"The fragment that was observed to exhibit magnetic levitation consisted of a very heterogeneous agglomeration of Cu2S, elemental Cu, Pb-apatite, and an unexpected impurity of metallic Fe. The levitation, therefore, is likely the result of magnetic torque on the Fe particles embedded within the material."

This was from Andrew's latest tweet. Looks like this should be closed as a NO

https://twitter.com/andrewmccalip/status/1689096102333796352 He has finished going through all his shards. The only ones that had any magnetic response have already been shipped to USC. I'd say this could be closed as NO

Yeah this seems pretty definitive NO, Andrew is moving on.

I'm guessing this update means no, even if LK-99 is eventually found to be a superconductor:

https://twitter.com/andrewmccalip/status/1688712575817768960

As someone who is invested heavily against LK-99 being a RTP superconductor - I still think this one is way undervalued. The resolution criteria don't include proving superconductivity, this is about "any" statements made by McCalip in the next month. I think the odds that he says something like "we saw a magnetic response consistent with the meissner effect" or "we saw either the meissner effect or strong diamagnetism" are pretty high.

@JeffreyWagner Neither of your examples sound like claiming they have “gotten the Meissner effect to work” to me, which is the market criteria. They sound like claims that they might have gotten the Meissner effect to work, which seems importantly different.

@JimHays That's a good point, but I'm not sure how it competes with the open-endedness of "... any claim...".

@BoltonBailey could you weigh in here? I think it's likely at the end of the month that there will still be no consensus about diamagnetism vs. SC vs. something else. How will you judge statements by McCalip with some amount of uncertainty? Maybe you could give an example statement or two that you would/wouldn't resolve YES on for reference?

@JeffreyWagner

I will not treat "we saw a magnetic response consistent with the meissner effect" or "we saw either the meissner effect or strong diamagnetism" as claims of achieving the Meissner effect, he will have to say something stronger than that.

@BoltonBailey An example of a statement on the edge but that I would resolve YES: "I am virtually certain that I have achieved the Meissner effect"

@BoltonBailey Excellent, thanks a million for the clarification!

@AndrewMcCalip If this is really you, just letting you know that insider trading on this market is absolutely encouraged.

Sorry for the duplicate; I searched before creating the market!

The linked market should be significantly lower than this market, in my opinion. The linked market resolves tomorrow.

Love this market. I think we could also use one covering will Andrew follow through for a long time, until he's convinced it doesn't work, or will he be stopped or give up earlier for some other reason? i.e. to distinguish the NO part of this market into its possible causes.

https://manifold.markets/StrayClimb/will-the-lk99-room-temp-ambient-pre-d6f8357bb625?r=RXRoYW5BbGxleQ

Twitter guy <= Anyone

Will the LK-99 room temp, superconductivity pre-print replicate in August

9% chance. August 2023 or earlier Preprint here: https://arxiv.org/abs/2307.12008 Companion paper here with description of synthesis: https://arxiv.org/abs/2307.12037 Make money fast if it replicates it will replicate soon [link preview]