several years before they got caught.
While it will be another 5-10 years China is rapidly building up technology, science, and math. They have the manpower power and will, just like japan had 30 years ago. Remember 40 years ago the Japanese only made junk, 20 years later they owned the electronics market, and 10 years after that had some of the best selling cars out there.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
there was a chinese company called NEC which duplicated the Real NEC's tv's poorly but close enough to work for several years before they got caught.
Not only did they make the TVs, but apparently they also dealt with real NEC plants on a regular basis, and due to poor organization, nobody caught on.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:US science is dying? (Score:5, Informative)
China is mostly a second world country
"First world", "second world", and "third world" are not some ranking of affluence. "X world country" was an old Cold War term. First world nations were those aligned with the West. Second world nations were those aligned with the Soviets. Third world nations were those aligned with neither. Since the fall of the USSR, there is no longer such thing as a second world country.
Third world countries tended to be poor and underdeveloped. Now "third world" has become synonymous with "poor", but it is really a misnomer.
Re: (Score:2)
Third world is so named because it is neither of the other two.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re:US science is dying? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
And here: [in-cites.com]
US ranked #1 at 3 times the number of pape
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
That's always been true, though. America's public school system has always done poorly in world ranking, but its university system is far better and attracts a lot of foreign talent.
In the past, most of that foreign talent tended to stay in the US (like Einstein or Tesla), but that might be changing.
Re:US science is dying? (Score:4, Insightful)
Hanging on to our lead, on the other hand, is doubtful [scidev.net]: "Cited papers first-authored by Chinese scientists -- an important indicator of scientific creativity -- increased by 25.3 per cent in 2006, and the number of times they were cited increased 28.3 per cent. However, China remains thirteenth in terms of total citation numbers." At that rate, China won't be in 13th for long.
From the global perspective it doesn't matter; all this means mankind as a whole is simply progressing much faster now. But from the US nationalist perspective, this definitely decreases our ability to compete for increasingly scarce natural resources. We've already seen this occur drastically in the price of oil.
Re: (Score:1)
How are creationists ruining superconducting research? (I'm not defending them, I'm looking for more ammo.)
And so as to defend myself, in some fields, like biomedical research, I think the US is still putting out the most and the highest-impact research papers.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
When you have creationists trying to ruin science education all across the country it's not that surprising.
This is a red herring.
I would chalk the lack of advancement up to the lack of need for it. We can point and say, "well, we do need this," but there is no sense of urgency to that need.
Performance happens when pressure is applied. Some societies have instilled within themselves a constant pressure, and apparently progress at a faster rate than others. I imagine that the lack of urgency and impending need is what negates motivation. It doesn't seem like this applies only to scientific research, eith
Re: (Score:1, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Interest was rekindled two years ago when researchers at the Tokyo Institute of Technology synthesized a new superconductor based on iron rather than copper. The material also featured oxygen, lanthanum and phosphorus, but its transition temperature was just 4 degrees above absolute zero, no better than the very first superconductor discovered a century before.
Then this February, the same group announced an exciting development. The researchers had replaced phosphorus with another pnicogen, arsenic, in the layered material and - boom - the transition temperature shot up to 26 K (Y. Kamihara et al. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 130, 3296â"3297; 2008). Subsequent tweaking has already boosted that temperature above 50 K. âoeWe all were surprised,â says materials scientist Hideo Hosono, who led the study.
It would seem that this research is coming out of Japan, not China.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Background Information (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Hope it fits in a bedroom (Score:3, Funny)
as well as paving the way for practical magnetic levitation
Awesome! Can't wait for my superconductor magnetic levitation bed!
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
You might not wake up from that bed...lol
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
You can levitate frogs and such by themselves, without having to support them on a levitating magnet -- see the Youtube video [youtube.com]. Of course, that technique doesn't work with superconductors -- the field strength required is higher than they can sustain. Instead, you need a 6 megawatt electromagnet [hfml.ru.nl].
I suppose 6 MW to levitate a frog is about as impractical as it gets...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
It beats 1.21 jiggawatts to levitate a squirrel [xkcd.com].
Is this really news? (Score:1)
Not to mention this one [slashdot.org] operating at 200 kelvin.
I feel kind of bad for these guys doing their research and coming in 150 kelvin behind everyone else.
Re:Is this really news? (Score:5, Insightful)
This is an entirely new family from the cuprates. The cuprates started much lower too. Also, even if this family never compares to the cuprates in performance, the behavior of this new family could shed light on the (relatively unknown) mechanisms of cuprate superconductivity, allowing for that family to be developed further.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Levitation (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
John (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Last month some team in Germany discovered a "room temperature" superconductor. That's still not terribly useful, though, unless you can build a wire that is safely under almost 4000 atmospheres of pressure required to turn the Silane gas into a solid.
=Smidge=
Re: (Score:2)
Familiar with the Josephson effect [wikipedia.org]?
I sense some new pick-up lines on the horizon... (Score:1)
Re:I sense some new pick-up lines on the horizon.. (Score:2)
Superconducting Supercomputers? (Score:2)
If so, how about building these computers buried in Antarctic ice? Winter air temperature drops to -80C; deep in the ice it's probably even lower. 138K is -211C. So the energy required to cool the
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The answer to the problem you pose (other than how the device's physical chemistry actually makes a supersemiconductor) is just to cool the part that much lower than its superconducting point. The energy is still lost to the extra heat from imperfect resistance, and multiplied by the energy consumed in recooling th
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Scale, scale, scale, scale, scale. Don't let environmentalist mottos fool you; humans aren't actually "heating" the planet. By pumping large amounts of a greenhouse gas into the atmosphere, we are causing the planet to retain more heat. (This isn't new
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
FWIW, the "environmentalist mottoes" are just fine. We are heating the planet, by stopping its natural cooling radiation with our thickened Greenhouse atmosphere. The same way I "warm up" by putting on a coat, even if the coat isn't that warm to start with. In fact we can directly heat the planet, and of course we do, though the effects of
Re: (Score:2)
I don't really have a lot to say, but you made one error. Zero degrees C is 273K, so 138K is actually -135 degrees C, not -211.
Ian
Re: (Score:2)
Which means that the ice, even if it's only -80C, is only 55C hotter than the -135C superconducting point. Unlike the usual labs, which at about 24C (I doublechecked [google.com]
Double Standard Standard (Score:1)
> type of superconductor...
> as well as paving the way for practical magnetic
> levitation and lossless transmission of energy.
Lossless transmission = 0 entropy
0 entropy (Isolated system? Transmission line, check. Not in equilibrium? Voltage gradient, check) = violation of the second law of thermodynamics: "The entropy of an isolated system not in equilibrium will tend to increase over time, approaching a maximum value at equilibrium."
When others mak
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Wrong Icon (Score:1)
Supercomputing is all about massively parallel computation, not just computers... nor chips. This article is about condensed matter physics and (who knows?) a possible replacement for the semiconductor.
Got a semiconductor icon, perhaps?
Your Idea/My Idea (Score:2)
Interesting term "firestorm" to describe the interest in this discovery. One is left thinking that the intense firestorm has resulted in pushing temperatures so high that all the superconducting stopped right there.
Distributed computing (Score:2)
Be More Specific... (Score:2)
Were those Chinese researh groups at US univeristies or actually in China?