https://phys.org/news/2018-01-physicists-clues-high-temperature-superconductivity.html
I certainly don't pretend to understand exactly what they are saying with their talk of "incoherent electron correlations" and "strange-metal correlations", both technical terms unfamiliar to me and I tried googling them and got nowhere.
But I am sure they they what they are talking about and it at least sounds to me that they are one step closer to true understanding of how high-temperature superconductors work. Can any physicist here who understands it confirm that?
01 Feb 18
Originally posted by @humyI could pose that to my son-in-law, Phd in statistical physics.
https://phys.org/news/2018-01-physicists-clues-high-temperature-superconductivity.html
I certainly don't pretend to understand exactly what they are saying with their talk of "incoherent electron correlations" and "strange-metal correlations", both technical terms unfamiliar to me and I tried googling them and got nowhere.
But I am sure they [i]the ...[text shortened]... w high-temperature superconductors work. Can any physicist here who understands it confirm that?
02 Feb 18
11 edits
Originally posted by @apathistI don't think you quite understand the extreme complexity of what you are asking. What you are in-effect asking is exactly how quantum physics, or at least how some experts currently think how might quantum physics, applies here. But, to understand that, you will need to first spend YEARS intensively studying (probably at university) quantum physics and make sure you fully and correctly understand it. Then you need to spend a few MORE YEARS intensively studying all the research done specifically on superconductivity (which neither of us have done) and all the current theories formulated by people (research scientists) that are MUCH smarter than you or I that know VASTLY more about it than you or I. Until if and when you do that, any COMPLETE answer to your question will inevitably be beyond your or my ability to understand unless it is so massive and comprehensive that it will fill a whole book with hundreds if not thousands of pages of writing and which would take us months if not YEARS to just merely read it let alone learn it. -I hope that gives you the picture.
When we get new data, we try to fit them into a framework. I want to ask, what are the frameworks?
02 Feb 18
Originally posted by @humyWell Trumpf claims to be a 'stable genius' so he could do all that in 3 weeks.......
I don't think you quite understand the extreme complexity of what you are asking. What you are in-effect asking is exactly how quantum physics, or at least how some experts currently think how might quantum physics, applies here. But, to understand that, you will need to first spend YEARS intensively studying (probably at university) quantum physics and ...[text shortened]... nths if not YEARS to just merely read it let alone learn it. -I hope that gives you the picture.
Originally posted by @sonhousewho is Trumpf?
Well Trumpf claims to be a 'stable genius' so he could do all that in 3 weeks.......
I really hope you don't mean the US president. I think he is arrogant ignorant and delusional enough without that.
Somehow, I doubt that even the smartest person on Earth could do all that in just 3 weeks unless he had a massive amount of relevant prior expert knowledge.
Have you seen some of the more complicated equations for that? They are a nightmare.
02 Feb 18
Originally posted by @humyThe framework isn't the complex part though (or at least it shouldn't be).
I don't think you quite understand the extreme complexity of what you are asking. What you are in-effect asking is exactly how quantum physics, or at least how some experts currently think how might quantum physics, applies here. But, to understand that, you will need to first spend YEARS intensively studying (probably at university) quantum physics and ...[text shortened]... nths if not YEARS to just merely read it let alone learn it. -I hope that gives you the picture.
For example:
"DNA codes for RNA which codes for protein. Sometimes DNA is mutated, either randomly or by a mutagen, causing changes to the RNA code and proteins. These rogue mutant proteins are capable of changing the behavior of cells and tissues, and can cause human disease. We discovered..."
This lays the framework for the somatic mutation theory of cancer. New discoveries can be understood within that framework. Obviously it's extremely complex and researchers spend decades becoming experts, but at least it provides a starting point that is much more satisfying than "it's beyond your comprehension, so why bother."
02 Feb 18
3 edits
Originally posted by @wildgrasswhat I assumed what he meant by "frameworks" are the various models used/theorized to explain how high-temperature superconductivity works.
The framework isn't the complex part though (or at least it shouldn't be).
For example:
"DNA codes for RNA which codes for protein. Sometimes DNA is mutated, either randomly or by a mutagen, causing changes to the RNA code and proteins. These rogue mutant proteins are capable of changing the behavior of cells and tissues, and can cause human disease. ...[text shortened]... tarting point that is much more satisfying than "it's beyond your comprehension, so why bother."
Because science is important, I certainly would NOT say "so why bother". But I would say it is unreasonable for a layperson, at least if he is not prepared to spend years studying it, to expect a proper and full explination of such a complex thing. Not that I pretend to be able to give such a proper and full explination of the current theories of how high-temperature superconductivity works (its outside my real area of expertise which is AI ) but, even if I could, it would take impossibly too long to do so here.
02 Feb 18
Originally posted by @humyYou answered that it would take many years of dedicated study just to be able to possibly understand the material. Certainly there is a reasonable introduction to the subject matter that does not take years, and would provide a framework for comprehension.
what I assumed what he meant by "frameworks" are the various models used/theorized to explain how high-temperature superconductivity works.
Because science is important, I certainly would NOT say "so why bother". But I would say it is unreasonable for a layperson, at least if he is not prepared to spend years studying it, to expect a proper and full explinat ...[text shortened]... f expertise which is AI ) but, even if I could, it would take impossibly too long to do so here.
03 Feb 18
Originally posted by @humyI use Trumpf as pejorative. It's his family's real name.
who is Trumpf?
I really hope you don't mean the US president. I think he is arrogant ignorant and delusional enough without that.
Somehow, I doubt that even the smartest person on Earth could do all that in just 3 weeks unless he had a massive amount of relevant prior expert knowledge.
Have you seen some of the more complicated equations for that? They are a nightmare.
03 Feb 18
Originally posted by @wildgrassdo you think the whole of that "framework" can be posted here in a single post to answer apathist's question and so he completely and correctly understands it?
You answered that it would take many years of dedicated study just to be able to possibly understand the material. Certainly there is a reasonable introduction to the subject matter that does not take years, and would provide a framework for comprehension.
04 Feb 18
Originally posted by @humyI think he was asking about the framework, not the complete and correct understanding.
do you think the whole of that "framework" can be posted here in a single post to answer apathist's question and so he completely and correctly understands it?