Scientists are taking a skeptical eye until they see validation on claims about a potential breakthrough in superconductor technology from South Korea, as similar scientific claims in the past have turned out to be errors, an expert said.
(Bloomberg) — Scientists are taking a skeptical eye until they see validation on claims about a potential breakthrough in superconductor technology from South Korea, as similar scientific claims in the past have turned out to be errors, an expert said.
There were “major scientific attraction scandals where big claims were made and later shown to be incorrect,” Michael Biercuk, professor of quantum physics at the University of Sydney and the chief executive officer and founder of quantum sensing company Q-CTRL, said in an interview with Bloomberg TV on Friday. “We are hopeful that that’s not the case here, but everybody is waiting to see what happens.”
Papers published last month showed researchers at the Seoul-based Quantum Energy Research Centre and other South Korean experts synthesized the world’s first superconductor known as LK-99 that is capable of conducting electricity at room temperature with ambient pressure. The claims have been driving both excitement and controversy among markets and industry participants.
“If this is true, the impact cannot be understated,” Biercuk said. “We have been looking for this kind of technology for a long time.”
Room temperature superconductors would reduce costs of magnetic resonance imaging significantly as they would not require liquid helium coolants, which are expensive and in short supply. Electrical power grids would be more power-efficient as the material allows electricity to flow with no loss and no resistance.
It may become a multi-decade journey to see the full potential impact of the technology in industries beyond those such as power and medical if it is true, Biercuk said. He stressed that the world should prioritize validation before getting excited about the potential industrial impact of the technology.
“What we’re waiting for is teams that were not involved with the original claim to be able to synthesize the same material and validate the claims,” he said.
More stories like this are available on bloomberg.com
©2023 Bloomberg L.P.