Failed replication of claimed superconductor reported on arxiv

Scientific fraud is a weird phenomenon that many do not intuitively see coming. That it happens at all is worth keeping in mind, as well as the manner in which it is done. When a new finding seems to good to be true, it helps to remember that it may just be so.

In this particular case, my feeling is that an unhealthy lab dynamic led to a small group of people get carried away with their excitement. I'm betting fraud hasn't happened here, but rather scientific negligence in the pursuit of glory. All my relatively uninformed speculation of course ...

From what I've gathered the group of 3 comprise one elder and former supervisor and two former graduate students. Don't underestimate the weird sway a scientific elder can have on younger researchers, nor the strange psychology that can develop around the pursuit of one's legacy. Competing with Einstein and Nobel prize winners can be a helluva drug, and the elder/senior research can influence all sorts of decisions and aspects of the research through the amount of deference the receive from the younger researchers.

As for the two younger researchers, without knowing where their careers are up to, they're probably fairly desperate to get more papers and grants, as all researchers are. Once you've started a project, you want something out of the time you've spent on it. If you've dived in on a long shot project that might go no where, you start to really want to find something in there the longer it goes all while sunk-cost fallacies haunt you everyday and pull you along longer and deeper than you really wanted to go. Combined with respect and deference to an elder pushing them along, the young researchers may very well have found themselves in a weirdly confusing space with not entirely healthy mindsets. I'm talking about losing perspective on what matters in terms of research/scientific integrity as well as managing resources for the sake of their life and career and how much trust they have for their research group on the whole, where a good deal of weird suppression followed by dramatic outbursts in an unhealthy mental health sense can happen.

Now that is all speculation, of course, but I write it just to illustrate that these kind of situations can occur, especially in science/research, and it's helpful to be aware when dramatic confusing things like this situation arise.

That’s fair, I could’ve easily been wrong!

The guy behind this paper has the exact same issues as Schon. Plagiarism in his PhD thesis, faked data, retracted papers, etc.

Unfortunately it’s a 3 part (~2.5 hour) series, but I thought it was worth the time. Definitely made me wary on the topic LOL

I agree, I was a bit cynical when I made that comment but the other commenter made me lessen my stance. It’s definitely got that BATTERY BREAKTHROUGH vibe tho 😆