A Korean superconductivity academic body invalidated the research results from a team of Korean researchers claiming to have developed a room-temperature superconductor in its preliminary assessment.
And their proof is the report they already put out. A refusal to examine or test the proof doesn’t mean it’s invalid. That’s Science 102.
It may be invalid, I myself am extremely skeptical, but in this situation it absolutely is possible to prove that the process described doesn’t work, that’s what replication studies are for. Replicating the experiment and reporting on the results is vastly more valuable than “Your study didn’t make sense to us.”
They claim to have found an unreliable, method for generating impure samples of a superconductor type predicted by a 40 year old theory.
One member of their group jumped the gun on publishing before the people that did the bulk of the work were ready, so the others released more detailed info on what they had so far.
The onus is on the researchers making the extraordinary claims.
Extraordinary claims require solid proof. That’s like science 101.
And their proof is the report they already put out. A refusal to examine or test the proof doesn’t mean it’s invalid. That’s Science 102.
It may be invalid, I myself am extremely skeptical, but in this situation it absolutely is possible to prove that the process described doesn’t work, that’s what replication studies are for. Replicating the experiment and reporting on the results is vastly more valuable than “Your study didn’t make sense to us.”
It’s not a remotely extraordinary claim though.
They claim to have found an unreliable, method for generating impure samples of a superconductor type predicted by a 40 year old theory.
One member of their group jumped the gun on publishing before the people that did the bulk of the work were ready, so the others released more detailed info on what they had so far.