1. Joined
    06 Mar '12
    Moves
    642
    21 Oct '20 21:11
    An interesting theoretical alternative way to achieve room-temperature superconductivity;

    https://phys.org/news/2020-10-kitchen-temperature-supercurrents-stacked-d-materials.html
  2. Joined
    06 Mar '12
    Moves
    642
    22 Oct '20 05:49
    Are there any real experts here on this subject that can express their opinion here of what they think are the realistic chances of this interesting theoretical alternative way to achieve room-temperature superconductivity actually working?
  3. SubscriberPonderable
    chemist
    Linkenheim
    Joined
    22 Apr '05
    Moves
    653674
    22 Oct '20 09:30
    The Problem will be to obtain defect-free monolayers in sufficient area and Price...

    As I understood, the work is purely theoretical up to now. We can discuss the practical implications after we saw the first test (I expect Areas less than 1 mm² for the first samples)
  4. Joined
    06 Mar '12
    Moves
    642
    22 Oct '20 09:451 edit
    @ponderable said
    We can discuss the practical implications after we saw the first test
    That above statement kind of confused me; Unless what you are suggesting involves some confusing time travel, I think that above word "saw" should have been "see" ? 🙂
  5. SubscriberPonderable
    chemist
    Linkenheim
    Joined
    22 Apr '05
    Moves
    653674
    22 Oct '20 10:29
    @humy said
    That above statement kind of confused me; Unless what you are suggesting involves some confusing time travel, I think that above word "saw" should have been "see" ? 🙂
    I pologize.

    Instead of
    We can discuss the practical implications after we saw the first test


    it should have read:

    We will be able to discuss the practical implications after we will have seen the first test.
  6. Joined
    06 Mar '12
    Moves
    642
    22 Oct '20 15:016 edits
    @ponderable said

    it should have read:

    We will be able to discuss the practical implications after we will have seen the first test.
    LOL. I am afraid I am still only just nitpicking here but I think that "we will have seen" really should be just "we have seen"; There is definitely a superfluous "will" there 🙂
    My editing is also far from perfect and I make mistakes all the time; which is kind of ironic when you consider the fact I have only just finally finished writing my book! I have, of course, made sure it is completely free of edit mistakes. I will start a new thread about it and it's subject matter as soon as I get it published via self-publishing on Amazon (To start a new thread about it before publication would be premature and inappropriate so I just have to wait just a bit longer)
Back to Top

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.I Agree