Chances are, it is nothing.
However, if it is something, it is a big something.
Late last month, a group of researchers published two papers reporting an extraordinary discovery: a superconductor that works at normal temperatures and pressure. Dubbed LK-99, the material consists of the mineral apatite doped with copper atoms. Like conventional superconductors, the authors say, it can conduct electricity resistance-free — but, crucially, without the need for super cool or highly pressurized conditions.
Such a material, long theorized, has been dubbed the “holy grail” of the field.
In the days since, there has been a scramble to confirm the results. Two theoretical analyses concluded that the authors’ claims were at least plausible. Dozens of other teams are trying to replicate the feat experimentally. Among practitioners of materials science and condensed-matter physics — at least those expressing themselves online — something close to giddiness has taken hold.
Caution is wise nonetheless. Neither paper has yet been peer-reviewed, while both seem to omit key facts. Some experts have called the experiment “sloppy.” Many others have voiced skepticism. Notoriously, the field has long been plagued by hype and false hopes (A study published in Nature in 2020, making claims of a similar breakthrough, was retracted last year).
And yet, and yet. The implications of such an achievement — if replicated — would be profound. Almost overnight, the scientific landscape could change. The superpower of superconductors is that electricity moves through them without losing energy to resistance — provided they are cooled to (say) minus-195°C and subjected to colossal pressure. A room-temperature version could be deployed cheaply and widely, revolutionizing fields from energy to transportation to computing.
Take the power grid. Using superconducting materials, energy loss from generating and transmitting electricity — currently an immense challenge — could be eliminated, thereby slashing costs and reducing emissions. Wind and solar power could be stored indefinitely. Battery life could be extended for laptops, phones, electric cars. More tantalizingly, nuclear fusion — that long-elusive source of carbon-free baseload energy — could start to look commercially viable as room-temperature superconductors enabled smaller and less costly reactor designs.
There is more. Levitating trains, gliding above superconducting rails, could become commonplace. Medical imaging devices could become smaller, cheaper and more precise. Practical quantum computers — with potential to accelerate everything from drug design to climate science — might become more feasible, thanks to improved accuracy and performance. In fact, almost any technology relying on electromagnetic processes could be transformed.
On the other hand, LK-99 might come to nothing. Sometimes things that seem too good to be true are just that. Such is the nature of scientific progress: trials and errors, triumphs and setbacks. It is a process that rewards risk, ambition and — every once in a while — off-the-wall optimism. In this case, it might well change the world as we know it.
The Editors are members of the Bloomberg Opinion editorial board.
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS