Simulating something you don’t understand is problematic because you don’t know if your models are correct. I can simulate digging a hole to the core of the planet as long as I get the physics wrong.
The alternative isn’t blind experimenting, though. The original research publication is full of lots of holes, and even people working to replicate it are noting that it seems more amateurish than it should be.
So, I’m surprised we went from YBCO to strained lattice, even though I actually hoped we would look closer at strained lattice, I just assumed it was far off, you need a much better model, our ReBCO model is fairly weak, trying to jump to strained lattice seems like it would be much harder.
If we found this, we almost certainly found it through pure luck, we’re 30 years from this kindf of material science, we can barely do single-crystal stuff in bulk, this is theoretically more complex if we hadn’t gotten crazy lucky.
But while I’m skeptical, and want to wait, I’m not willing to turn away a possible golden ticket just because I didn’t expect it in my wonkabar.
I’ve seen 40 years of these kinds of claims come and go. If we actually make a massive breakthrough like this, the lab that makes the discovery is going to be incredibly detailed and meticulous, documenting their exact processes, theories, and efforts to reproduce the material(s) from scratch. It’s not going to be someone publishing notes with major variances and holes in the details.
I guess what I’m saying is when you see enough perpetual machines published in the news, you start to realize that if someone actually had one the first thing they’d do is make another one to confirm, and then plan which island they’re going to buy with their new found riches. And that’s to say nothing of whether it’s commercially viable on a cost or production speed basis. LOTS of advancements die on those vines. Just look at the semiconductor research industry.
I’m sorry, simulations are actually more impressive to me, it shows there is a potential theoretical mechanism at play here.
Experiments can go wrong, simulations can go wrong, when they both align that’s interesting.
Simulating something you don’t understand is problematic because you don’t know if your models are correct. I can simulate digging a hole to the core of the planet as long as I get the physics wrong.
I agree, but then again experimenting blindly isn’t entirely better, you might not be measuring what you think you’re measuring.
When both align that’s spooky though.
The alternative isn’t blind experimenting, though. The original research publication is full of lots of holes, and even people working to replicate it are noting that it seems more amateurish than it should be.
So, I’m surprised we went from YBCO to strained lattice, even though I actually hoped we would look closer at strained lattice, I just assumed it was far off, you need a much better model, our ReBCO model is fairly weak, trying to jump to strained lattice seems like it would be much harder.
If we found this, we almost certainly found it through pure luck, we’re 30 years from this kindf of material science, we can barely do single-crystal stuff in bulk, this is theoretically more complex if we hadn’t gotten crazy lucky.
But while I’m skeptical, and want to wait, I’m not willing to turn away a possible golden ticket just because I didn’t expect it in my wonkabar.
I’ve seen 40 years of these kinds of claims come and go. If we actually make a massive breakthrough like this, the lab that makes the discovery is going to be incredibly detailed and meticulous, documenting their exact processes, theories, and efforts to reproduce the material(s) from scratch. It’s not going to be someone publishing notes with major variances and holes in the details.
I guess what I’m saying is when you see enough perpetual machines published in the news, you start to realize that if someone actually had one the first thing they’d do is make another one to confirm, and then plan which island they’re going to buy with their new found riches. And that’s to say nothing of whether it’s commercially viable on a cost or production speed basis. LOTS of advancements die on those vines. Just look at the semiconductor research industry.