Talk:Supersolid

Copyright query
I have removed the copyvio tag due to the discussions below. Best, UnitedStatesian (talk) 20:55, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

Copyright violation
Cummon, this is just about verbatim ripped from n/s. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.9.60.238 (talk • contribs) 06:00, 20 October 2005
 * Here is the original edit which added the bulk of the current text - an anonymous contribution. I'm going to google a bit for the source. Hairy Dude 01:39, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Nuts, all Google hits are derived from this article. It still looks like a copyvio to me. Adding cv-unsure here. Hairy Dude 01:49, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

The text was indeed copyrighted and was taken from the article "Just Passing Through" starting on page 34 of the October 8th issue of New Scientist. I have removed the offending text.

There's still offending text at the end, taken from Nature Here WorkerBee —Preceding comment was added at 15:27, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Just completed a copy-edit of the page. Sadly, it took on a fairly condescending tone at times. This copy-edit might have also effected sections of the text which were under copyright. RevZoe (talk) 06:13, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Also, just noticed 'Nature story on a supersolid experiment' is a dead link. RevZoe (talk) 06:14, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Effective mass
So when the helium was cooled below a certain point some of its mass disappeared. Is there any connection between this phenomenon and the phenomenon of 'effective mass'? just-emery (talk) 19:27, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

No, there is no connection between 'supersolid', mass decoupling in a torsional oscillator and an effective mass phenomenon. Supersolid is supposed to be a state where part of a solid behaves like superfluid, (check superfluid 4He, BEC etc.), but within a solid state.

The whole super-solid concept sounds pretty contrived (fishy). Apparent loss of mass, or more precisely momentum, has enormous implications across a very broad area of science, such as QM, astrophysics, potential implications for fusion, LENR, ZPE, etc, etc, etc..... Particularily given the fact that this concerns He4, a principle component of fusion (cold or HOT). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.68.90.133 (talk) 00:45, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Inverted metal
there is something called an 'inverted metal' that has properties that sound very similar to this. Does anyone know anything about this? just-emery (talk) 19:35, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

What?
What is the last line of the article really saying? Somebody figured it out? Any sources? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.233.13.147 (talk) 19:01, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Torsion experiments?
Whatever happened to the torsion experiments, where it seemed that super-cooled HE4 seemed to lose mass..... Just curious...?

YAH... GOOD Question.... Nobody seems to want to talk about that one !

[Please note: The above was an unsigned comment left on the article page. I moved it here since that was an inappropriate place for an editorial comment. Joshua Davis (talk) 18:23, 19 February 2011 (UTC)]

Hypotetical?
A supersolid is a hypotetical spatially ordered material with superfluid properties. Superfluidity is a special quantum state of matter in which a substance flows with zero viscosity.

Because it was not observed ... 195.113.87.138 (talk) 13:24, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

This helium or that helium
There is a sentence sequence that has a strange way of saying what it's saying, and I thought it might mean to say the opposite. In the section on experiments, fourth paragraph
 * Furthermore, most samples of helium-4 contain a small amount of helium-3. When some of this helium-4 is removed, ....

My interpretation of the first of the two sentences is the helium-3 is unwanted, like a contaminant, and the desired status is that the sample contain only helium-4. So when it says in the second sentence "some of this helium-4 is removed" it is unexpected, because in my interpretation the helium-3 is the unwanted isotope, and the experimenter would want to increase the amount of helium-4 or decrease the amount of helium-3. One obvious edit is that I'm correct in my tentative understanding and that it should read "When some of this helium-3 is removed," and the other possibility is to reword so that the reader is not primed to expect that the helium-3 is an unwanted contaminant. Perhaps a wording that suggests that the helium-3 is unexpected but interesting. Cardiffman (talk) 18:00, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Unclear
This article does not provide a very clear description of what a Supersolid actually is for someone not familiar with physics. In the Superfluid article, there is a clear description regarding the fluid's properties, complete with illustrations. This article has no such description, only saying "A supersolid is a spatially ordered material with superfluid properties." before diving into the background on Superfluidity and being extremely confusing as to how to relates to the subject of Supersolids. Biglulu (talk) 02:33, 24 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Agreed. The article talks far more about superfluids than it does supersolids, and it took several re-reads to get the general gist - "A crystal with superfluid flowing within the solid lattice structure." And I'm not entirely sure if that's completely accurate. --King Starscream (talk) 14:41, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

Moved from External links

 * Phys. Rev. Lett. Vol.101, 8 August 2008
 * (1969). "Destruction of Superflow in Unsaturated 4He Films and the Prediction of a New Crystalline Phase of 4He with Bose–Einstein Condensation", Physics Letters, Vol. 30, No. 5, November 3, 1969, pp. 300–301 Jack Sarfatti
 * Youtube lecture on Supersolids

86.191.67.197 (talk) 20:16, 21 April 2019 (UTC)


 * I've also tentatively added in a brief recent news item. 86.191.67.197 (talk) 20:21, 21 April 2019 (UTC)