Explained: S Korea’s claim of ‘Holy grail’ superconductor and why it is making waves

Last week, researchers in South Korea claimed to have discovered a room-temperature ambient-pressure superconductor – a massive technological breakthrough. While some on social media went wild in the aftermath of the claim, others remain skeptical. But what is a ‘room-temperature’ superconductor? Why is this claim making waves? Let’s take a closer look: What is it? First, let’s briefly examine superconductors. A superconductor is an element that allows electricity or electrons to be conducted with little to no resistance. The phenomenon was first discovered in 1911 by Dutch physicist Heike Kamerlingh Onnes. As per ExplainThatStuff.com, around 30 elements including metals like mercury, semimetals or semiconductors show superconductivity at atmospheric pressure. Superconductors are made by cooling elements to very low temperatures. Every element has its own temperature at which it becomes a superconductor – known as critical temperature. Superconductors are used in human society – from generating and transmitting power to MRI machines, frequency filters in radio, and particle accelerators. Now, let’s examine the claims made by Sukbae Lee and Ji-Hoon Kim of South Korea’s Quantum Energy Research Centre. As per The Conversation, the researchers claim to have invented a lead-based element known as LK-99.

LK-99 is purportedly a room-temperature, ambient-pressure superconductor.

As per Scientific American, researchers say LK-99 is an element made up of lead, copper, phosphorus and oxygen. Researchers claimed LK-99 can be made via baking process combining the minerals lanarkite (Pb₂SO₅) and copper phosphide (Cu₃P). They added that the end result two key signs of superconductivity at normal air pressure and at temperatures up to 127 ℃: —-zero resistance and magnetic levitation. In short, researchers, claimed that this element can conduct electricity perfectly under ‘everyday conditions’. “For the first time in the world, we succeeded in synthesising the room-temperature superconductor working at ambient pressure with a modified lead-apatite (LK-99) structure. The superconductivity of LK-99 is proved with the critical temperature, zero-resistivity, critical current, and critical magnetic field,” the researchers wrote on the preprint server. The authors have claimed their research “will be a brand-new historical event that opens a new era for humankind.” Claim spurs excitement, skepticism As per Bloomberg, such a scientific breakthrough would ‘revolutionise the power, transportation and chip industries’. “If LK-99 is proved to be true and able to be mass-produced, it would be disruptive for a wide range of industries,” Nick Cheng, an analyst at Jefferies Financial Group Inc, was quoted as saying by the outlet. Ming-Chi Kuo, an influential analyst at TF International Securities Group Ltd, added that such a technology is commerficalised could prove to be a ‘game changer’.

But amid the excitement, some remain skeptical.

The Scotsman quoted Dr Mohammad Yazdani-Asrami of the University of Glasgow as saying such an invention would be ‘one of the Holy grails of modern physics.’ “As it stands, however, the paper is not yet peer-reviewed and has not yet been tested in other labs to see if other researchers can reproduce its results. These are both key to determining for sure whether the world should be getting excited about the authors’ claims, which need much more scrutiny at this early stage. If the claims of findings are approved, perhaps, this is one of the most significant achievements of the last few decades in physics and material engineering,” Yasdani added. “Even before those standards are applied, the published results show that the critical current, in-field performance, and mechanical properties of the new material need improvement, to make it useful for energy and transport sector applications, in devices such as cable, motors, and transformers, and magnets in fusion industry. However, achieving this superconducting phase at ambient pressure is already a significant achievement which should be valued.” “Even though this work lit a glimmer of hope for all of us within the superconductivity community and beyond, much more work needs to be done to verify and explore the results. I will watch the developments with keen interest.” A piece in The Scientific American noted that the field of superconductivity is rife with extraordinary claims that didn’t pan out. “In 1987, after a compound called YBCO was discovered to be a high-temperature superconductor, some researchers thought they saw hints of the compound developing superconductivity at room temperature—but those disappeared on closer inspection. The list of once-promising failures goes on and on: sandwiches of aluminum and carbon, copper chloride, ammonia-based compounds, and more all teased room-temperature superconductivity that ultimately proved illusory,” the piece added. As per Nature.com, high-profile journal Physical Review Letters recently decided to retract a paper on room-temperature superconductors by Rochester University physicist Ranga Dias. Nature reported the imminent retraction comes on the heels of apparent data fabrication. “The findings back up the allegations of data fabrication/falsification convincingly,” PRL’s editors wrote in an e-mail obtained by Nature. Dias, it is to be noted, has denied any such misconduct, data fabrication or data manipulation. So it is understandable why scientists aren’t exactly jumping out of their skins when it comes to the Korean researchers claims. But others have had an even harsher response. Michael Norman, a theorist at Argonne National Laboratory, told Science.org that the author papers “come off as real amateurs.” “They don’t know much about superconductivity and the way they’ve presented some of the data is fishy,” he said. Nadya Mason, a condensed matter physicist at the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign added, “I appreciate that the authors took appropriate data and were clear about their fabrication techniques.”

Still, she admitted that the data ‘seems a little sloppy’.

More from Explainers

Why Mossad was not on board with Israel’s strike on Hamas in Qatar Giorgio Armani will: Who will get the inheritance? What happens to his fashion empire?

The Scotsman quoted science writer Stuart Ritchie as blasting the paper for its “ridiculously overblown language” and typos”. Ritchie on Twitter concluded that the research looked “dodgy as hell”. There also may be another twist in the tale. Sukbae Lee, one of the team’s lead researchers told Korean agency Yonhap on Friday that Young-Wan Kwon, an author of the study, published the papers ‘without the permission’ of his fellow authors. Kwon is a research professor at Korea University. Dr Hyun-Tak Kim, another team member, added, “The two papers have many flaws and were published without permission.” With inputs from agencies