Scientists pave the way for large-scale storage at the atomic level
1–10 of 78 posts
Re: Scientists pave the way for large-scale storage at the atomic level
#2Interesting. Hadn't considered the applications of atomic storage before
Re: Scientists pave the way for large-scale storage at the atomic level
#3Re: Scientists pave the way for large-scale storage at the atomic level
#4anyone else notice that some of the transcriptions seem wrong, assuming a fixed 8-bit encoding? for instance. the "rrange" doesn't have two columns with identical bits.
Re: Scientists pave the way for large-scale storage at the atomic level
#5anyone else notice that some of the transcriptions seem wrong, assuming a fixed 8-bit encoding? for instance. the "rrange" doesn't have two columns with identical bits.
Look at the rows
Re: Scientists pave the way for large-scale storage at the atomic level
#6This is pure buzz. Physical storage does not make any sense when light based or magnetic based storage is much faster and denser. It only makes sense if it is very permanent, ie. Etching sapphire discs [1] The position of atoms is just one classical property. Quantum properties like spin and charge are much more numerous and versatile.
[1] http://www.digitaltrends.com/cool-tech/nanoform-laser-etched...
Re: Scientists pave the way for large-scale storage at the atomic level
#7While this is very intesting, the storage mentioned does seem somewhat small to me. The article compares the area covered by the text to be a little smaller than a HIV (Human Immunodeficiency Virus). However, the genome of HIV apparently stores approximately 9.2kb (kilo basepairs, not kilobytes, so ~18KiB) of information. It also doesn't need to be kept at -196C. Are there any viable tactics for atom-based storage that could rival this density?
Re: Scientists pave the way for large-scale storage at the atomic level
#8From -269ºC to -196ºC is actually a huge improvement. Its the difference between liquid helium (expensive) to liquid nitrogen (cheap). Getting something that cold is hard, but keeping it there is just a matter of insulation. There seems to be a different kind of physics when you get that cold. Stable single atom structures, superconducting magnets, etc. It's all based around the idea that nanometer structures are now stable.
The big issue with bringing these kind of products to the general market is that we operate at a much higher temperature, the range of liquid water. And these technologies may never be able to improved to a point that they work at room temperature. Instead of moving those technologies into our range, I think could focus on moving our technologies to that range and improving/shrinking containment vessels. Self contained units with periodic maintenance/refills are viable (eg vacuum tubes). Having someone to top off a super computer's liquid nitrogen every couple of weeks is not a hard ask. We just have to make everything else work at that temperature so the entire unit can be cooled and contained, instead of just a specific section. Integrated circuit boards are already black boxes to 99.9% of the public, so sealing them in a cooled vessel is viable.
I know MRI/NMR machines already operate at that range, but they are way to big/specialized to be considered the general market. No one has an MRI machine in their medicine cabinet. I was once interning for a chemist, and asked if he ever thought we would have desktop NMR machines. He said there was no way they would ever be small enough. I then pointed at his laptop and remarked that is what people thought about computers 50 years ago.
Re: Scientists pave the way for large-scale storage at the atomic level
#9This is pure buzz. Physical storage does not make any sense when light based or magnetic based storage is much faster and denser. It only makes sense if it is very permanent, ie. Etching sapphire discs [1] The position of atoms is just one classical property. Quantum properties like spin and charge are much more numerous and versatile. [1] http://www.digitaltrends.com/cool-tech/nanoform-laser-etched...
True, unfortunately most scientists are nowadays practically obligated to state a potential real world use case for their research in their publications even when they are engaging in basic research. And mainstream media rather naively picks up on these statements.
Re: Scientists pave the way for large-scale storage at the atomic level
#10While this is very intesting, the storage mentioned does seem somewhat small to me. The article compares the area covered by the text to be a little smaller than a HIV (Human Immunodeficiency Virus). However, the genome of HIV apparently stores approximately 9.2kb (kilo basepairs, not kilobytes, so ~18KiB) of information. It also doesn't need to be kept at -196C. Are there any viable tactics for atom-based storage th…
Genetic storage is way more resistant to bit rot than conventional computers. DNA is not stable, has a full time support system fixing it, and still has a relatively high mutation rate. But biological systems on the whole are much more resistant to individual errors.
Yes, single mutations can cause horrible diseases, but these mutations are either in the active site of proteins, or disrupt folding. A large portion of proteins are "bulk." If you look at protein simulations, only a small section of the protein is simulated, and the rest is just approximated as charged mass. Changes there are much less impactful and noticeable. As for it to be a disease, it had to be present at time of concept. If it happens during life (which is does, millions of times a day), the cell either ignores it or dies.