To be fair, time crystal is a real -- albeit somewhat clickbaity -- concept in physics, proposed by none other than the Nobel laureate Wilczek. In simple terms, a time crystal is something whose frequency is not a harmonic of what's driving it (e.g., its periodicity could be double that of the drive). It's a "crystal" because it's breaking the (temporal) symmetry of the governing theory, just as a conventional crystal, by forming into a lattice of atoms, breaks spatial translation symmetry.

Now let's see which youtube "science channels" do a debunk on their own content pushed out a mere month ago.

What other fields?

The offspring of a virgin birth are not exact clones of their mother but are genetically very similar, and are always female.

What's the source of the difference?

Think of this as a citation gold rush. You need to get on the band wagon early to become part of "the standard references" that everyone has to cite regardless of relevance. People will avoid making outlandish claims in order not to look stupid a year later in case things didn't work out -- no follow up work thus far has actually claimed to see superconductivity, just innuendos.

Not saying LK99 is or is not the wonder material, but right now it's more of a sociological experiment.

The point is there are established conventions among the practitioners on how these are pronounced, and not getting them right says something about the youtuber who may otherwise appear as an expert.

You might be right on how the name 'Schrieffer' should be pronounced in its original tongue, but I've heard multiple former students and colleagues of Bob Schrieffer pronounce it otherwise to conclude that theirs is probably how Schrieffer himself intended his name to be pronounced.

Yeah, can't wait to hear economists' take, or The Economist's..

While the phenomenon, namely bulk-boundary correspondence, is inspired by topological insulators, the fundamental physics here is rather classical, not quantum. It appears quantamagazine has since updated the title (physics -> physicists), but not the url.

What's interesting here is they were able to verify the bulk topological characters (winding number around the zero of the wave function, ie the vortex) via observational data. In physics it's usually the other way around: the edge phenomenon, that is the edge spectral flow, is easier to measure than the elusive phase winding of the bulk wave function.

Incidentally, the original theory paper from Delplace et al came out right after the physics Nobel prize was awarded to topological physics.

Technically technical

Here is a more in-depth companion article from APS. It sounds more like technical difficulties in performing a theoretical calculation than a problem with the fundamental theory

This was the 2020 material science Ig Nobel winner. Personally I think their control for the annealing process is flawed but somewhat understandable given the difficulty in securing the amount of material necessary for a more refined experiment. For reference, here are all the papers citing this work: https://scholar.google.com/scholar?oi=bibs&hl=en&cites=17315240754674471683

Very refreshing to see the technical content of the notion of entropy succinctly summarized in the first sentence. Too many articles about entropy fixate on interpreting entropy as "order" or "disorder" without ever giving a precise account of what entropy is.

May not be what you are looking for, but I'd look into either a chair mount or an under-the-desk keyboard tray.