Slashdot Mirror
A Plasmonic Revolution for Computer Chips?
Roland Piquepaille writes "Today, we're using basically two ways to move data in our computers: transistors carry small amounts of data and are extremely small, while fiber optic cables can carry huge amounts of data, but are much bigger in size. Now, imagine a single technology combining the advantages of photonics and electronics. This Stanford University report says a new technology can do it: plasmonics. (For more about plasmons, read this Wikipedia article.) Theoretically, it is possible to design plasmonic components with the same materials used today by chipmakers, but with frequencies 100,000 times greater than the ones of current microprocessors. There is still a challenge to solve before getting plasmonic chips. Today, plasmons can only travel a few millimeters before dying, while today's chips are typically about a centimeter across. Read this overview for more details and references about plasmonics, and to discover why it's one possible future for chips' circuitry."
How much heat are these things going to generate though. Because you know E = hf, if you have 100,000 times the frequency, your going to need to throw in 100,000 times the energy!! Of course that is simplification of what is really happening with these kinds of chips and it is much more complicated then just 100,000 times the energy needed. But it seems like these things might make the Pentium IV seems like a fridge!
It's not that we need a "Roland Piquepaille" section; it's that we need the ability to filter stories by submitter.
If you're wondering why all this fuss about the Roland Piquepaille problem, check out the rpiquepa's Recently Accepted Submissions.
6 articles were submitted in the last month, NONE were rejected. If there were any Rejected articles, they would be displayed under a "Recent Submissions" section.
What are the chances that the Slashdot editors accept 100% of Roland's submissions, when they reject the majority of submissions from other people.
When was the last time YOU had a story accepted by the Slashdot crew?
94% of Repubs and 21% of Dems voted to renew the Patriot Act
I don't know about your computer, but my computer uses wires to move data and transistors to process said data. I don't see how one can compare transistors to fiber optic cables.
-- Thou hast strayed far from the path of the Avatar.
Yes, and stopping the light from reaching the observer's eyes would also cause the region to appear black. You actually need complete transparency and cleanliness for invisibility (i.e. passing light instead of stopping it).
-insert a witty something-
Blocking many people's access to a web-site based on your personal opinion is censorship and is, in my opinion, a bad idea. You can educate people about what he is doing and your opinion about it, but removing other people's freedom of access to information is unethical.
As someone who posts using links to wikipedia occasionally, I must say that I object. When I'm looking for a source to explain what I'm talking about, I simply reference the best URL I can find. Very often, that is wikipedia. It doesn't really matter who hosts the data if I know it to be valid.
As someone who has done some research on surface plasmons, I find the wikipedia article on Plasmon to be accurate and useful, so I think it is a good reference. Not all wikipedia articles are so good, but then again I don't reference the bad ones.
On the other hand, you are pointing out that we shouldn't accept wikipedia articles just because wikipedia is cool and lots of people edited the article so it must be right. Yes, that's valid. However, as with *all* sources of information, whether it is a wiki or slashdot or an encyclopedia or the local news, the end-consumer MUST use his judgement to decide if the information is valid or BS. It is an illusion to think that traditional sources of information are error free. In all cases, the reader must simply use judgement and double-check if things seem wrong.
"Today, plasmons can only travel a few millimeters before dying, while today's chips are typically about a centimeter across."
Maybe its just me, but as electronics become smaller and smaller, wouldn't this be more and more possible?
This signature is part of a balanced post.
I don't think he is complaining about wikipedia in itself.
More the fact that a person with an agenda could replace clean methodical bias free information with drivel changing the view for everyone in the process.
The original source may not have the time or inclination to maintain his articles, so the biased view remains.
It may be required in the long run to have a karma/points system - much like slashdot, where particular versions of articles can be rated and those written by established experts gain greater weight and visiblity.
An outside user could view all, uncut and raw, or they can view the cream of the crop so to speak.
liqbase
Come on Roland, give us a break . . . you obviously don't understand what your writing about. Your analogies make no sense, your summarize is full of gross holes and you're trying to "sex-up" plasmons by calling a natural phonomena a technology and saying that it's something "new" when it is not. And seems you're doing this to attract hits to your blog so that you can sell ad space.
I know this post is harsh, but I have to say that it appears that you are attempting to exploit the /. community for your own personal financial gain. We /. readers aren't as gullible or stupid as you seem to think . . .
Sounds a bit like my research into anti-gravity by using parachute jumps.
Y'see, I started with a full size parachute, and each time I make a jump I use a slightly smaller chute than last time. Eventually I won't need a parachute at all!
Curiosity was framed. Ignorance killed the cat.
Additionally, Roland's writing style is terrible and his command of the technology that he writes about is lackluster at best. Consider:
He compares connectors (optical fiber) to gates (transistors) and implies that they have the same function. He leaves out key points from the article (like the issue of heat is a complete unknown in the world of plamon based chips ). His summaries are blantant rip offs of the articles where he merely combines two ideas into one sentence or vice versa, giving no editorial content of his own . . . it is all editorial content from the article that he links. I can only assume that he is simply unqualified to give free thought and personal editorial content to the material that he submits.
He is not a journalist . . . he is a poor writer that steals editorial ideas and implies that they might be his own. He peppers these ideas with his own analogies that make little to no sense.
I honestly think that he's trying to launch a career as a blogger/technology writer, but I honestly think that he should consider broadening his knowledge of technology and taking some writing courses first.