The reason why science doesn’t work now

(1)○ Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne National Laboratory, United States
(2)Michael Norman of is amateurish and has a raw data presentation. Lead-phosphorus ore is a non-conductive mineral, not a metal, so the explanation for the dimension is bad, but the Argonne National Laboratory is taking it very seriously and trying to reproduce it You’ll know in a week put one’s back on
(3)Nadiya Mason, a coagulant physicist at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Sampaign, said, “I appreciate that the authors presented some sloppy but appropriate data and that manufacturing technology was clearly presented. Charge waves could exist in the chain.” I think I’ve found the best point of non-traditional but strong interaction, etc
(4)Reproduction attempt and precision verification of the paper is bad
(5)LK-99’s Room T Some Toes For Superconductivity Reproduction Today; This Time Pure Cu3P Pb2SOS Cu Impurities None At All New LK-99 Coming Tomorrow Evening!! Wishing the new LK-99 will dance with permanent magnets!!
(6)· Hide Translation / Evaluate Translation
(7)It’s called “Partial success” and a new LK99 will be completed tomorrow
(8)The reproduction attempt failed, so they continued to experiment by changing the conditions, and evaluated that their results and the figures of the paper were different in the middle

(1)This person also went into a verification experiment, swearing that his thesis was lame
(2)What’s interesting is that the laboratory environment is not good, so I experimented in the kitchen
(3)Now we’re done with the experimental verification, and we’re preparing a peer review for the LK99 paper

(1)Likewise, after the experimental verification, the paper is crude, but it is worth studying, and further research is being conducted under different conditions
(2)So far, scientists have shown different characteristics than conventional superconductors, so it’s natural that there were no room temperature superconductors in the past
(3)There’s also a feeling that we should sort out the concept of superconductors, and I’m roughly tearing off graduate students’ heads

(1)Whatever it was, it was fun
(2)From the first day, he said that his thesis was crude and called GJ23
(3)No experimental verification while being sarcastic with a magnetic body
(4)Whatever it was, it was fun < A paper review of science that can't be done
(5)Superconductor’s History! Review of LK-99 Video Archive Papers
(6)2 days before 580,000 views
(7)Science Unrealcience that won’t work
(8)Superconductor research, which is drawing keen attention from all over the world, needs to be properly known to analyze it properly! Explore the basic concept types and research history of superconductors and new videos
(9)Superconductor History to Know!
(10)LK-99 Video Archive Paper Review
(11)I said this is a review
(12)The scientific community is still skeptical about the possibility of a LK-99 superconductor Briefing on the current situation of room temperature superconductors until the contents of the paper and samples are unreleased!670,000 views – 21 hours ago
(13)Engineering that won’t work – IT Tech New Technology
(14)A new video showing errors and meaningful achievements in previous papers when the LK-99 Superconductor Verification Quantum Energy Research Institute has not yet released and verified the superconductor samples of LK-99
(15)Why the scientific community is skeptical
(16)Recent video clips
(17)Still no direct verification
(18)Citing reviews written as a result of experiments by other researchers, about seven LK99 videos were uploaded continuously
(19)And it’s like summarizing the mainstream opinions of the scientific community, and upload the video

(1) hjung98 1 hour ago
(2)This guy says he’s more resistant than the copper, so he’s been making a lot of noris, but he’s laughing
(3)They’re saying that we can take one of the IV curves and finish it off. They’re saying that we’re shooting a sweeping graph from a high value at a micro level
(4)Have you ever had a hard time
(5)You’re talking on the same scale
(6)Normally, when measuring the high area of sweeping, of course, it’s a high unit, so it’s measured slowly when looking at the behavior, and only when measuring the superconductivity, it’s taken by lowering it to a completely small unit nearby
(7)Besides, MIT’s got the opposite graph of him, dude. He’s trying to pretend he knows, but he’s just got his ignorance
(8)And it’s not like you’ve ever read a paper in science, and it’s not like you’ve ever read a paper in science nature, and it’s not like you’re going to be able to verify anything
(9)Hey, you, you should check it out You list your thesis and revise your citation, at least on Google Scholar, your English name is at least 5,000 quotes, and you’re playing around with something that’s not like a number, and you’re playing with an open ending with a data error
(10)It’s not even a state-funded material, but a company-made material. Why do you ask for a sample? Why do you ask for stealth material from the F22? Dude, MIT, you’re right, is already arguing against the graph you said, so you’re right, so you’re pretending to know
(11)Dude, I’m gonna have a lot more papers and quotes than you It’s not the same. How can you pretend to know your short knowledge and milk
(12)He’s talking as if it’s easy for all materials to be made pure, and he’s been perfecting Ybco for more than a decade. It’s common sense that even superconductors in the middle can have other materials turned off
(13)Even when a Korean professor in the U.S. who directly participated in the paper said that the current value is 2,500 times better in the graph, who are you to be worse than copper, if you want to do YouTube in moderation
(14)He’s talking like a master, saying that he interpreted it as if he was the most authoritative and aware of it. As a scientist, he’s arguing that the level of babies is big, but the eyes that are doing YouTube are really losing to works that others have worked hard for a long time
(15)There’s not even a couple of conductors that can’t even be explained by the Cooper pair theory, but they’re still talking about it, like it’s embedded in pure metal that only Cooper pair Eaton can explain everything
(16) hjung98 19 hours ago
(17)He’s playing around, giving him a little room, saying there’s a possibility that he won’t be criticized, so if you’re making something similar and only criticizing what others made, if you don’t write your thesis in Science Nature first autor, let’s start with a physical review
(18)I think you keep saying that the Meisner effect is completely bite and explain the Meissner effect without a hundred percent problem, and I think you’re explaining the Meissner effect perfectly when Cooper Fair is there
(19)Keep messing with me. I think I’ll be much higher in your paper count and citation, but I’m not sure, but why are you pretending to know? The domestic verification team is messing with me, but citation is around 5000
(20)If there’s a possibility that you don’t get criticized
(21)He’s using a different metaphor
(22)One of the scientific officials finally opened the lid