Hae tiger

Formerly

On 11 May, the work of the TMVP team at Nanjing University to overturn the U.S. Temperature Study was published online. The publication of the paper was less than two months from the publication of the first draft on the pre-print site, arXiv.

The final version, compared with the first draft of the pre-print, provides more detailed data, demonstrating that there is no near-pressure hyperforming room in the H-N3 materials.

The data presented in the pre-print paper are under pressure of less than six GPa, and this nitrogen hypothetical hyperconduct is not available. Newly published papers in Nature complement a large number of new data, which do not have ultra-conductivity, let alone hypertension, under pressure of 40.1 GPa and lower temperatures to 2K.

On 8 March, the Ramga Dias team at the University of Rochester, United States, published a moderate ultra-conduct study in Nature, which stated that one of its researched dioxin-hydro-nitrogen materials had achieved room hyperform under nearly one GPSa.

The paper published by the tiger team directly negates this conclusion. If the Dias team also wants to maintain its near-pressure superconduct, it must give convincing new evidence. “It seems difficult, however, to hear the TMVP.

Three additional

The tiger team, while issuing an advance paper on 15 March, contacted the Nature magazine to ask whether the findings contrary to the Diyas team could be published. On the day after the affirmative answer, the tiger voted for Nature.

Naturally, the paper was intended to be published as the “Matter Arising Argument” (Contracting), but the tiger team, in its response to the comments of three drafters, added much of the high quality of the data, which was enriched. As a result, the editorial discussion of Nature culminated in the publication of research papers.

“The negation of a study is more difficult than proof of a study, since the samples that you have studied need to be shown in many ways to be consistent with the samples of the subject being questioned. There is also a need to use fine measurements and a large number of data analyses for validation.” It was said.

The TMVP has told the Chinese Science Journal, compared to the 16-page preprint paper, and the natural paper has produced numerous data, which are mainly reflected in three areas.

First, more samples were tested. They carried out more than 30 experiments with each of them and repeated each. The new data include the evolution of sample colours at higher pressure, with samples moving from deep blue to ultraviolet to red flour, and electric resistance reduced with temperature in all pressures and colours, without superconducting.

Secondly, it is more rigorously demonstrated that the samples of the experiment were consistent with those of Dias. They carried out several X-ray-ray experiments. The drafters had suggested that the frequency of X-rays was slightly different from that of Dias. The TMVP stated that this difference is very small and is generally within the scope of the instrument error. However, they have re-examined several rounds of experimentation, while also measuring Ramman spectral data, thus giving details of molecular shocks, which have proved that the samples were almost identical to those of Dias.

Third, contrasts. The drafter suggested that it would not be possible to measure possible overconducts because of inadequate sensitivity of the experimental device? The tiger team then selected a copper oxide superconductor for many years (changed temperature of 112K) to perform the same conditions. If the experimental nitrogen-hydro-nitrogen material is ultraconductible, the magnetic signal should be as strong. However, in comparison with the true ultraconductors, the 镥-hydro-nitrogen signal is weak to 1/100, and the symbols are correct and are not in conformity with the conduct of the hyperconductor.

Another obvious difference from the paper published in Nature is that of five authors, mainly because new data need new cooperation. However, the number of words is somewhat lower, as the formulation is clearer.

The sound tiger states: “We have very rich, comprehensive and bridled’ data, which can be described in a same’ fashion”.

Comparison of shares

Such a paper was also published in a high-level ad referendum.

In fact, over the past two months, in addition to the pre-print study published on 9 March and 12 March by the Research Fellows of the Institute of Physical Studies of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, which was previously reported in the Chinese Science Journal, a joint research team from the University of the Pedagogy and the University of South-East, as well as a research team from the Research Fellow of the Institute of Physical Studies of the Central School of Science, has also in some way negated the findings of Dias.

It was reported by the TMVP that the Nature had given feedback to Dias that the samples were not entirely consistent. However, it is difficult to produce exactly the same samples in actual polyclinics.

The TMVP stated that it was to be hoped that the work of its own team would serve as a hypocrisy, and that it was also a necessary process for scientific progress, especially the very important conclusions that required the certification of other independent teams. He hoped that those efforts would allow the climate of hyperconducting studies to be enthusiastic and promote the study of metal hydraulic materials.

“Phytical analysis, room hyperlinks are not necessarily achievable. In this sense, the world’s leading scientist rivalries are fast moving forward.” It was said.