Is iris_IGB's claim of an LK-99 like superconducting material with zero resistance @ ~°7c legit?
resolved Jan 2

I'll resolve to YES if:
- the material is independently verified by a legit scientific institution (research lab)
- >2 independent verifications replications
- public consensus deems it's legit
- said material has a transition temp anywhere above 0°c

relevant twitter link:

Get Ṁ1,000 play money

🏅 Top traders

#NameTotal profit
Sort by:
bought Ṁ70 of NO

Has this person ever mentioned anything about LK99 ever again?

predicted NO

@1111111 When are you planning on resolving this? It seems very clear that not a single one of the criteria for a yes resolution are going to be met.

predicted NO

@NKM the creator isn't active, but generally if not otherwise stated a market like this will resolve after its close date, in this case end of year.

predicted NO

@chrisjbillington Ahh, got it thank you! I remember seeing some chat in another market about resolving things earlier and I thought this would be a pretty uncontroversial candidate but I didn't check to see if the creator was still active.

bought Ṁ50 of NO
predicted NO

@Ernie So... which monday was iris updating about this again?

predicted NO

I'm pretty surprised people are still betting this up, is there anything I'm missing here?

predicted NO

@NKM You're not missing anything about the facts of the matter, only perhaps something about human stubbornness.

bought Ṁ100 of NO

@NKM I don't think this person has even mentioned LK99 ever again

bought Ṁ5 of NO

Choosing such a far away date was not the best choice, it should be resolved NO now

bought Ṁ20 of NO

No news?

predicted NO

When would this resolve to NO?

Never mind, Jan 1st.

predicted YES

It's a weekend, so Iris Alexandra is working on superconductor again.

predicted NO

Any news?

predicted NO

@Sanargama The latest I've seen on the topic is this post

predicted NO

@1111111 Why would this person say "update om monday "then? kinda suspicious.

predicted YES

@Sanargama Occam's razor style simplest explanation is time estimation failure.

Any speculators of when Iris will provide an update, you may like this question:

When will @iris_IGB provide an update on "ZERO R TRANSITION DETECTED" | Manifold

bought Ṁ10,000 of NO

Does YES resolution require satisfying all Of the listed criteria or any of the first 3 plus the last one?

predicted NO

@QuantumObserver I'll think on it then update to be more specific when I'm back at a PC, but it will likely be that I'll only resolve if point 2, 3 AND 4 are satisfied. My original intention was all 4, but I can see a world where iris doesn't share her original sample, but the material is legit and replicated - so I'll probably remove that point.

why did you buy 10k no? you'll get much less potential profit than with a limit order. in general idk why so many manifold users who've used it for a while still make massive direcitonal bets that push the market too far in one direction

predicted NO

@jacksonpolack A great question and I'm glad you asked.
1. I am not very smart.
2. I did end up putting in a limit order.

  1. I keep forgetting limit orders exist.

bought Ṁ2,357 of NO

@1111111 Oh also is 'public consensus' like, Science Influencers on Twitter, or Actual Physicists on Twitter, or something else?

predicted NO

@QuantumObserver good question, I'm not sure how best to resolve the public consensus part. What is typical practice for this sort of resolution criteria? I see a few options, all with flaws:

- manifold poll (con: in people's interests here to manipulate the results)
- require replications to be published in a peer reviewed journal (con: this generally takes some time and might extend over the market's current close date, even if material is legit)
- vibes based resolution: I'll resolve if I deem the general consensus amongst experts is positive (con: it's vibes & I already hold a position in this market, not sure whether it's allowed to resolve a market I have stakes in based on my own vibes)
- I remove the public consensus criteria altogether (con: more likely to resolve to YES even if the material is bunk)

open to advice here!

predicted NO

@1111111 (hopefully goes without saying that the real question I want answered via the proxy criteria is "is material X really a superconductor")

predicted NO

@1111111 Yeah dude, I dunno. If you want a consensus, I think the best bet is some kind of expert consensus, especially if a lot of the condensed matter types go on record stating their belief that it is a superconductor.

Journals are pretty slow, and not likely to be meaningfully better filters than interested experts looking at the available evidence. Iris claimed they'll upload all data to Zenodo, so it should be easier to check for obvious fraud if that upload happens.