One of the first steps would be figure out the theory of how it works, and based on it, synthesize ambient SC materials that are easy to produce repeatably and reliably and are easy to work with. The next steps depend on the outcome of that undertaking.
Even if we know how a room temp superconductor works, that doesn’t mean we can predict new materials with arbitrary combinations of properties. We more or less understand how iron-based high temperature superconductors work, but that hasn’t led to a spate of designer unconventional superconductors. Prediction is just hard. People will certainly make educated guesses about how to turn any new superconductor into a “family” of superconductors related by small changes, but that’s very phenomenological.
Well, yes, we do understand the low-temp superconductors and its limitations. We do not really understand High-Tc superconductors, and it seems to impair the search for better versions. It’s quite possible that if LK-99 turns out to be more than a false positive, its workings might still remain an open problem for a long time. Or maybe, as you suggest, we figure out how it works, but still will not be able to use it to guide the design of something significantly more convenient. So, yeah, it is possible that the search for more convenient versions will be left to material scientists rather than physicists proper. Still, it seems like there is a lot of improvement needed before we can produce these potential ambient superconductors in useful quantities and sizes.
One of the first steps would be figure out the theory of how it works, and based on it, synthesize ambient SC materials that are easy to produce repeatably and reliably and are easy to work with. The next steps depend on the outcome of that undertaking.
Even if we know how a room temp superconductor works, that doesn’t mean we can predict new materials with arbitrary combinations of properties. We more or less understand how iron-based high temperature superconductors work, but that hasn’t led to a spate of designer unconventional superconductors. Prediction is just hard. People will certainly make educated guesses about how to turn any new superconductor into a “family” of superconductors related by small changes, but that’s very phenomenological.
Well, yes, we do understand the low-temp superconductors and its limitations. We do not really understand High-Tc superconductors, and it seems to impair the search for better versions. It’s quite possible that if LK-99 turns out to be more than a false positive, its workings might still remain an open problem for a long time. Or maybe, as you suggest, we figure out how it works, but still will not be able to use it to guide the design of something significantly more convenient. So, yeah, it is possible that the search for more convenient versions will be left to material scientists rather than physicists proper. Still, it seems like there is a lot of improvement needed before we can produce these potential ambient superconductors in useful quantities and sizes.