Space & Physics
Superconducting Saga: What happened to LK-99?
The community of condensed matter physicists was put under spotlight in the wake of a paper, triggering a frenzy like none other in recent times.

In July 2023, two South Korean experimental physicists, Lee Sukbae and Kim Ji-Hoon published a pre-print in arXiv, claiming discovery of superconductivity in a sample, occurring at room temperature.
The condensed matter physics community was put under spotlight in the wake of this paper, triggering a frenzy like none other in recent times.
The material dubbed, LK-99, after the initials of the South Korean physicists, promised nothing short of a revolution to the electronics industry.
But before I go further, let’s go through some superconductivity basics.
What are superconductors?
Basically, superconductivity is a macroscopic quantum phenomenon. Our story begins with two ground-breaking experiments.
In 1911, the Dutch physicist, Heike Onnes observed that a mercury wire dipped in liquid helium, offered zero resistance to the passage of electricity, when the temperature of the mercury was lowered to-269◦ C.
In 1937, Pyotr Kapitsa, John F. Allen and Don Misener discovered that at an even lower temperature close to -273◦ C, liquid helium-4 transformed into a superfluid. A superfluid’s an exotic fluid exhibiting zero viscosity.
Both these exotic phenomena of superfluidity and superconductivity are closely linked, though they’re not the same.

However, this effect would go for years without a solid theory, until the physicists’ trio, John Bardeen, Leon Cooper and John Schrieffer, put together a ‘complete’ microscopic theory, known as the ‘BCS theory’. The theory makes a number of quantitative predictions about the behavior of superconductors. Most importantly, it shows how pairs of electrons would couple to form Cooper pairs, overcoming mutual repulsion below a set critical temperature. Bardeen, Cooper and Schrieffer would go on to win the 1972’s Nobel Prize in Physics for this work.
As much as superconductors revolutionized the electronics industry in the 20th century, the temperatures at which this effect is commonly seen is in the same regime as outer space. It takes resources for laboratories to reach these temperatures. But imagine if nature showed us a material that can become a superconductor at room temperature …
The case for ‘room temperature’ superconductors
But you may be wondering what’s the big deal with room temperature superconductors anyway? For one, they’re promising an overnight revolution of sorts in the electronics industry. The approximately 7% loss of energy there is to pass currents through wires during transportation, can be brought down to near zero with room temperature superconductors. Another important use of these superconductors would be in the development of strong magnetic fields. Strong stable magnetic fields are used in MRI imaging and maglev trains.

Source: Ramon Salinero / Unsplash
This could make such technologies more accessible and cheaper to the public. Renewable energy generation from solar and wind power could see their efficiency rise with the help of room-temperature superconductors. The use of room-temperature superconductors could grow exponentially more after its discovery, even in applications we do not know yet. Think of the world today without any semiconductors, it would be tough to live without our LED lamps or solar panels. Similarly, room temperature superconductors could inexorably revolutionize our way of living for the better. I mean, who knows? Nobody knows! It’s yet to be invented.
Sukbae and Kim claimed that LK-99 displayed superconductivity when the temperature dropped below 127◦ C. They claimed to have observed zero resistance currents.
And that was all it took for social media savvy tech entrepreneurs to embark on a hype train, and spread the word on room temperature superconductors potentially being real at last. Except it’s not technically room temperature – for 127◦ C is way past the boiling point of water. But it’s much easier for laboratories to set up an experiment, investigate and replicate 127◦ C.
The dream fever isn’t abating away, but the proof really is in the pudding.
There’s nothing to say room temperature superconductors can’t exist. In fact, scientists who worked in producing these results have also shared this opinion in their work.
Conventional superconductivity – with extreme cold critical temperatures – was challenged back in 1986, when certain cuprate compounds such as yttirium barium copper oxide (or YBCO) were discovered. They have a higher critical temperature of -183◦ C, which is still very cold, but still warmer compared to helium-4. Such critical temperatures are outside the realm of the standard BCS theory, with the main mechanisms underpinning them being a topic of research.
The race for verification
After their paper was submitted in arXiv, Sukbae and Kim released a video of the levitating LK-99 sample on a magnet – a hallmark signature of the Meissner effect. The Meissner effect is a prediction of the standard BCS theory – when magnetic field lines are ousted from within the material itself.
They provided a detailed description of how LK-99 can be synthesised. This led materials labs from across the world to descend into a frenzy to try and replicate their results.
Some of the earliest research were done at the National Physics Laboratory (NPL) in New Delhi and Beihang University in Beijing (BU).
A team from the Southeast University in Nanjing, observed a near-zero resistance in LK-99 at -163 ◦ C. The team from Nanjing used an X-ray diffraction technique consistent with the work that the Korean scientists had published.
And then the theorists entered the fray. Sinead Griffin from the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, US, performed calculations to suggest there really were telltale signs of room temperature super conductance in LK-99. Specifically, possible mechanisms for forming Cooper pairs were identified.
While these results were tantalising, they did not give conclusive evidence of superconductivity.
The Meissner effect – or what the South Koreans claimed was the Meissner effect- couldn’t be replicated in any other studies.
Griffin attained social media popularity after her tweets with over 14K followers on X. However, truth be told – Griffith wasn’t explicitly backing anybody – but was merely giving the South Koreans’ work a fair shot.
The last twist in the saga came when she said, “My paper did *not* prove nor give evidence of superconductivity”.
Realization dawns
And suddenly, it wasn’t going in LK-99’s favour at all. It turned out the research team at Southeast University in Nanjing, had made incorrect measurements using faulty instrumentation, meaning they were unreliable.
Whereas, the studies from India’s National Physical Laboratory (NPL) and Beihang University didn’t find report any superconductivity effect. In fact, it just seemed like dull, grey metal.
But the final series of nails in the coffin were the conclusive results by Yuan Li at Peking Institute, and Yi Jiang at the Donostia International Physics Centre, Spain. They proved beyond doubt that LK-99, as synthesised by the South Korean team, was a ferromagnet. Yuan Li also explained the levitating video of LK-99 pellets over a magnet was a result of ferromagnetism. He also showed the absence of superconducting current at low temperatures.

A ferrofluid exhibiting ferromagnetic properties; Source: Etienne Desclides / Unsplash
Science is often rife with controversies and debatable results. Many physicists have published unconfirmed, and published plagiarized work. Some notable examples include the alleged groundbreaking work of Jan Schön, who claimed discovery of organic transistors. Only to be charged with fraud after he made up his results, thus bringing him disrepute that brought an end to his scientific career pretty early on.
Then there was the work by Anshu Pandey and Dev Thapa on similar claims of room temperature superconductors that weren’t replicated.
Although it’s unfortunate that this saga ended so disappointingly with LK-99, I am not, in any manner suggestive of the fact that room-temperature superconductivity cannot exist.
Scientists who worked in producing these results have also shared this opinion in their work. Many scientists have however also shared the need to understand the results and related nitty gritty, before jumping the gun.
However, the collaboration amongst scientists at universities across the world, was focused on uncovering LK-99’s true properties.
It wasn’t just mere claims, backed by data, but also the peer-review process that helped redefine public discourse, and set the facts straight. And that had made all the difference.
Space & Physics
New double-slit experiment proves Einstein’s predictions were off the mark
Results from an idealized version of the Young double-slit experiment has upheld key predictions from quantum theory.

- MIT physicists perform the most idealized double-slit experiment to date, using individual atoms as slits.
- Experiment confirms the quantum duality of light: light behaves as both a particle and a wave, but both behaviors can’t be observed simultaneously.
- Findings disprove Albert Einstein’s century-old prediction regarding detecting a photon’s path alongside its wave nature.
In a study published in Physical Reviews Letters on July 22, researchers at MIT have realized an idealized version of the famous double-slit experiment in quantum physics yet.
The double-slit experiment—first devised in 1801 by the British physicist Thomas Young—remains a perplexing aspect of reality. Light waves passing through two slits, form interference patterns on a wall placed behind. But this phenomenon is at odds with the fact light also behaves as particles. The contradiction has lent itself to a paradox, which sits at the foundation of quantum mechanics. It has sparked a historic scientific duel nearly a century ago, between physics heavyweights Albert Einstein and Niels Bohr. The study’s findings have now settled the decades-old debate, showing Einstein’s predictions were off the mark.
Einstein had suggested that by detecting the force exerted when a photon passes through a slit—a nudge akin to a bird brushing past a leaf—scientists could witness both light’s wave and particle properties at once. Bohr countered with the argument that observing a photon’s path would inevitably erase its wave-like interference pattern, a tenet since embraced by quantum theory.
The MIT team stripped the experiment to its purest quantum elements. Using arrays of ultracold atoms as their slits and weak light beams to ensure only one photon scattered per atom, they tuned the quantum states of each atom to control the information gained about a photon’s journey. Every increase in “which-path” information reduced the visibility of the light’s interference pattern, flawlessly matching quantum theory and further debunking Einstein’s proposal.
“Einstein and Bohr would have never thought that this is possible, to perform such an experiment with single atoms and single photons,” study senior author and Nobel laureate, Wolfgang Ketterle, stated in a press release. “What we have done is an idealized Gedanken (thought) experiment.”
In a particularly stunning twist, Ketterle’s group also disproved the necessity of a physical “spring”—a fixture in Einstein’s original analogy—by holding their atomic lattice not with springs, but with light. When they briefly released the atoms, effectively making the slits “float” in space, the same quantum results persisted. “In many descriptions, the springs play a major role. But we show, no, the springs do not matter here; what matters is only the fuzziness of the atoms,” commented MIT researcher Vitaly Fedoseev in a media statement. “Therefore, one has to use a more profound description, which uses quantum correlations between photons and atoms.”
The paper arrives as the world prepares for 2025’s International Year of Quantum Science and Technology — marking 100 years since the birth of quantum mechanics. Yoo Kyung Lee, a fellow co-author, noted in a media statement, “It’s a wonderful coincidence that we could help clarify this historic controversy in the same year we celebrate quantum physics.”
Space & Physics
Researchers Uncover New Way to Measure Hidden Quantum Interactions in Materials

A team of MIT scientists has developed a theory-guided strategy to directly measure an elusive quantum property in semiconductors — the electron-phonon interaction — using an often-ignored effect in neutron scattering.
Their approach, published this week in Materials Today Physics, reinterprets an interference effect, typically considered a nuisance in experiments, as a valuable signal. This enables researchers to probe electron-phonon interactions — a key factor influencing a material’s thermal, electrical, and optical behaviour — which until now have been extremely difficult to measure directly.
“Rather than discovering new spectroscopy techniques by pure accident, we can use theory to justify and inform the design of our experiments and our physical equipment,” said Mingda Li, senior author and associate professor at MIT, in a media statement.
By engineering the interference between nuclear and magnetic interactions during neutron scattering, the team demonstrated that the resulting signal is directly proportional to the electron-phonon coupling strength.
“Being able to directly measure the electron-phonon interaction opens the door to many new possibilities,” said MIT graduate student Artittaya Boonkird.
While the current setup produced a weak signal, the findings lay the groundwork for next-generation experiments at more powerful facilities like Oak Ridge National Laboratory’s proposed Second Target Station. The team sees this as a shift in materials science — using theoretical insights to unlock previously “invisible” properties for a range of advanced technologies, from quantum computing to medical devices.
Space & Physics
Dormant Black Holes Revealed in Dusty Galaxies Through Star-Shredding Events

In a major discovery, astronomers at MIT, Columbia University, and other institutions have used NASA’s James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) to uncover hidden black holes in dusty galaxies that violently “wake up” only when an unsuspecting star wanders too close.
The new study, published in Astrophysical Journal Letters, marks the first time JWST has captured clear signatures of tidal disruption events (TDEs) — catastrophic episodes where a star is torn apart by a galaxy’s central black hole, emitting a dramatic burst of energy.
“These are the first JWST observations of tidal disruption events, and they look nothing like what we’ve ever seen before,” said lead author Megan Masterson, a graduate student at MIT’s Kavli Institute for Astrophysics and Space Research. “We’ve learned these are indeed powered by black hole accretion, and they don’t look like environments around normal active black holes.”
Until now, nearly all TDEs detected since the 1990s were found in relatively dust-free galaxies using X-ray or optical telescopes. However, researchers suspected many more events remained hidden behind thick clouds of galactic dust. JWST’s powerful infrared vision has finally confirmed their hunch.
By analyzing four galaxies previously flagged as likely TDE candidates, the team detected distinct infrared fingerprints of black hole accretion — the process of material spiraling into a black hole, producing intense radiation. These signatures, invisible to optical telescopes, revealed that all four events stemmed not from persistently active black holes but dormant ones, roused only when a passing star came too close.
“There’s nothing else in the universe that can excite this gas to these energies, except for black hole accretion,” Masterson noted.
Among the four signals studied was the closest TDE ever detected, located 130 million light-years away. Another showed an initial optical flash that scientists had earlier suspected to be a supernova. JWST’s readings helped clarify the true cause.
“These four signals were as close as we could get to a sure thing,” said Masterson. “But the JWST data helped us say definitively these are bonafide TDEs.”
To determine whether the central black holes were inherently active or momentarily triggered by a star’s disruption, the team also mapped the dust patterns around them. Unlike the thick, donut-shaped clouds typical of active galaxies, these dusty environments appeared markedly different — further confirming the black holes were usually dormant.
“Together, these observations say the only thing these flares could be are TDEs,” Masterson said in a media statement.
The findings not only validate JWST’s unprecedented ability to study hidden cosmic phenomena but also open new pathways for understanding black holes that lurk quietly in dusty galactic centers — until they strike.
With future observations planned using JWST, NEOWISE, and other infrared tools, the team hopes to catalog many more such events. These cosmic feeding frenzies, they say, could unlock key clues about black hole mass, spin, and the very nature of their environments.
“The actual process of a black hole gobbling down all that stellar material takes a long time,” Masterson added. “And hopefully we can start to probe how long that process takes and what that environment looks like. No one knows because we just started discovering and studying these events.”
-
Society5 months ago
Starliner crew challenge rhetoric, says they were never “stranded”
-
Space & Physics4 months ago
Could dark energy be a trick played by time?
-
Earth5 months ago
How IIT Kanpur is Paving the Way for a Solar-Powered Future in India’s Energy Transition
-
Space & Physics4 months ago
Sunita Williams aged less in space due to time dilation
-
Women In Science4 months ago
Neena Gupta: Shaping the Future of Algebraic Geometry
-
Learning & Teaching5 months ago
Canine Cognitive Abilities: Memory, Intelligence, and Human Interaction
-
Society6 months ago
Sustainable Farming: The Microgreens Model from Kerala, South India
-
Earth3 months ago
122 Forests, 3.2 Million Trees: How One Man Built the World’s Largest Miyawaki Forest