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."

17 of 239 comments (clear)

  1. A billion years? by GrumblyStuff · · Score: 5, Interesting

    That's great. Will the readers and systems able to display such information be around for even a hundred? Will they even accept the same power?

    1. Re:A billion years? by pipatron · · Score: 4, Insightful

      See, this is not a problem. Unless society is cast back into darkness by some nuclear war, the future human/creature will easily understand how to power up and interface to this device. Either by locating historical documentation, or reverse engineering, which would be trivial for our future superhumans/robots.

      --
      c++; /* this makes c bigger but returns the old value */
    2. Re:A billion years? by harryandthehenderson · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The papyrus medium developed by the Egyptians are still readable today

      Only if they were stored under conditions conducive to them not rotting away which was the fate of most papyrus.

      compared to DVD-RWs that can hold a few GBs of data, but only has a shelf life of a few years.

      Stop buying cheap DVD-RWs and you don't have that problem.

  2. Main problem by synthparadox · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The main problem isn't the length of time that data can be stored. Hard drives and tape drives still carry data from the 1970s, but no one can use them. Why? Because of format changes. We recently transitioned to Blu-Ray, and there are countless codecs for video at this point in time. I don't think the problem is with the length of time for storage, as useful as that is, but rather with the format in which we store them.

    An excellent anecdote was mentioned on slashdot recently: http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/04/13/005224

    1. Re:Main problem by techiemikey · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Length of time is a relevant restriction. While information can be lost due to becoming obsolete, corruption over time occurs. CD's and DVD's are sometimes very fickle on how long they last, and many people are using them for backups. I believe that is the main concern, thus leading to this new technology.

    2. Re:Main problem by MyLongNickName · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Unsolicited advice: If you aren't going to do the work, don't second guess the tech doing the work. Likely you are right. However, say something does go wrong with the drive... now you are the one who takes the blame. Best to go "uh huh... yea... sounds good" and leave it like that.

      --
      See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
    3. Re:Main problem by Bakkster · · Score: 4, Interesting

      A few years ago I had four hard drives fail within two weeks of each other resulting in near complete data loss. Luckily I went and bought a big HDD right after the first died so I saved something like 30% of the data because I had somewhere to put it ... but anyway The thing is, those drives were never abused, never hurt in any way, they just simply died because they were about 5 years old. Clicking noises. Crashy computer. Bad sectors. Death.

      That, to me, sounds like they were killed by an environmental factor, just not one you were aware of. It could be anything, but I'll name a few: Humidity, excessive vibration, excessive read/write cycling, excessive power up/down of motor, poor power supply, excessive heat, static electricity, or a physical abuse by somebody else. Assuming these were your only 4 drives (based on your claim of 'near complete data loss'), it's highly unlikely that all 4 drives would die at the same time due to regular wear-and-tear.

      --
      Write your representatives! Repeal the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics!
  3. Sure it can by fataugie · · Score: 5, Funny

    Wow, what a claim. And by the time someone figures out it's bullshit, the guy who made it will be dust long ago.

    BRILLIANT!

    --

    WTF? Over?

    1. Re:Sure it can by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 4, Funny

      Wow, what a claim. And by the time someone figures out it's bullshit, the guy who made it will be dust long ago.

      Bah! I already have a medium that can store data for a billion years. Now you kids can take your newfangled nanotech memory and get off of my lawn!

    2. Re:Sure it can by Prof.Phreak · · Score: 4, Interesting

      More interesting: now that we know how to make these, we might find these already on our planet (left by a super intelligent species who abandoned our planet a billion years ago :-)

      --

      "If anything can go wrong, it will." - Murphy

  4. Finally an archival format we can use. by Rosyna · · Score: 4, Funny

    The problem with CD-Rs, DVD-Rs, tapes, and so on is that they have extremely short lifetimes (6 to 3 years for most optical media, 10-20 years for most magnetic media).

    This is a solution that would finally allow our civilization's information to last beyond the apocalypse occurring in 2012.

    Or think think how long Atlantis was lost to intelligent life...

    1. Re:Finally an archival format we can use. by beelsebob · · Score: 4, Informative

      Yes, some of them die early, but I have CD's from 10 years ago that are fine
      Maybe, but that's not what's important is it... What matters is if you record something, after how long are you guaranteed to still be able to read the data. With CD-rs I'd put that as low as 1 and a half years.

      Notably, you also seem to confuse CDs and CD-rs, the dies used in CD-rs go south far far faster than the data layers used on comercial CDs.

      Finally, your cassette tapes from the 70s may be "fine" in terms of listening to them, but how many scratches, pops, whirs and whistles have they picked up? If that were digital data, do you honestly think you'd be able to recover it still?

  5. Seriously? by whisper_jeff · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Ok, while I find the tech cool and this is certainly News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters but, seriously? "Details of the process are available at the American Chemical Society for $30." Seriously? We're just abandoning any pretense that these are news summaries now and just outright turning them into ads for products? We're now outright trying to sell things? Weak. Very weak indeed.

  6. In 1 billion years... by Eddy+Luten · · Score: 5, Insightful

    nobody will give a damn about our data anyway.

  7. So? by Rik+Sweeney · · Score: 4, Funny

    Nanotech - 1 Billion years
    Elephant - Forever

    Technology simply cannot compete with mother nature.

  8. Re:Nano this, carbon nano that... by gt6062b · · Score: 5, Funny

    This just in, people use buzzwords to sound smart, get funding. I mean seriously, how else are we going to syngerize our companies to their maximum efficiency? It isn't all about the low hanging fruit, you know.

  9. Re:Ken. Meet Barbie. by TheRaven64 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    A little while ago there was an article on Slashdot by someone who wrote some software that played LPs using a flatbed scanner. The resolution on a cheap consumer-grade scanner is high enough that the sound is recognisable. You wouldn't want to use it for music, but to get a rough idea it's fine, and this is using hardware that a lot of people have sitting around at home. Specialist firms will use a laser to read the disks and will copy them for you - for a much larger fee.

    --
    I am TheRaven on Soylent News