Ranga Dias, March 2023.
| Photo Credit: Screengrab from University of Rochester video/YouTube
Controversial University of Rochester physicist Ranga P. Dias face a possible third retraction of a paper associated to his work on room-temperature superconductors in a yr, after the co-authors of a examine printed in March 2023 have requested for it to be retracted following considerations over the integrity of its information.
The paper, printed by the journal Nature, reported {that a} compound referred to as lutetium hydride turns into a superconductor with the addition of a small quantity of nitrogen atoms and excessive stress.
Letter to Nature
Against the backdrop of an investigation ongoing by the University of Rochester into Dr. Dias’s work, his coauthors – principally graduate college students on the time the work was carried out – wrote a letter to Tobias Rödel, a senior editor at Nature, The Wall Street Journal reported on September 26.
In the letter, the group urged the journal to retract the paper as a result of, The Wall Street Journal stated it added, the paper had misrepresented measurements {of electrical} resistance and warmth capability – that are used to infer {that a} materials is superconducting. The group additionally wrote that its members had notified Dr. Dias of those considerations however that he had “largely dismissed” them in addition to that “some of us were instructed by Dr. Dias not to probe further into the issues raised and/or not to worry about such concerns”.
Dr. Dias instructed the newspaper, “I have never engaged in the fabrication, manipulation, or misrepresentation of data in any of my research endeavors.”
The newspaper additionally reported that not less than six of the co-authors of the paper had obtained an e mail earlier in September from Dr. Dias wherein he threatened them with a defamation lawsuit in the event that they didn’t “cease and desist” their correspondence with editors at Nature.
Another critique
On May 2, two physicists who have been unidentified on the time additionally submitted a be aware to Nature wherein they criticised the outcomes described within the printed paper. Science reported on September 27 that they have been James Hamlin (University of Florida) and Brad Ramshaw (Cornell University).
In their be aware, Drs. Hamlin and Ramshaw had additionally raised involved in regards to the electrical resistance plot. In their paper, Dias et al. had written that the resistance was measured with some noise and that the noise had been subtracted later, leaving solely the resistance sign. But critics have alleged that the subtraction eliminated extra than simply noise and that the sign left behind regarded anomalous.
Two different retractions
At least one try to replicate the findings of the lutetium hydride paper, by Russell Hemley (University of Illinois Chicago) claimed to have discovered proof that the fabric turns into a superconductor within the circumstances described within the March 2023 paper. But unbiased consultants have stated its “resistance measurements may be flawed,” in accordance to Science, whilst Dr. Hemley has stood by his findings.
On September 26, 2022, Nature had retracted one other paper of a examine led by Dr. Dias that purported to present {that a} compound of carbon, sulphur, and hydrogen turned a superconductor, over considerations about information of the fabric’s magnetic susceptibility. In August 2023, Physical Review Letters retracted one other paper led by Dr. Dias wherein his group reported superconductivity in manganese sulphide. The paper was retracted once more over considerations with {the electrical} resistance measurement.
Unearthly Materials
Dr. Dias has based an organization, referred to as Unearthly Materials, to commercialise his findings. A superconductor that may work in ambient situations is predicted to revolutionise a plethora of fields and industries, together with high-energy physics, electrical engineering, and medical diagnostics. But the slew of retractions is predicted to enhance scrutiny of its plans and the $16.5 million it has raised from buyers, per The New York Times.
The journal Nature can be underneath the lens for its vetting course of, which has so far allowed two problematic papers to get by way of earlier than dealing with the prospect of retraction.
