This is the beauty of peer reviewed science - can't say I'm not disappointed a bit about not having a world changing material, but I'm still pleased that in the end, we can trust honest science.
This is the beauty of peer reviewed science - can't say I'm not disappointed a bit about not having a world changing material, but I'm still pleased that in the end, we can trust honest science.
It's kind of funny you say this as I just want to point out that literally all of the sources in the article are unreviewed preprints except one with a broken doi code. But yeah -- I get your...
This is the beauty of peer reviewed science
It's kind of funny you say this as I just want to point out that literally all of the sources in the article are unreviewed preprints except one with a broken doi code. But yeah -- I get your overall point that science is about community collaboration and confirmation. Everybody gave LK-99 a fair shot and it didn't measure up because you can't fool nature.
Mostly more hype. The whole point of science is replicated results. The whole point of media is generating hype. Every time someone claims they did something amazing the media reports it. Every...
Mostly more hype. The whole point of science is replicated results. The whole point of media is generating hype. Every time someone claims they did something amazing the media reports it. Every time the science community then tries to replicate and fails to do so, suddenly it's silence.
I suspect much of the same for a whole slew of reasons. The results are interesting, but to my understanding from the same group as last time. And to be clear, that initial report wasn't just a mistake, there was a lot of serious quality concerns just with how they reported their data (graphs and what not).
In short, this whole thing feels like going to a website that has a million "CLICK ME TO INSTALL TOOLBAR" things on it and then trusting it's going to do anything it claims. The red flags are everywhere. If something serious comes out of it, wonderful. Right now the science says "no", and while there's a counter argument, nothing is confirmed until the science checks it out again.
To be honest, I haven't been paying close attention to lk99 over the past months. I suspect the latest round is just hype - people really want this to be a room temp superconductor!
To be honest, I haven't been paying close attention to lk99 over the past months. I suspect the latest round is just hype - people really want this to be a room temp superconductor!
I mean, I want a room temperature super conductor to be real too :D But yeah, it seems impossible to know whats actually happening, so best to just sit back and wait for reputable news.
I mean, I want a room temperature super conductor to be real too :D But yeah, it seems impossible to know whats actually happening, so best to just sit back and wait for reputable news.
This is the beauty of peer reviewed science - can't say I'm not disappointed a bit about not having a world changing material, but I'm still pleased that in the end, we can trust honest science.
It's kind of funny you say this as I just want to point out that literally all of the sources in the article are unreviewed preprints except one with a broken doi code. But yeah -- I get your overall point that science is about community collaboration and confirmation. Everybody gave LK-99 a fair shot and it didn't measure up because you can't fool nature.
So, given whats going on now with LK-99 news, how is this piece holding up? And, is the latest round of LK-99 news just more hype?
Mostly more hype. The whole point of science is replicated results. The whole point of media is generating hype. Every time someone claims they did something amazing the media reports it. Every time the science community then tries to replicate and fails to do so, suddenly it's silence.
I suspect much of the same for a whole slew of reasons. The results are interesting, but to my understanding from the same group as last time. And to be clear, that initial report wasn't just a mistake, there was a lot of serious quality concerns just with how they reported their data (graphs and what not).
In short, this whole thing feels like going to a website that has a million "CLICK ME TO INSTALL TOOLBAR" things on it and then trusting it's going to do anything it claims. The red flags are everywhere. If something serious comes out of it, wonderful. Right now the science says "no", and while there's a counter argument, nothing is confirmed until the science checks it out again.
To be honest, I haven't been paying close attention to lk99 over the past months. I suspect the latest round is just hype - people really want this to be a room temp superconductor!
I mean, I want a room temperature super conductor to be real too :D But yeah, it seems impossible to know whats actually happening, so best to just sit back and wait for reputable news.