Talk-Polywell.org

Over reacting maybe, but it's not a non-issue.

Sorry, I truly fail to see the issue.

Superconductors have ALWAYS been cryogenic materials. ALWAYS. And for the most part, they still are. There are indications of non-cryogenic (a-cryogenic?) SCs, but no product yet. The sole question is whether they are at the low end or the high end of the cryogenic temperature range. Some are low, some are high.

When we get reliably out of the cryogenic range we will need new language. Till then, no issue. JMHO.

It's an issue if you're not "in" to the technicalities as is pretty much anyone reading press. Just one more small instance of disconnect between scientists and general public.

Betruger wrote:Just one more small instance of disconnect between scientists and general public.

Yes, that was my point exactly. Happy to see that I am not the only one feeling the pain of this situation.

If the phrase had been "public" first and then was perverted by scientists with an agendum (think "planet") then I could see the issue. But this lexicon was cryogenicist's from day one. Tell your aquaintances to learn the language.

A friend reports being in a meeting wherein there were many communications and radar systems experts presenting options to an admiral. They kept saying things like "high frequency" and "low frequency" where one's high was the other's low. The admiral finally said something along the line of "whenever you say high or low, tell me the ACTUAL range you mean". So when my friend got up to talk and he started with, "these items are low frequency mounted, low frequency means 5 to 25,..." the admiral broke in and asked, "is that megahertz or gigahertz?" My friend said, no this is hertz, I'm talking ship structure, not electrons.

EVERYONE has issues with modifiers. Doesn't make them wrong. Just means you have to be able to define it.

As a pretty inclusive definition:
High Temperature Superconductor= greater tha 30 K but still cryogenic.

I'd accept that HTS is one that does use the original "phonon?" mechanism, which would make MgB2 a LOW TS even though it has a Tc ~ 35 K.

Neither changes the fact that YBCCO SCs are HTSs.

Rationalize all you want, that's not how it is for everyday people. High temperature isn't something you flash-chill booze in.

Superconductors are NOT for "everyday people" either. If they can't understand (unlikely) tell them it is magic. Everything else is to such people.

Oops. Dis-digita strikes again!

KitemanSA wrote:Superconductors are for "everyday people" either. If they can't understand (unlikely) tell them it is magic. Everything else is to such people.

You are really overgeneralizing now.

Giorgio wrote: You are really overgeneralizing now.

Hmmm? In what way?

Kite sticking a beer into a liquid for it to cool within a few moments is neither magic nor due to high temperature. There's no need for any fancy counter-intuitive nomenclature to describe this simple behavior, whether you try to see how it's "physics-based" or not.

Superconductors are NOT for "everyday people" either. If they can't understand (unlikely) tell them it is magic. Everything else is to such people.

That's beside the point. They know that superconductors are those fancy electrothings where electricity's superlative in some substantial way. They understand that "the catch" is that those "superconductors" need to be kept cool, that one "scientific holy grail" of superconductor tech is to get them to work in mundane conditions.

Temperatures far below freezing aren't mundane, nevermind "high temperature". High temp is what you fry eggs on, not what flash-freezes things.

KitemanSA wrote:

Giorgio wrote: You are really overgeneralizing now.

Hmmm? In what way?

In two ways.

The first to think that superconductors are for everyday people. There will be a time when this will be true, but not now. Normal people still hardly understand the logic of what a superconductor is and does.

The second to think that people either understand something or they believe it is magic.

Giorgio wrote:

KitemanSA wrote:

Giorgio wrote: You are really overgeneralizing now.

Hmmm? In what way?

In two ways.

The first to think that superconductors are for everyday people. There will be a time when this will be true, but not now. Normal people still hardly understand the logic of what a superconductor is and does.

The second to think that people either understand something or they believe it is magic.

First, see my edit: oops!

Second, just applying Clarke's law: any sufficiently advanced technology seems like magic. If they CAN'T understand (unlikely) punt and tell them it is magic.

Betruger wrote: That's beside the point. They know that superconductors are those fancy electrothings where electricity's superlative in some substantial way.

Then tell them that the funny cryo-scientist weenines who MAKE the stuff have funny ideas about temperature and to them what MADE the fancy electro-thingees, "high temperature" is still cold enough to freeze the nads off the devil!

Weird, no?

KitemanSA wrote:First, see my edit: oops!

Second, just applying Clarke's law: any sufficiently advanced technology seems like magic. If they CAN'T understand (unlikely) punt and tell them it is magic.

Didn't notice the edit, sorry.

But Clarke's law cannot be applied here as we are not talking about a huge technological gap between scientists and the rest of the people, but just about avoiding miscomprehension.

If with a logic use of word you can reduce the mental gap between scientist and other people why not do it?

Obviously, the definition of "high temperature superconductor" comes because it is very important if the superconductor can be cooled with liquid nitrogen: nitrogen is much more abundant and cheap than helium.

But the news has big implications in engineering and science. A superconductor cable capable of the same or more current with one-tenth the typical diameter is not a trifle, and it is a good notice for poywell, I think.