Slashdot Mirror


Nano-Scale Terahertz Antenna May Make Tricorders Real

MrSeb writes "Researchers from Imperial College London and A*STAR in Singapore have shown off a terahertz antenna that's just 100 nanometers across — about 30,000 times smaller than existing terahertz antennae — and two orders of magnitude stronger than other T-ray beam-forming techniques. T-rays are a lot like EHF (extremely high frequency), which is used by millimeter wave scanners in airports, medical imaging, and emerging wireless networking standards like WiGig — but stronger, faster, and more detailed. Where EHF radiation can see through your clothes, T-rays can penetrate a few millimeters of skin. Furthermore, because atoms and molecules have a unique terahertz-range signature, T-ray scanners can detect toxic substances, bombs, drugs — or even cancerous tumors under your skin. Most importantly, though, due to the nano scale of these antennae, it's possible to create huge antennae arrays on a single silicon chip, meaning hand-held T-ray scanners are now a possibility. In the not so distant future, every household might have a Star Trek-like tricorder capable of detecting cancer or other diseases."

17 of 185 comments (clear)

  1. Detecting Cancer....... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    or giving it to us.

    1. Re:Detecting Cancer....... by Mitchell314 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Given that Tetrahertz is mostly infrared (or visible towards the gigahertz magnitude), you'd be hard pressed to give anything cancer.

      --
      I read TFA and all I got was this lousy cookie
    2. Re:Detecting Cancer....... by root_42 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Given that Tetrahertz is mostly infrared (or visible towards the gigahertz magnitude), you'd be hard pressed to give anything cancer.

      First, it's Terahertz, and second: no, not visible when it goes down to Gigahertz. Gigahertz waves are Microwaves, and hence far from being visible. Terahertz waves are in order of 1mm or smaller, approaching the infrared. Safety limits for radiation exposure of Terahertz waves are still being researched upon, though.

      --
      [--- PGP key and more on http://www.root42.de ---]
  2. Change last sentence by Exitar · · Score: 3, Funny

    into "In the not so distant future, every household might have a Star Trek-like tricorder capable of giving you cancer or other diseases."

    1. Re:Change last sentence by radtea · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "In the not so distant future, every household might have a Star Trek-like tricorder capable of giving you cancer or other diseases."

      That's the misinformation the medical establishment would like promulgated, so thanks for getting a jump on it.

      It's really important that technology like this be seen as "potentially dangerous" so it's use can be restricted to highly paid professionals whose business model requires such legal limitations "for your own safety."

      There is exactly zero evidence, for example, that diagnostic ultrasound carries any risks, but there are still limitations on its use (you can buy your own unit but can't use it on people unless you're a trained, insured, highly paid professional.)

      --
      Blasphemy is a human right. Blasphemophobia kills.
    2. Re:Change last sentence by amRadioHed · · Score: 5, Insightful

      There is exactly zero evidence, for example, that diagnostic ultrasound carries any risks, but there are still limitations on its use (you can buy your own unit but can't use it on people unless you're a trained, insured, highly paid professional.)

      The risk of some untrained people using diagnostic ultrasound is that they may tell someone with cancer that they don't see anything to worry about.

      --
      We hope your rules and wisdom choke you / Now we are one in everlasting peace
    3. Re:Change last sentence by squizzar · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Surely some of that protectionism is in the public interest, since those trained, insured, professionals actually know what they are looking at (and when they get it wrong they have liability insurance). Look at all the wonky alternative medicine that's already out there and tell me you want to create an industry of people with legitimate diagnostic equipment that don't know how to correctly gather or interpret the results from those machines and then using them to diagnose people with all manner of nasty things that they probably don't have.

  3. Argh by INT+21h · · Score: 4, Funny

    If you meant *medical* tricorder, why didn't you say *medical* tricorder? There's a difference, ya'know.

  4. there's still no cure for cancer by cashman73 · · Score: 4, Funny

    So pretty soon, your cell phone will not only be able to give you cancer, it will also be able to tell you that you have cancer, too! All they need is an app to cure it next! I see a tremendous marketing opportunity here!

  5. ST:VOY by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Holographic Doctor: Hand me a tricorder.
    Clueless Crewman: *hands him a tricorder*
    Holographic Doctor [annoyed]: A medical tricorder.

  6. Re:Just another way to get genital cancer by ceoyoyo · · Score: 4, Funny

    Why? Do you dislike flashlights too?

  7. Re:Silly Scale by somersault · · Score: 4, Informative

    And what does "two orders of magnitude stronger" mean?

    Around 100 time stronger.

    --
    which is totally what she said
  8. supply and demand by roc97007 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    > In the not so distant future, every household might have a Star Trek-like tricorder capable of detecting cancer or other diseases."

    I find that unlikely. Much more likely: Even though the device itself costs $12 to make, it will be rigidly controlled and only available at high cost (either through insurance premiums or taxes) from your health provider.

    I take one of the most common blood pressure medications available. It's so common and the quantities are so high that manufacture is cheap, so the drug is cheap. I don't even bother with insurance -- I pay cash for the drug. (Approx $20 per month.) However, I can only get it by prescription. My doctor requires monthly visits, including a blood pressure check (fairly pointless as I do it myself 3-4 times a week) and a blood test requiring lab work. After insurance, the cost to me is approx $200 a month. They keep my prescriptions on a short leash, designed to run out right at my appointment date. (Sometimes if they're busy my prescription will run out before my appointment, so when I see them I've been off the drug for 3-4 days, unless I call the office and beg for an extension.) The doctor says this is to insure that I keep my appointment. When I point out I have never missed an appointment and don't deserve to be treated like an errant child, I'm informed that all patients are treated this way.

    To recap, a common, well tested drug that costs $20 a month (cash -- no insurance) that I've been taking for years costs me $220 a month total to take due to additional visits and tests required by the doctor's office before they'll allow me to continue taking the drug. Based on this business model, even if full ST:TNG-type scanners were available for less than the price of an iPad, I strongly suspect the actual devices will be rigidly controlled by law and only available through expensive doctor's visits.

    (In December I told my doctor to shove it. I'm now shopping around for a doctor who doesn't hold my meds hostage.)

    --
    Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
  9. Re:But will they make me breakfast by Zaldarr · · Score: 4, Funny

    Tea. Earl Grey. Hot.

    --
    I write professional videogame reviews! http://www.digitallydownloaded.net/
  10. IF You Have Nothing To Hide by NEDHead · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Why are you wearing clothes?

  11. Re: radiation by IAmR007 · · Score: 3, Informative

    Terahertz radiation is not nearly ionizing radiation; it's between infrared and microwave. It can't hurt you unless you use high enough intensities to cause burning.

    The awesome thing about terahertz is that can also be used for spectroscopic analysis as well as imaging. The terahertz energies correspond to crystal phonon energies, which means substances and their crystal structure can be determined by a terahertz scan. This means that for security applications, you don't even need to form an image unless the signature of an explosive substance is seen, which reduces privacy concerns of such technology considerably.

    The major downside, at least for devices operating at around 1THz, which I've worked on at the University of Leeds, is that water is opaque. Atmospheric water is highly annoying (samples in labs are run in dry nitrogen environments) and a damp cloth would completely block such scans. Many of the commercial devices run at 300GHz, however, so I'm not sure if water is a problem for them.

  12. 25 million American diabetics: "Faster please." by hirundo · · Score: 5, Informative

    Seems like this story dropped the lede. The most significant use of this technology will be to detect blood glucose levels without lancing through the skin, making it a less dreaded process for millions of diabetics to monitor their conditions.