<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>mensetmanusman</author><text>Because materials interfaces create weird effects.&lt;p&gt;You would use metals as your leads and create Josephson-junctions-like interfaces.&lt;p&gt;Basically the abrupt change in electron mobility across materials can cause knock on effects that dominate what you are trying to measure.&lt;p&gt;Interfacial engineering is one term in materials science that implements best practices for dealing with such challenges.</text><parent_chain><item><author>weinzierl</author><text>This is probably a very stupid question, but why is simply measuring resistance not enough to conclusively prove that it is a superconductor. I mean, isn&amp;#x27;t zero resistance the defining property?</text></item><item><author>bluecoconut</author><text>I got my PhD studying band structure of high-tc superconductors (experimentalist, ARPES). These Cu d-d interactions right at the fermi energy give me huge hope. Feels very familiar to other superconductors (re: all the cuprates). (Note: I specifically worked in a lab that was measuring a lot of the d-wave character &amp;#x2F; gap-energies of various superconductors)&lt;p&gt;All in all, I&amp;#x27;m now much more bullish on LK-99 being real superconductivity after seeing multiple different labs compute similar band structures. The video of multiple directions of magnet showing some levitation also inspires a lot of hope.</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Electronic Structure of LK-99</title><url>https://arxiv.org/abs/2308.00676</url></story>
<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>vrotaru</author><text>Well, I guess, that are islands of superconductivity and normal conductivity in the same sample.&lt;p&gt;This gives a low resistance and diamagnetism which is used as proxy to real superconductivity.&lt;p&gt;I may be wrong though.</text><parent_chain><item><author>weinzierl</author><text>This is probably a very stupid question, but why is simply measuring resistance not enough to conclusively prove that it is a superconductor. I mean, isn&amp;#x27;t zero resistance the defining property?</text></item><item><author>bluecoconut</author><text>I got my PhD studying band structure of high-tc superconductors (experimentalist, ARPES). These Cu d-d interactions right at the fermi energy give me huge hope. Feels very familiar to other superconductors (re: all the cuprates). (Note: I specifically worked in a lab that was measuring a lot of the d-wave character &amp;#x2F; gap-energies of various superconductors)&lt;p&gt;All in all, I&amp;#x27;m now much more bullish on LK-99 being real superconductivity after seeing multiple different labs compute similar band structures. The video of multiple directions of magnet showing some levitation also inspires a lot of hope.</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Electronic Structure of LK-99</title><url>https://arxiv.org/abs/2308.00676</url></story>