Exactly, the 99 stands for 1999, so potentially this material has existed for over 20 years and we could have started testing and replication on a much wider scale a decade ago. What benefit have we gained by disseminating this research so slowly?
This reminds me of an Asimov novel (don't remember the name)
In this universe there are long life humans that don't really collaborate with other humans (like a single person, not a group of quasi immortal humans) in the scientific field to have all the credit because who cares if you take 200 years for a discovery if the glory is all yours
Maybe The Naked Sun or one of the books in that series? It’s been years since I read it but I remember there being some motif about people not interacting physically and living a long time.
> What benefit have we gained by disseminating this research so slowly?
It's less visible, but at this scale there's a high cost in everyone pausing their research to replicate LK-99. If it turns out to be real that's worth, but if not it could've gone to better use. Think of what we could've done with the time we spent reproducing cold fusion.
It's survivorship bias; yes, you would love to see the significant discoveries happen sooner, but if they were rushed you'd also see a lot of trash that currently never leaves the draft stage. Just look at how many people complained that the LK-99 papers were incomplete and unprofessional!
Also, LK-99 was discovered in 1999 but wasn't known as a room-temperature superconductor then. There are too many things to research and not enough researchers, so it was put on hold for two decades.
> It's less visible, but at this scale there's a high cost in everyone pausing their research to replicate LK-99. If it turns out to be real that's worth, but if not it could've gone to better use. Think of what we could've done with the time we spent reproducing cold fusion.
This is a (I feel rudimentarily obvious) fallacy of finite time implying there is N researchers working on one thing that must be useful at any given time. The individuals reproducing cold fusion / LK-99 / whichever might not have been spending their energy / time / funding on anything more "guaranteed productive" (nor even on anything at all) otherwise.
Knowledge motivates research. That motivating is not a classsically scarce resource, its multiplicative.
Most PhF students a desperately looking for a usefull thing to work on. Most professors desperstely search for a usefull topic that they can use to justify grant funding. etc.
I'm sorry but this is BS (and I don't mean that as a personal attack, just a repulsion to the idea)
As if researcher must drop everything they're doing and attempt to reproduce every wild claim. It simply doesn't happen because these people are able to work through hypotheticals and form value predictions... Just like they do with any other research resource allocation decision.
No, it's far worse to lock up knowledge behind academic institutional norms and hide and yell "rigor" when anyone is curious to see what's being worked on. People can decide for themselves what is worth pursuing and the OP is likely correct that we're doing damage to our own progress by not disseminating a hypothesis that's being worked on but could use more resources. Furthermore this fear of someone publishing before you in a race to claim the Nobel prize likely doesn't help.
The institutions should formalize and normalize a method for broad open access to research in progress and broader collaboration.
Seems extremely unlikely there's a "high cost" because it's already clear there's some strange properties involved in LK99. Cracking the explanation for this could potentially help advance material science in all sorts of ways.
In some ways this is pure science. Multiple groups working on the same thing increases the chance of searching the problem space thoroughly, and not missing out on finding better local maximas.
Exactly, hindsight is 20/20. This reminded me of a friend of mine fixing a coding issue that was impacting performance. Fixing it saved a lot of money and it was the initiative of the engineer to bring it up. The response of the (at the time) CEO: well, why did you not fix it earlier?
> It's less visible, but at this scale there's a high cost in everyone pausing their research to replicate LK-99.
Less visible? More like invisible if you ask me. There's all sorts of seemingly frivolous research going on at any given moment. A red herring in this case would be no different.
The instant strange behavior becomes apparent it becomes worth researching. I don't see how keeping it silent is anything other than a tragic waste.
If it's bogus, we discover that sooner.
If it's legitimate, we discover that sooner, AND the benefits to humanity can begin 24 years earlier. Think of how much we've accomplished in the last 24 years. Now think of how many benefits could have been reaped during that time by building on this new knowledge (assuming it has practical applications).
If it's truly useful and they knew this 24 years ago: what a waste.
> but at this scale there's a high cost in everyone pausing their research to replicate LK-99
The people deciding to pause their research are experts with their own agency. If they are pausing their own research then it's because they've made an expert determination that it's worth doing so. So you don't need to worry yourself over it. Open the information up so that other experts can decide what to do with it.
I don't know if this is true or not, but I read something suggesting they produced it in 1999 as a side product of something else but didn't start to examine its properties properly until a handful of years ago.
It might be that the process to make LK99, produces a fraction of the Good Stuff, which went under the radar until recently. It would not have been the first time. If it is confirmed with the proper methodology ... right now it's too early to build castles on LK99.
With the anti-hype hype that surrounds this discovery this was to be expected. Why would I disclose this kind of research to the public so that the whole world can benefit from it when I'm called a fraudster or a liar. Why would I risk my reputation – no matter how I spin my research – in a sacrificial circle jerk when I can work on it stealthily and hope to make some bucks ?
Neither of them were doing research for the bulk of the time. We can only guess what brought them back to the project, but it may have restarted sometime around 2016.
