Will we have "The First Room-Temperature Ambient-Pressure Superconductor" before 2024?
resolved Dec 31

The paper "The First Room-Temperature Ambient-Pressure Superconductor" https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/2307/2307.12008.pdf claims to have discovered a very simple room-temperature ambient-pressure superconductor. Resolves YES if by the end of the year there are multiple independent replications of the claims in the paper, or in general there's consensus that the results are legit.

If a variation of the methodology used in this paper gives us "The First Room-Temperature Ambient-Pressure Superconductor", this resolves YES.

Resolves N/A if there's no consensus on Dec 31st, resolves NO if on Dec 31st most of the relevant experts state that the results don't hold up. (i.e. there is no known room temperature superconductor)

If a completely independent method gives a room-temperature ambient-pressure superconductor this resolves N/A.

I will not bet in this market after setting it to 10%

Get Ṁ200 play money

🏅 Top traders

#NameTotal profit
Sort by:
predicted NO

Resolve? Give people their mana back for end of year?

predicted NO

@MarcusAbramovitch Not 2024 yet!

predicted NO

@Lorenzo im surprised everyone agrees with this but ok

predicted NO

@MarcusAbramovitch I'm surprised you're surprised. IMHO it's good to respect resolution dates, so people can use the appropriate discount rates

predicted NO

@Lorenzo more important than discount rates, to me, is the chance that the early resolution ends up inaccurate. Maybe we can say it's very unlikely in certain cases (e.g., scientific consensus pivots in a single day), but in theory we want markets to work even for very unlikely events.

predicted NO

@Jacy we can re-resolve

predicted NO

@Lorenzo I'm not a fan of relying on the ability to re-resolve. When you re-resolve, people get mana yanked out of their accounts. They might already have reinvested their "winnings", so they could get left with a negative balance. Not the worst thing in the world, but best to avoid if possible.

predicted NO

@Fion I agree, but the chance of me misclicking or manifold glitching, and so needing to re-resolve, is already much higher than the chance of this market correctly resolving YES (something like .5% vs .03%?)

predicted NO

@Lorenzo how about now?

predicted NO

@MarcusAbramovitch Eh, close enough. Happy almost 2024! 🥳

the problem is that even if lk99 were actually real, it would be basically useless since it's ceramic. This whole story is a huge nothingburger

predicted YES

@VoyagerRock clay pots flying through the sky delivering mcdonalds orders

@VoyagerRock it would still work as a thin film coating on surfaces such as flexible fibres. However, flexibility is not required in motors, generators and MRIs. Josephson junctions in SQUIDs for low-noise sensors that are orders of magnitude more sensitive than what we have today.

predicted YES

https://twitter.com/altryne/status/1686801275604877312 We have successfully observed zero resistance below 110K in #LK99 material...

If the superconductivity only exists along one axis and if there is consequently no strong Meissner effect [1], which maybe means there'd be some dispute over whether or not it's a "real" superconductor, does the market still resolve to YES?

[1] e.g., suggested here: https://twitter.com/DanielleFong/status/1686514863777120257

predicted NO

@tmk Depends on the state of dispute on Dec 31st. If at that time there is no consensus as to whether or not LK99 is a superconductor this resolves N/A.

See the description: "Resolves N/A if there's no consensus on Dec 31st"

bought Ṁ100 of YES

More and more papers are going to pile up.

Looks like we are actually going to get RTAPSC, but with weird caveats eg directional conductivity.

Material lattice is complex and weird, needs more considered production methods eg in presence of magnetic fields and radio frequencies to maximise properties.

But all that is slowly emerging already.


Am I reading right, if this specific paper gets retracted for reasons unrelated to replicability, the market will resolve No even if the results are replicated later?

relevant: https://nitter.1d4.us/8teAPi/status/1685294623449874432

bought Ṁ500 of NO

@yep If it both gets retracted and replicates multiple independent times, then I'd argue the spirit of the question is "yes" and the letter of the question is both "yes" and "no", which might add up to N/A, but who knows.

predicted NO

@yep Oh no, I didn't think of that, I've edited the description. @StevenK is correct

predicted YES

Gotta believe in your communist catgirls.


"A recent report of room temperature superconductivity at ambient pressure in Cu-substituted apatite (`LK99') has invigorated interest in the understanding of what materials and mechanisms can allow for high-temperature superconductivity. Here I perform density functional theory calculations on Cu-substituted lead phosphate apatite, identifying correlated isolated flat bands at the Fermi level, a common signature of high transition temperatures in already established families of superconductors. I elucidate the origins of these isolated bands as arising from a structural distortion induced by the Cu ions and a chiral charge density wave from the Pb lone pairs. These results suggest that a minimal two-band model can encompass much of the low-energy physics in this system. Finally, I discuss the implications of my results on possible superconductivity in Cu-doped apatite"

predicted NO

@JacobPfau Just Say No!

More related questions