Regarding the recent superconductivity claims video
The question is about a specific experiment. The reason for closure is that this is about an unpublished theory.
$\begingroup$
$\endgroup$
1
-
$\begingroup$ I dunno why it was closed as non-mainstream but it is basically a link which refers to paper: I would personally close it as needing details. $\endgroup$– ZeroTheHeroJul 28 at 3:31
Add a comment
|
2 Answers
$\begingroup$
$\endgroup$
In its current form (v1), the question in its entirety is
Regarding the recent superconductivity claims video
Can anybody please tell why this cannot be electrostatic repulsion?
[some link]
This question is not self-contained. It cannot be answered without following the link. The link goes to a website that I'm not familiar with, and I haven't clicked it; it could go to a well-written paragraph, or a technical paper, or to a three-hour video by a raving lunatic, or (worst) to a short video.
To make the question on-topic, one step will be to make the question self-contained, so that an interested person can gather enough evidence to answer the question without necessarily leaving our site.
I don't know why two of your three close voters chose "non-mainstream" rather than "unclear" for their close reason. Note that part of our "non-mainstream" close reason is that we don't peer-review unpublished material here; perhaps the applicability of that reason would be obvious if I had clicked on your link.
$\begingroup$
$\endgroup$
I voted to close the question as Opinion based. There is no way we can judge whether or not the experiment is genuine just by looking at a short video.
