Photonic Breakthrough Allows 'Lab-on-a-Chip'

Roland Piquepaille writes "Georgia Tech researchers have shrunk an optical device called wavelength demultiplier (WD) by combining into one crystal three unique properties of photonics crystals. This optical discovery opens the way to sophisticated and cheap bio-sensors mounted on 'lab-on-a-chip' devices -- sensors to run blood tests, detect chemicals in water supplies or for drug testing. Their new WD is less than a millimeter in all dimensions rather than the several centimeters of other currently available WDs. And it should not cost more to produce."

Comments

Let me get this straight.

[gpn]

40 WDs = 40 x WD = WD40 ?

WD for computing

[gigne]

Interesting...

Now the key components for processing light have been miniturised, it should be possible to use this for the basis of a simple optical computer.
From the sources below:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/08/03/photonic_c rystals/

The design also eliminates problems of wavelength interference, which means that although the crystal is tiny, it will work at very high resolutions - between 64 and 100 microns.

So... it seems like the photonics are ready. We just need engineers to step up to the challenge.

Fear mongering scapegoats ahoy!

[lisaparratt]

drug testing

The War On Drugs is sooo last century - didn't they get the memo that we're fighting the War On Terror now? They haven't sensationalised it enough - they've got chemical attacks on water supplies in there, but it's too subtle - where's expolsives detection at customs on their list?

Re:Fear mongering scapegoats ahoy!

[Silver Sloth]

Maybe I'm dumb, but I read it as 'testing drugs' - monitoring the changes in the body when certain drugs are used. As someone who is (remotely) involved in Medical Research I feel this is a Good Thing (TM).

propagating typos

[geeber]

That's a "wavelength demultiplexer". It is wrong in the original article.

Demultiplexer not demultiplier

[coinreturn]

The error is in both the article summary and one place in the article. The proper term is "demultiplexer," not "demultiplier." A "demultiplier" is called a "divider."

"Allows"? it's already possible

[pimpimpim]

There's a whole journal devoted to lab on a chip, bringing this small part of the technique as the only thing needed to make labs on a chip (lab on a chips?) is a bit of an overstatement

As a scientist, this is what I don't really like about scientific journalism. Like the 'New breakthrough in fighting cancer' titles, etc. etc. These are laboratory research developments and will take at least 10 years to evaluate, some of them will end up being impractical before ever being put to use.

I think that scientific journalism should be more than just a PR machine for research labs. Of course they want the message out that they're doing nice stuff, but as it are all just small pieces of advancement, don't bring it as if you just developed a working nuclear fusion reactor ready to connect to the powergrid. Show that you're doing someting nice, what it can do, what the scientific/technical genial idea is that was done to get it, and in what frame we should see it, that should be enough.

Re:"Allows"? it's already possible

[amide_one]

Only trouble with that is that scientific journalism isn't aimed at scientists; it's aimed at the generally-educated layman, who outnumber scientists hundreds to one. And so the average reader isn't going to be very impressed by "this new device could allow the integration of another optical component onto the chip rather than the reader, reducing the cost of the reader and the risk of carryover" -- or at least, he'll find "will allow 'lab on a chip' devices" a lot more impressive. There's already plenty of literature aimed at scientists.

Scientific journalism really *is* PR; the reason universities and "Scientific American"-type magazines publish these things is to show people what science is doing lately... and why you should encourage your kids to grow up to be scientists, why you should write to your Congressman to support the NIH, why you should make a generous bequest to your alma mater, etc.

That said, it really isn't correct to report an incremental advance as more than that. (And not even one actually ready yet for micro-TAS systems; they demonstrate a device optimized for 24 channels over 1.5-1.6 um.) Not to say that it's not an impressive bit of work.

Coming next week...

[Richard_at_work]

Poodle-on-a-chip, jackrussell-on-a-chip and the all time favourite alsation-on-a-chip.

Wavelength-accurate cameras

[Anonymous Coward]

Makes me wonder about using an array of them in a camera in order to record colour images in terms of their actual spectral content instead of approximating down to red, green and blue. Then just run them in reverse (I assume the optical demux can be used in reverse) to re-create the display.

This would make a convincing display even for those with colour blindness or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetrachromattetrachro matic vision.

As an aside, it has been mentioned that humans with tetrachromatic vision can see through various types of man-made textiles ;-)

Sadly, human tetrachromatic vision occurs only in females :-(

LabManPower

[Doc Ruby]

Great! So now I should be able to get a little lab on a chip that analyzes the air and water around me, wherever I go, for pollutants and toxins. Am I glad that we've got the Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act that keep my personal environment clean.

Wait, my old chips are telling me that those "clean" Acts are really "dirty". And since the police will arrest you when you photograph them, it's going to be tough on people getting the dirt on polluters.

Or maybe these little LabMans on every allergic person's mobile phones will force a change on all that. Will the government be able to lie to us about our pollution laws being "Clean" laws when our phones are chirping whenever we leave our oxygen tents?