Talk:Unconventional superconductor

Need a reference

I'm sceptical towards the claim that "at present it is considered unlikely that cuprate perovskite materials will achieve room-temperature superconductivity". I recently interviewed Nicolas Doiron-Leyraud (concerning some interesting research on understanding high-temperature superconductors, see http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2007-06/c-asn060607.php), and his opinion was that copper oxides so far are the best candidates for room-teperature superconductors. (It can be argued that it still is unlikely that copper oxides will reach room-temperature superconductivity, but that's just playing on words. And in any case it would be nice with a reference to the statement.) --Itangalo 06:05, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Especially since Joe Eck has suggested that (Tl₄Pb)Ba₂MgCu₈O₁₃₊ has (yet to be confirmed) a T_c of 276K [1].

What are people's thoughts on using superconductors.org as a citation location?

Fine Structure (talk to α) 08:48, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And in Dec 2011 they claim SC "near 28 Celsius (83F, 301K) in a senary oxycuprate".

I think its ok to note their claims - it's a notable claim and interesting to read. Better if we can find some informed comment on it. - Rod57 (talk) 19:34, 30 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

200 K superconductor?

For what it's worth:

"Superconductors.ORG herein reports synthesis of the first 200K superconductor in conjunction with the discovery of a new superconductor system." http://www.superconductors.org/200K.htm

—WWoods (talk) 18:15, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction Re-write?

Now I'm no expert on the style guidelines proposed by Wikipedia, but I get the feeling that perhaps some of the introduction should be merged into the "History and progress" section, leaving instead a briefer overview of the topic before the navigation box. Anyone agree? --Luceus (talk) 05:57, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've made it into a Detailed history section - so now we might need to add more to the intro. - Rod57 (talk) 23:15, 20 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Mention of Nikolay Bogolyubov needs to be explained

It's in the first sentence. Is his theory accepted or is this vandalism ? - Rod57 (talk) 23:15, 20 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Does this cover Tc relative to Fermi temp

HTS says defn 2 is "Having a transition temperature that is a larger fraction of the Fermi temperature than for conventional superconductors such as elemental mercury or lead.[citation needed] This definition encompasses a wider variety of unconventional superconductors and is used in the context of theoretical models." Should we cover this in the intro here ? - Rod57 (talk) 19:19, 21 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

What can we say about the predictions of the two representative theories of HTS

Do either of them make testable predictions ? Can we list some ? - Rod57 (talk) 04:52, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Huge overlap with huge overlap with High-temperature_superconductivity#Possible_mechanism

Which should be detailed and which should be summary ? or should the two be merged ? - Rod57 (talk) 07:06, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]