galilette

joined 1 year ago
[–] galilette@mander.xyz 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

OK, but where are they when the LK99 first came onto scene?

[–] galilette@mander.xyz 4 points 1 year ago

Now let's see which youtube "science channels" do a debunk on their own content pushed out a mere month ago.

[–] galilette@mander.xyz 5 points 1 year ago

The point is there are established conventions among the practitioners on how these are pronounced, and not getting them right says something about the youtuber who may otherwise appear as an expert.

You might be right on how the name 'Schrieffer' should be pronounced in its original tongue, but I've heard multiple former students and colleagues of Bob Schrieffer pronounce it otherwise to conclude that theirs is probably how Schrieffer himself intended his name to be pronounced.

Yeah, can't wait to hear economists' take, or The Economist's..

[–] galilette@mander.xyz 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Hi ~~Joe~~ Brian

[–] galilette@mander.xyz 17 points 1 year ago

It is waiting for reproducibility is what it is. It won't matter much if it got published today in some no name journal -- a journal is going to gamble just as this youtuber did, for the slim chance of this being true (not saying it isn't)

Also, a quantum well is just particle in a box. Nothing fancy about it. Guy mentioned tunneling a lot but tunneling happens in metal, semiconductor, and insulator. Doesn't really mean anything. In fact if you need to tunnel, that means there's a chance to back scatter, so it won't be superconducting.

[–] galilette@mander.xyz 39 points 1 year ago (6 children)

Not to be snobbish or anything, but at this juncture I wouldn't trust anyone who can't pronounce arXiv (or Schrieffer for that matter) correctly to explain room temperature superconductivity to me. Hell I barely believe anyone with a materials/physics degree...