Science●●●●●Difficulty 5 of 5

Why did the 2023 LK-99 room-temperature superconductor claim collapse within weeks?

A video of a tiny rock half-floating over a magnet set the internet on fire. The physics behind why it wasn't a superconductor is a lesson in what proof looks like.

▶ Start the story

The claim collapsed because it never showed the signatures that define a superconductor, and because other scientists found ordinary explanations for what it did show. In July 2023 a Korean team published preprints claiming that LK-99 was a room-temperature superconductor at up to 400 K at ambient pressure. Researchers reached initial results within weeks, and by mid-August 2023 the consensus was that LK-99 is not a room-temperature superconductor and is an insulator in pure form.

The claim was extraordinary. At the time, the best known superconductors reached 250 K only at enormous pressure, and at atmospheric pressure at most 150 K. And the preprints did not report any definitive property of superconductivity, such as zero resistance, the Meissner effect or a jump in specific heat. What they offered instead was a tiny sample that seemed to float partly over a magnet.

That partial levitation is a sign of ordinary diamagnetism or ferromagnetism, but a video of it went viral, with memes about floating rocks and a brief surge in Korean and Chinese technology stocks. A prediction market briefly put the chance of successful replication at 60%.

Three weeks of LK-99
  1. Step 1: July 2023: preprints claim a room-temperature superconductor

  2. Step 2: Early August: a floating-rock video goes viral

  3. Step 3: Labs replicate within weeks

    Copper sulfide impurity explains the signs

  4. Step 4: 16 August: Nature declares it an insulator

Then the replications came in. A prominent cause of the signs was a copper sulfide impurity from the recipe, which can produce resistance drops, a heat-capacity transition and magnetic response in small samples. On 16 August 2023, Nature published an article declaring that LK-99 had been shown to be an insulator, not a superconductor. It is a case of science working fast: a bold claim, quickly tested, and quickly corrected.

Quiz me

0/3

  1. 1.What did the LK-99 preprints fail to show?
  2. 2.Which explanation accounted for several of the observed signs?
  3. 3.Why was 'partial levitation' not convincing?

Recap

Partial levitation alone proves nothing: a superconductor needs zero resistance and the Meissner effect, which were never observed.

💡 A trick to remember it · Half a float is not a flight: look for zero resistance and the Meissner effect.

Surprising fact · A copper sulfide impurity from the recipe can mimic several of the signs reported for LK-99.

Sources (2)

No source, no claim. Every fact in this lesson (17 claims) cites at least one of these.

  1. [1]LK-99 · Wikipedia
  2. [2]Ranga P. Dias · Wikipedia
More lessons in 🧬 Science (3) See all science lessons →

One more light on your map.

Get one lesson like this every day, about the things you love. Free, in two or five minutes.

Get the share card for this lesson ↗