Has Taj Quantum invented a room-temperature, ambient-pressure superconductor?
Basic
135
81k
2030
5%
chance

Note: this market is not referring to the material known as LK-99, claimed to be a room-temperature, ambient pressure superconductor, discovered by a South Korean group. This is an entirely separate claim.

Taj Quantum claim to have invented a room temperature, ambient pressure superconductor.



On July 25th, 2023, they were granted a patent 17/249,094 | 545074945NP:ABOVE ROOM TEMPERATURE TYPE II SUPERCONDUCTOR

The inventors are listed as John A. Wood, Bethlehem, PENNSYLVANIA (US) and

Paul J. Lilly, Howey In The Hills, FLORIDA (US)

They've tweeted about it here:


Wherein they clarify that they are indeed claiming it to be superconducting at ambient pressure as well as room temperature (the patent does not emphasise the ambient-pressure part).

Edit: and they have made a press release:

https://tajquantum.com/art-t2sc/

Did they invent such a superconductor?


This market resolves YES or NO on credible reports of convincing empirical tests establishing that the material as described in this patent either does or does not exhibit superconductivity at room temperature and ambient pressure.

Ideally this will take the form of peer-reviewed scientific publications that establish a consensus view, but other convincing evidence will suffice if it is to a high standard. I will not resolve immediately upon early evidence, but wait (possibly a substantial time) for a consensus view to emerge among superconductivity researchers, in case early attempts are flawed or controversial.


Alternately the market resolves NO immediately if the inventors retract their claim that the material is a superconductor.

The market resolves NO at the beginning of 2030 if there has been no evidence either way, or the close date will be extended if there is some evidence that is the subject ongoing debate at that time.

It does not matter whether other claims made about the material are true - for example whether it is specifically a type II superconductor (as claimed), or not. It only matters to this market whether the material exhibits superconductivity at room temperature and pressure.

Get Ṁ600 play money
Sort by:

What is going on with this market? The press release literally talks about their use of blockchain in a press release about superconductors, and nothing has come out of them since a twitter post last August.

@TychonNotos looks like the market will likely be resolving NO in 2030 (which is what happens if there is no news).

I would have made the timeframe shorter if I were making this market today, but unfortunately when I made this one I went for a lengthy deadline.

@chrisjbillington Yeah, but why have three traders bought YES in the last 2 days?

As you scroll through their recent post, it becomes more and more obviously LLM generated (and/or they got lazier editing it).

A favorite excerpt of mine:

What is the purpose of developing superconductor wire?
The development of a superconductor wire presents numerous potential benefits and practical uses owing to the distinctive characteristics exhibited by superconducting materials. There exist several primary motivations for the development of superconductor wire:

  • The concept of zero electrical resistance refers to the phenomenon when a material or system exhibits no opposition to the flow of electric current.

  • Superconductor wires has the remarkable property of exhibiting absolute zero electrical resistance, hence enabling the transmission of electrical current without any dissipation of energy. This phenomenon stands in stark contrast to the behavior of traditional wires, which consistently exhibit resistance and hence dissipate energy in the form of heat. The aforementioned characteristic is greatly sought after in terms of enhancing energy efficiency.

  • The concept of high current density refers to the condition in which a significant amount of electric current is flowing through a certain area or volume.

  • Superconductors possess the capability to transport significantly higher currents compared to conventional conductors of equivalent dimensions. This phenomenon is commonly referred to as high current density. Therefore, the utilization of superconductor wires enables the generation of robust magnetic fields without the requirement of bulky and weighty wire coils.

@RobertCousineau Is it just me, or have LLMs gotten worse at correct grammar? Chat-GPT used to almost always write (what most English professors would consider to be) “perfect grammar,” but now I’m seeing it make some mistakes. E.G. it should be “superconductors wires have,” not “…wires has.”

@nottelling2ccc I don’t think ChatGPT would make that mistake. They probably asked it in another language and then translated it.

2030 resolution is kind of a bummer. I'm sure this guy will never retract anything, and I'm sure that almost nobody will care about these bad claims to try and debunk them so we just have to wait until 2030 when nothing materializes and then it gets resolved as no.

@zzlk Sorry. Having seen how the incentives are playing out on the other markets based on when they resolve, I would have picked a shorter period. Better not change it now though.

The guy claiming this invention has a youtube channel where he posts (as recently as today) AI generated finance videos, tesla FSD videos, and hot sauce reviews.

I dunno about you but if I'd discovered a RTSC i'd probably quit doing the AI grifting and focus on that.

(verification: youtube channel has the same name as the Paul Lilley mentioned in the press release posted by taj quantum. A google search for '"paul lilly" "taj quantum"' brings up this linkedin profile. The profile picture on the linkedin is the same picture as on the patreon page linked on the youtube channel's about page.)

Thats some good investigation

predicts NO

Another website of his - https://lillyglobalconsulting.com/

this website also has a RTSC claim which is listed second on their list of acheivements, under "COVID-19 Pandemic Support Services".

The RTSC claim has been there since at least July 2021 -

https://web.archive.org/web/20210701003621/https://lillyglobalconsulting.com/

@vlad Huh, that looks like it might be fully floating! Nothing we know of can do that other than type II superconductors. Either it's outright fraud, or that's a superconductor. (Edit: or new physics)

Now let's see a video to help figure out which one...

@chrisjbillington The fact that they're leaving it open to speculation by uploading a single photo when they have apparently been sitting on this for 2 years makes it very suspicious. Why? Why not take a single iPhone video? Why not upload a photo where it's clear that it's at room temp and atmospheric pressure? At least the LK-99 people took a video and put a hand in it.

predicts YES

@vlad Looks like some kind of supporting gel in between the nearly touching part.

predicts YES

@HenkPoley They posted a much higher res photo on twitter: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/F2Y13rnXwAAJg-p?format=jpg&name=4096x4096
It doesn't really look like anything between them to me. (I still don't think this is real)

I have been a strong yes advocate for the main superconductor bet. I still have very good reasons to believe that the main superconductor will work out (mostly from authorial motivations)

This one is an absolute joke. Any 'superconductor research' that is associated with 'blockchains' is straight to the trash.

Hard to explain betting yes here, but the vibes guide me. Could this be a Newton/Leibniz situation? Some transformational ideas are independently conceived almost simultaneously, so maybe that’s happening here. The time is right

@QuantumObserver the ideas are unrelated though, they are using some weird wetted graphene approach

predicts YES

@CodeandSolder This is true, but both are (claimed to be) 1D superconductors. 1D Superconductor Summer?

@QuantumObserver more like 1D Superconductor Scammer, amirite?

predicts YES

It's hilarious you can get that as the title of your patent without any verification from the US patent Office. I understand that's not how the patent office operates, but it's great for spreading conspiracy theories and generating scams.

superconductivity at room temperature and ambient pressure. That is, whether or not it can or cannot conduct current with zero electrical resistance.

Maybe use the term "ideal conductor" over "superconductor"?

@Mira I was unaware the two terms were not equivalent, I was intending for that to be a definition of superconductivity. Thanks for pointing that out it's not. My aim with making the resolution criteria narrow like that was to absolve the patent of being wrong about specific details such as what type of superconductor it is - but I do only want to resolve YES if it's actually a superconductor, however that is actually defined. I'll reword.

@chrisjbillington Traditionally, uperconductors are generally required to demonstrate

  1. Zero resistivity below Tc

  2. The Meissner effect at Tc

  3. A phase change at Tc