Not to be rude, but what makes this person such an authority that a contextless Tweet from them is worth discussing? They appear to be somebody who recently finished an undergraduate degree in physics at Princeton and now works for a coffee start-up. I'm sure they know more physics than I do, but I don't see why I should trust their assessment of this situation.<p>(Or maybe they "showed their work" in a more extensive form that is not visible to me in whatever Twitter is now.)
For context, he goes on:<p>>LK-99 is probably a new and interesting diamagnetic material that exhibits a phase change from an insulator to a conductor at 400K, but it does not exhibit features of superconductivity<p>>Still worth trying to replicate, but there's essentially no data left in the original paper that can only be explained by superconductivity. All the main findings have more plausible alternate explanations.
For people who don't like staring at blank pages: <a href="https://nitter.net/alexkaplan0/status/1684642852616192000" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://nitter.net/alexkaplan0/status/1684642852616192000</a>
Given how Twitter doesn't allow you to see anything without an account now, this link is essentially useless. It's just someone stating a contextless opinion, which is guess is what the original Twitter was.
I've been following this guy on twitter and it seems like he's kind of jumped the gun twice at this point. Was really quick to celebrate the new superconductor, and now he's convinced it's over. I think we just need to wait for replication attempts