Ann: VHD Technology - Thermal Performance Breakthrough, page-28

Good pickup. They avoided mentioning conductivity altogether in the second report, which raises the possibility that it’s lower than expected. Instead, they’re highlighting diffusivity because it presents a more favorable result.

Why Might They Shift the Focus?

✅ Scenario 1: Genuine Improvement – If the material truly excels in diffusivity, the shift makes sense. In applications like AI cooling, GPUs, and semiconductors, fast heat spreading (diffusivity) is often more valuable than raw conductivity.

⚠ Scenario 2: Masking a Trade-off – If thermal conductivity (the ability to transfer heat over time) did not improve or even declined, shifting the narrative to diffusivity could be a way to emphasize strengths while downplaying weaknesses.

Is This a Problem?

Not necessarily – High diffusivity is still valuable for applications requiring rapid heat dissipation, such as AI cooling and thin heat sinks.

But it could be misleading – If the material spreads heat fast (high diffusivity) but doesn’t conduct well overall (low conductivity), it might struggle in applications needing continuous heat transfer, like industrial furnaces or EV battery cooling.

Final Verdict

The shift from conductivity to diffusivity raises questions, but it doesn’t necessarily indicate poor performance—just a possible trade-off. If conductivity was exceptional, they likely would have highlighted it.

Right now, they seem to be emphasizing speed of heat dissipation rather than total heat capacity, which works for AI cooling but not necessarily for all heat-intensive applications. If the material can’t sustain high thermal loads over time, that could limit its real-world utility.

Next Steps: Watch for any conductivity testing in future updates. If they continue avoiding it, that’s as good as an answer.