nature.com/lw767/magazine-assets/d41586-02061 w/d41586-02061 w_27364992.jpg?as=webp 767W, https://media.nature.com/lw319/magazine-assets/d41586-02061 w/d41586-02061-w_2736492.jpg?as=webp 319W "SISES =" (Max-Width) 319PX,: 1023PX) 100VW, 767PX ">

researchers who examine high-pressure supercups-materials that have zero electrical resistance when they are compressed-are under pressure again. The field is still recovering from A scandal in which the physicist Ranga Dias claimed to have discovered room temperature superconductors , but by his employer Extensive scientific misconduct was found.

Now there are again concerns about the results from the laboratory of Mikhail Eremets, a physicist at the Max Planck Institute for Chemistry (MPIC) in Mainz, Germany. In 2015, Eremets announced a sensational discovery that the connection material hydrogen sulfide is up to 203 Kelvin (–70 ° C) at a pressure of 155 gigapascal - a little less than the pressure in the center of the earth. Most materials only show superconductors at much lower temperatures; For example, the previous record holder works for the same type of supercondition, magnesium diboride, only up to frosty 39 Kelvin (−234 ° C). So he was a progress.

Since then, Eremets and his colleagues have continued to collect evidence of the superconductor in hydrogen sulfide and other hydrogen -based materials, so -called hydrids. Your article in Nature Communications examined in June 2022 and their magnetic properties, which are crucial for materials that are super ladders. In November, however, the theorists Jorge Hirsch from the University of California, San Diego, and Frank Marsiglio from the University of Alberta in Edmonton, Canada, contacted the journal with concerns about what triggered a year -long dispute over data.

On March 6th of this year, after Hirsch and Marsiglio had expressed further concerns about the data of the article, the editors of Nature Communications added a note to the article in which they pointed out that they were drawn to potential problems with the processing of raw data. A spokesman for the journal says that the editors are waiting for technical feedback from experts that they will use to make a decision about the article. ( Nature is editorially independent of Nature Communications .)