I feel like I am out of the loop on this one. But everything I am seeing makes me skeptical, can anyone explain why I should be excited about this being anything more than just a fake paper?
Multiple authors instead of a single quack. Former leader (now sadly deceased) was a respected superconducting material researcher. They ran the essential tests, albeit not very well. They were at it for years in silence, and it was only after this current material's synthesis that they were tripping over each other to publish, with the apparent firm belief that they were onto a Nobel Prize level discovery. The theory they proposed -- while perhaps wrong -- also makes intuitive sense.
Cold fusion had many of those elements also, but the difference is that superconductivity is easier to verify.
Many people like the overall concept of using doped crystals to produce compressed or stretched lattices, which seem to be one of the enablers for superconductivity.
Compare with cold fusion, where there was no reasonable theory to explain how the palladium lattice would bring hydrogen nuclei close together.
