Slashdot Mirror
Nanotech Memory Could Hold Data For 1 Billion Years
Hugh Pickens writes "Digital storage devices have become ubiquitous in our lives but the move to digital storage has raised concerns about the lifetime of the storage media. Now Alex Zettl and his group at the University of California, Berkeley report that they have developed an experimental memory device consisting of a crystalline iron nanoparticle enclosed in a multiwalled carbon nanotube that could have a storage capacity as high as 1 terabyte per square inch and temperature-stability in excess of one billion years. The nanoparticle can be moved through the nanotube by applying a low voltage, writing the device to a binary state represented by the position of the nanoparticle. The state of the device can then be subsequently read by a simple resistance measurement while reversing the nanoparticle's motion allows a memory 'bit' to be rewritten. This creates a programmable memory system that, like a silicon chip, can record digital information and play it back using conventional computer hardware storing data at a high density with a very long lifetime. Details of the process are available at the American Chemical Society for $30."
It reminds me of the word "ubiquitous". Prior to 1997 or so no one had ever heard of this word, much less used it in a computer/business setting. Now I see even my boss, someone who does not come from an IT background, using it.
So Nano this and nano that is the new buzzword. All we need to say is that we get billions and billions of years of storage through this magical carbon nanotubes, instant VC funding! Just like all you needed to do was throw around a few ubuquitous statements in the late 90s and VCs and business people would beat a path to your door.
"This stuff is going to be everywhere... it is so good it will be ubiquitous!"
This post brought to you by your friendly neighborhood MBA.
Who's stupid enough to say a billion years about anything? What kind of skill is required to see a billion years into the future?
This reminded me most of one of the recent space-elevator tethers from last year. The one that was finally strong enough and light enough and thin enough. So it got strung up. And it promptly failed. Not because it wasn't strong enough, and not because it wasn't light enough. Instead it failed because insects laid eggs on it, and then it crumbled.
Nanoparticles and nanotubes are subject to nanoforces. That's why we like them. Less power, more precision. But so many other things agree.
Next up, the discovery of nano turmites.
Hey, it's worked so far for the authors of the Bible!