Slashdot Mirror
Nano-Scale Memory Fits A Terabit On A Square Inch
prostoalex writes "San Jose Business Journal talks about Nanochip, a company that's developing molecular-scale memory: "Nanochip has developed prototype arrays of atomic-force probes, tiny instruments used to read and write information at the molecular level. These arrays can record up to one trillion bits of data -- known as a terabit -- in a single square inch. That's the storage density that magnetic hard disk drive makers hope to achieve by 2010. It's roughly equivalent to putting the contents of 25 DVDs on a chip the size of a postage stamp." The story also mentions Millipede project from IBM, where scientists are trying to build nano-scale memory that relies on micromechanical components."
Yes, a terabit = 125 Gigabytes, which is 31.25 DVDs
Is that a hardware terabit or a software terabit?
This kind of devices would be incredible for backup purposes, but also, the recording method seems to be also fast, would they accept allmost-unlimited rewrites?, in that case, this technology could finally replace magnetic devices. Solid state is allways better, but so far, the existing alternatives don't offer the durability and flexibility of hard disks.
WTF am I doing replying to an AC at 5 A.M on a Friday night?
Mod me -1 redundant if you like, but for people out there, but 1 trillion b= 125,000,000,000 bytes = 116 GB, or if you're a harddrive manufacturer, its 125 GB.
Cool, the next time I need to send something over sneakernet to someone far away, I'll just send a postcard with 2 stamps on it. 1 postal and 1 storage stamp.
More information about the company can be found at their website, http://www.nanochip.com.nyud.net:8090[Coral Cache Link].
What are the odds that some idiot will name his mutex ether-rot-mutex!
Warm reboots don't erase memory. Cold reboots usually don't erase memory, either. (There are still fragments of what was left before after doing a cold boot.)
And as almost all data recovery people know, reformatting a hard drive using the conventional disk formatting commands don't really erase anything; they merely create new directory structures. In order to really erase a disk, you have to use something like Eraser or `dd if=/dev/urandom of=/dev/hda`.
It is non-volatile by nature. But it is not likely to be fast enough to replace RAM. Instead it could replace Flash memory or even (depending on cost) hard drives. The real question is, how long until it's practical to manufacture and use in mass-produced products? The answer seems to be (according to the article) 2007-2010 timeframe.
main(c,r){for(r=32;r;) printf(++c>31?c=!r--,"\n":c<r?" ":~c&r?" `":" #");}
i'm impressed... 25 dvds for 1 terabit. but i think were all holding out until we hit 150 zip disks on a square centimeter or 172 ls-120's on the size of a heineken bottle cap.
"Tread softly because you tread on my dreams"
(b) Testing: How are they going to test this trillion element chip ? Testing complexity grows exponential with number of elements and it will require serious consideration. It may be worthwhile to make smaller components which can be tested easily (modern chips has one-third cost devoted to testing)
(c) Redundancy: Is this process going to give more yield than conventional electronic processes ? If no, common technique of redundancy has to be utilized. This brings in the cost in terms of power, speed and delay. For example if the yield is only 90%, that means you will need ~110% resources. Not only you have to make up for the defective components, you will have to provide lot more redundancy for testing. At some point it becomes worthless as the performance will drop to floor.
But still it is a good work and perhaps will generate some new ideas.
So we must assume they are talking about an ATM, which a largish and complicated peice of equipment. It requires a piezoelctric device to move the tip to the proper placed on the substrate. For years, such devics kept cell phones large. The ATM requires a highly senstive feeback loop to keep the current constant. And is still requires a very delicae tip that can be easily damaged. Durable tips are probably years away and involve carbon nanotubes. Tips that have a lifetime more than a few months are probably even longer away.
It is a neat idea and probably works well in the laboratory on a vibration cancelation table. How would it work on a portable in the train or in the car? Does anyone have any real details on the technology?
"She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
Well, not with the software overhead in various checksums that will be had in 2010:
- MPAA/RIAA field (the "copy checksum")
- Dept. of Homeland Security header (the "red checksum")
- UN Standards bit (the "blue checksum")
- .SUM (the "Microsoft checksum")
Those are apt to take up quite a bit of space. So maybe you'll get 15 DVDs (maybe 20 by paying Microsoft an expansion fee) on that postage stamp.[You have a stable society when some nut guns down a schoolyard and the law doesn't change.]
Some earlier stories were mentioning stacking layers of memory to increase it. So considering structural, voltage, data and addressing layers as well, how much data can we store in a 1 inch cube?
Whatever that number, we'll still be running out of space since Windows 2050 will take 1/3rd of that space and games+movies the remaining 2/3rd.
"Give orange me give eat orange me eat orange give me eat orange give me you." -Nim Chimpsky
So, if we attached a couple square inches of this stuff to a pigeon, or filled a 747 with some of these chips, and flew it around the world, how fast would the transfer rate be?
Hurricane Ivan: A 17th century prison collapsed. All of the inmates escaped.
There was an article written (I believe by researchers from IBM) in Scientific American about two years ago regarding Millipede that said they expected technology to come to market in 3 years. Now the article from the post suggests the project is all but dead. What happened? I'm too lazy to actually look at the patents, but it isn't clear at all how this new technology actually differs from Millipede. I'd guess the write and erase mechanisms are different.
My god, it's two dimensional! Our memory limitations are over!
Standard DRAM will maintain its state --- mostly --- for a remarkably long time without refreshing. Unfortunately, it doesn't do so in a useful state.
I once was working on an embedded device that had VGA out. The development cycle was power on, boot from TFTP, run system, wait until it crashed, power off, repeat. When the system switched on, one of the first things the boot loader did was to initialise the video chipset, but without clearing the video memory.
If the board had been off for less than about five minutes, you could still see the last display that had been there when the board crashed.
Without refreshes, the data would gradually fade; the image was always corrupted with snow. The longer you left it switched off for, the worse the snow got. Different RAM chips lasted different lengths of time --- there was one band across the middle that would become completely unintelligable in about 30s, while another one could hold an image for about two minutes.
I suppose you could use this to store data for short periods during a power down, but you'd have to use so much redundancy to ensure that the data would survive the inevitable corruption that it probably wouldn't be worth it, but I'm sure someone, somewhere, could come up with a Nifty Trick(TM)... You couldn't do it at all on PCs, of course --- on boot, they wipe all their RAM, video or otherwise.
It's amazing how lucky these chip manufacturers are. Imagine to what lengths people need to go in other industries in order to convince customers to upgrade. If all you are selling is a damn chocolate bar, there is only so much that you can do to improve it. They had perfectly edible chocolate bars 100 years ago and there isn't much besides slapping "10% free" on the package that you can do. Ditto for things like headphones, ballpoint pens and pretty much everything else.
But the manufacturers of memory chips, hard disks, even CPUs, have it really easy. All they need to do is solve the technological problem of doubling the capacity/performance and the customer is eager to shell out some $$$ to get the new version. No focus groups are needed, no expensive marketing surveys. The only thing you need to do to please the customer is basically improve the obvious performance metric by 100%. You don't need to lie and twist the facts as those guys in cosmetics do with "73% more volume" for your eyelashes or "54% healthier hair" bullshit. You just make your CPU twice as fast and that flash chip twice as large, and you are done.
And if you really want to, you can say it will make Internet faster, or something...
Future Wiki -- If you don't think about the future, you cannot have one.
The IBM Millipede project doesn't use tunneling microscope technology (ATM, or usually STM). It uses a modified AFM tip that can be resistively heated. The hot tip pushes into a polymer surface and creates a hole. The hole can be "erased" by heating close to the surface and the region around the hole melts and fills it in. The reading is done with cold tips using regular AFM technology.
We don't measure HDs in Terabits . 1 Tbit = 128 GBytes or 128 gigs3
Second, converting this from inches to Centimeters, we get slightly less than 20GB/cm^2
Yes ladies and gentlemen, 20 Gigs per Squared centimeters.
That's a nice increase but it sure as hell isn't overwhelming.
Assuming a radius of 5 cm for a 3.5" HD, we get a surface of 80 cm^2 per platter. That comes to 800 Gb per platter. around 8 times the current density.
These new-gen HDs will be at most 8 times bigger than those we have right now.
That's it. 8 times. Not even a single order of magnitude.
Now mod this up or be destroyed!
The article says they have working prototypes. Of what? The implication is that it's a device that's a square inch in size, and it holds a terabit of data. But from the usage of "square inch" I think the reality may mean a density of 1 terabit per square inch, not that they have a terabit device. (I hope I'm wrong!). For example, they may have a prototype that stores 1000 bits in an area of a billionth of a square inch. That's a lot different than an actual terabit device! I wish articles had more details...
...there is a single atom. Orbiting it is an electron. When it's in a spin up state I consider it to contain a 1. When spin down it's a zero. There: a prototype of a multi exaterapetabit/mm^3 storage device at the end of my nose. Oh wait - I might be able to hype this up more. Oh yes...it's an electron, so it's in a superposition state. It's a multi exapetaterabyte/mm^3 quantum computer at the end of my nose. Surely /. have got to publish this story now.
Doesn't it make you feel good to know that our freedoms are protected by politicans, lawyers and journalists.
Prototype Arrays of Atomic Force Probes?? Is this real technology? I wonder is the talk of a real product by 2007 is credible, or just marketing to attract venture capital. I'm still waiting for products based on NRAM (made up of arrays of carbon nantubes) from Nantero (nantero.com). I wonder if "atomic force probes" are easier to manufacture than "arrays of carbon nanotubes"? Will Nanochip beat Nantero to the marketplace, or will they just burn through venture capital and next year we'll hear about another "Nano-'something'" company with some other "revolutionary technology" that's going to produce a marketable product "real soon now".
They didn't explain how many volkswagons per metric second.
Most posters seem unimpressed with the storage density they are reporting, but I'd like to point out a couple of things. (Note that I use atomic force microscopes in my "job" -- I do academic research.)
Firstly, the storage density they are reporting is for a prototype setup, and it's already as good as curent HD technology. The exciting thing is not the value they currently have, but rather the fact that this technology can be pushed very very far. Thus, comparing this new technology to a mature technology (magnetic disks) is not really fair. I do believe that if this new technology is investigated for 10 years, it could outperform magnetic drivers in terms of storage density.
Secondly, the data transfer rate can be much higher with this new technology. The millipede project uses an array of thousands of AFM-like tips, which means that in principle 1000 bits of data are read at a time (compared to, for example, 4 bits read at one time in a magnetic disk drive with 4 platters). We all know that HD access is a major bottleneck in modern computers. This new concept could immediately speed that up by 2 orders of magnitude. I think that's worthy of consideration!
That having been said: don't hold your breath. MEMS is a rapidly evolving field, but it will be awhile before it can really beat out the mature magnetic technology. The article also doesn't give any details on how this new technology works. The potential is great, but alot of work has to be done.
Boss: What are you two working on? You've been sitting and staring at the screen for hours.
Engineer 1: Uh....the millipede project.
Engineer 2: Yeah. Lots of data stored in two dimensional space.
Boss: Great! Keep up the good work. (Leaves)
Engineer 1: Whew that was close.
Engineer 2: In more ways than one. Look out! Here comes the spider again...
Engineer 1: I love MAME.
Why can't people just standardize on a common unit of measurement such the number of Encyclopedia Brittanica's or the number of Library of Congress's?