Slashdot Mirror


Scientists Twist Radio Beams To Send Data At 32 Gigabits Per Second

concertina226 writes Scientists from three international universities have succeeded in twisting radio beams in order to transfer data at the speed of 32 gigabits per second, which is 30 times faster than 4G LTE wireless technology in use today. The researchers, led by Alan Willner, an electrical engineering professor with the University of Southern California Viterbi School of Engineering, successfully demonstrated data transmission rates of 32 gigabits per second across 2.5m of free space in a basement laboratory.

63 of 122 comments (clear)

  1. At what signal to noise ratio? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Something tells me it's probably like +80dB, while real world conditions will expect -40dB. :-)

    1. Re: At what signal to noise ratio? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      Read the research. 19dB.
      http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2014/140916/ncomms5876/full/ncomms5876.html

    2. Re:At what signal to noise ratio? by justaguy516 · · Score: 1

      No wireless link operates at an SINR of -40dB. You are mixing up SINR and RSSI. An SINR of 19dB is actually very reasonable; LTE will achieve its top rates only at SINR of 30dB or so.

  2. 2.5M? by dohzer · · Score: 2, Funny

    Should have used optical fibre.

    1. Re:2.5M? by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 2

      Why fibre? Modulate your LED lamps. ;-)

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    2. Re:2.5M? by marcello_dl · · Score: 3, Funny

      Dohzer pls.
      Should have got a 2.5 power extension cord and moved the hardware.

      --
      ---- MISSING MISCELLANEOUS DATA SEGMENT --- [sigdash] trolololol
  3. Mom and Dad are pissed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    the University of Southern California Viterbi School of Engineering, successfully demonstrated data transmission rates of 32 gigabits per second across 2.5m of free space in a basement laboratory.

    They would have tried for 10m, but Mom and Dad told them that the street lights were on, and their little friends would have come up from the basement and go home.

  4. Crawl, *then* walk by Space+cowboy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Yeah, I could do with one of those office-space meme's right now.

    If all the nay-sayers faux-gasping at the extreme length of 2.5m could shut up, that'd be great.

    I'm not sure what people expect these days - this is a major achievement - whether it *can* be extended, or whether it *will* be extended would be different achievements. You could almost apply Jackson's rules of optimisation to this (refresher below) - in that first you *do* it, and only then (if you're an expert) do you try to do it *well*.

    Simon

    Jackson's rules of optimisation: "The First Rule of Program Optimization: Don't do it. The Second Rule of Program Optimization (for experts only!): Don't do it yet."

    --
    Physicists get Hadrons!
    1. Re:Crawl, *then* walk by skovnymfe · · Score: 2

      One would assume at least some of the Slashdot crowd has been to college and knows what a scientific paper is and how research and experiments are conducted, but clearly a college education isn't enough these days.

    2. Re:Crawl, *then* walk by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      A lot seem to be concerned about usefulness for broad use, as in how will it fare for end points like mobile phones or wifi access. However even if it never becomes useful in that arena what I want to know is how it will fair for longer distance communications, for specific uses rather than mass market consumers. Places where point to point radio is currently being used, or possibly where wired connections at a lower speed are in use. 2.5m is not much but it's just early work, so if it can be extended then this would be good for backhaul links or used where wired connections are impractical or expensive.

  5. Re:Huh? by ClickOnThis · · Score: 1

    transfer data at the speed of 32 gigabits per second, which is 30 times faster than 4G LTE wireless technology in use today.

    Exactly which carrier offers gigabit 4G LTE?

    Some 4G implementations have a theoretical upper limit of 1 Gb/s for low-mobility agents.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4...

    --
    If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
  6. Spiral filter, and a Tardis by brindafella · · Score: 1

    I notice from the diagram (per the linked story) that I only need to fit a spiral phase plate (no, not a flux capacitor) to my Tardis and it all works automagically...

    ... via "orbital angular momentum" and "OAM multiplexing".

    Frankly, I am still confused as to why it's not (more simply) "circular polarisation" that has been known about since the early days of radio.

    --
    Looking at space, radio, science and computing from a 'down-under' amateur enthusiast perspective.
    1. Re:Spiral filter, and a Tardis by zalas · · Score: 4, Informative

      Frankly, I am still confused as to why it's not (more simply) "circular polarisation" that has been known about since the early days of radio.

      Since you linked to Wikipedia, I'm going to assume that Wikipedia didn't do a very good job at explaining the difference. While OAM and circular polarisation both describe some sort of spinning, they correspond to different phenomena. As you may know, electromagnetic waves are oscillations of the electric (and magnetic) field, with the field at each spatial position varying over time. You may also recall from your high school physics class that the electric field at any position is a vector quantity --- it has both a strength and a direction. The polarisation of a electromagnetic field is a description of the direction that the electric field points, and circular polarisation can be roughly seen as the electric field direction rotating as you travel in the direction of propagation. What OAM is describing is the phase relationship between the oscillations of the field at different positions (whether the oscillation at one point is lagged or ahead compared to a different point); it can be roughly thought of as a spinning motion in the transfer of energy inside an electromagnetic field.

      For a rather inaccurate, but perhaps intuitive, analogy, try imagining a giant stream of asteroids coming your way in outer space. If the rocks are following a spiral trajectory as they come at you, then this corresponds to the rocks having "orbital angular momentum". If the rocks are themselves spinning, then this corresponds the rocks being "circularly polarised".

    2. Re:Spiral filter, and a Tardis by dtmos · · Score: 1

      So let me ask: If the multiplexing is due to "the phase relationship between the oscillations of the field at different positions", may I assume that these systems would be very sensitive to multipath interference -- especially varying multipath interference, as in mobile devices? Is that why the only demonstrations I have seen involve point-to-point links in free space (where multipath would be minimized)?

    3. Re:Spiral filter, and a Tardis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      As a microwave engineer, I find it unfortunate that it is called "orbital angular momentum" or "twisted beams". It causes confusion for many in the antenna engineering community. It is _not_ circular polarisation, but a form of spatial diversity non unlike MIMO systems. Where it differs from MIMO is, instead of translational spatial diversity, we have angular spatial diversity. The "beams'" phase fronts "twist" at different rates (there is no "twisting" of the direction of the E-field vector, as is the case with circular polarisation). This provides a means to multiplex many signals on the same "beam". Incidentally, you can also exploit polarization on top of the angular spatial diversity to (nearly) double the transmission capacity.

    4. Re:Spiral filter, and a Tardis by nblender · · Score: 1

      I feel like I'm in an episode of The-Big-Bang-Theory....

    5. Re:Spiral filter, and a Tardis by Bengie · · Score: 1

      As for free space twisted light, 32gb is slow: http://spectrum.ieee.org/tech-... Jun 2012 "Scientist in California and Israel say they've transmitted data through the air at a rate of 2.56 terabits per second using beams of "twisted light.""

    6. Re:Spiral filter, and a Tardis by Stuntmonkey · · Score: 1

      This earlier work you're referring to was led by the same person, Alan Willner of USC. Here he's essentially taken the techniques he used at optical frequencies and applied them to millimeter waves.

    7. Re:Spiral filter, and a Tardis by justaguy516 · · Score: 1

      Thanks. This is a little more understandable, once I read the wikipedia entry and saw the phase diagram.

    8. Re:Spiral filter, and a Tardis by MooseMiester · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the explanation. So would it be correct to say that these guys have come up with a new type of waveguide then?

      --
      Murphy was an optimist
  7. Re:Porn? by lister+king+of+smeg · · Score: 3, Funny

    How long until it is used as a medium for porn? lol.

    what do you think the data sent as a test was...

    --
    ---Saying gnome 3 is better than windows 8 not so much a compliment as it is damning with light praise.
  8. Re:Huh? by s.petry · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The reference to 4G limits has exactly what to do with this story? This was not 32Gb/s over a 4G network, it was 32Gb/s over an unknown protocol at a very short distance. I'm guessing that the basement was isolated from signal noise, which means this pretty much a non story or extremely premature.

    There are many people that invent some batshit crazy things that simply don't work in the real world. Honestly that is not an insult directed at the inventors, because their work tends to lead to other developments down the road. It's more an insult at media which focuses on hyping everything possible.

    --

    -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

  9. Re:read / write speed? by darkain · · Score: 1

    Raw 4K video. Even at the current distance, this could be used for a purely wireless 4K display that supports higher than 8-bit/channel for better quality imaging all around.

  10. dynamic twisting by frovingslosh · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Well, there seems to be a lot of information missing, but I'm suspecting that when they talk about twisting the radio signal they don't just mean static circular polarization, they mean that they are dynamically twisting it variable amounts as a way to modulate the data signal onto it. This would be similar to the modulation techniques used back in the last millennium to squeeze far more data down an audio like than the audio bandwidth would imply could be transmitted.

    --
    I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
  11. This won't amount to anything... by Electricity+Likes+Me · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It's been shown that all these "helical" polarization schemes are degenerate forms of MIMO essentially, and can't achieve speeds better then what MIMO antenna configurations can.

    At short distances in quiet environments, you can do a heck of a lot which will never, ever work anywhere but in that experiment.

    1. Re:This won't amount to anything... by goombah99 · · Score: 1

      I was going to say the same thing. It's total rubbish in it's claims. Being just yet-another-linear combination of MiMo modes it provides no additional channel capacity. But there is the possibility that the demodulation/modulation methodology is easier to implement than other fast modulation schemes.

      --
      Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
    2. Re:This won't amount to anything... by Zorpheus · · Score: 2

      I would think that MIMO can do quite a lot in a stationary environment, though it is useless if the environment changes significantly, especially if sender or receiver is moving. A polarization scheme may be imune to that. What do you think?

    3. Re:This won't amount to anything... by Stuntmonkey · · Score: 1

      But there is the possibility that the demodulation/modulation methodology is easier to implement than other fast modulation schemes.

      This is the key point. MIMO schemes require a lot of complexity in the receiver, which is workable at Wifi/LTE frequencies of a few GHz where you can get electronics to reliably function. Here he's working at millimeter wave frequencies (30GHz to 300GHz) were electronics either doesn't function, or is extremely expensive. You could think of this work as a MIMO-like spatial multiplexing scheme that doesn't require complex processing in the receiver, and is therefore implementable at very high frequencies.

      As others have noted it's a separate question whether and how this could scale up to real environments. What elicits research interest in millimeter waves is the potential for much higher bandwidth than LTE is capable of, plus the fact that millimeter waves can propagate a kilometer or so through air. So although it's still futuristic, one can start to imagine what a millimeter-wave wireless communications network would look like.

  12. Redundant by muphin · · Score: 1

    from the diagram, it looks to be a directional antennae.
    if you are doing that with radio waves... why not a laser?

    --
    It's not a typo if you understood the meaning!
    1. Re:Redundant by ArcadeMan · · Score: 1

      If you are doing that with radio waves... why not a laser?

      Have you seen the prices for sharks lately?

    2. Re:Redundant by sconeu · · Score: 1

      Because sharks are too unreliable, and you always need a bigger boat than you think you will.

      --
      General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
  13. Polarization modulation. by Ozoner · · Score: 1

    It's still modulation, modulation creates sidebands, and sidebands require bandwidth.

    Nothing has changed, the Shannon–Hartley theorem still rules.

    1. Re:Polarization modulation. by Ozoner · · Score: 1

      Any kind of Multiplexing requires additional bandwidth.
      TANSTAAFL.

      If there's no change, there's no data encoded.

    2. Re:Polarization modulation. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      This uses less bandwidth in frequency space than a more traditional scheme with the same amount of data capability (unless implemented badly). It uses spatial structure to separate several channels operating on the same set of frequencies. That is the same as how you can double your data rate without using any extra frequencies if you use two fibers (or two wave guides) to keep two channels separate. The difference here, is that it craps out with distance really fast as at some point the spatial structure smears out.

  14. Re:Not sure I like 30 ghz to 300 ghz frequencies by NIK282000 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Along with IR and Visible light, unless you are pumping watts into a very small volume you're not going to boil your guts with wifi.

    --
    Dear aunt, let's set so double the killer delete select all
  15. I dub thee "Swastika Modulation" by craighansen · · Score: 1

    Nice diagram of a left-facing swastika in the article - or is that a southern-hemisphere hurricane?

  16. Re:In other news, by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

    Now they can have customers chew through their 1GB data cap in 1/4 of a second! Before you realise you're downloading something, it's wasted all your data.

  17. Re:read / write speed? by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

    The RAM in my laptop?

  18. Microwaves and 2.4 GHz by dtmos · · Score: 4, Informative

    2.4GHz is perfect for heating anything with a high water content, like tissue. That's why microwave ovens use it.

    This is a myth. There is nothing special about 2.4 GHz as far as water is concerned. There is a mild absorption peak at 24 GHz, but nothing at 2.4.

    1. Re:Microwaves and 2.4 GHz by Muad'Dave · · Score: 3, Informative

      The special part about 2.4 GHz is that it's a the first available world-wide ISM band that is anywhere near frequencies that can be generated with high enough power in a countertop form factor to heat anything. Magnetrons are not known for their spectral purity or frequency stability, so using an ISM band that's 100 MHz wide also gives you a lot of leeway for frequency excursions for what little RF is actually leaked out of the oven.

      --
      Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.
    2. Re:Microwaves and 2.4 GHz by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      high enough power in a countertop form factor

      This is the important part. There is another ISM band at 900 MHz which is cheaper to make higher power magnetrons for, and is in use by industrial and some commercial microwave ovens. But it is also bulkier, and more expensive at lower power these days. The next ISM band is too high and expensive to make a source appropriate for an oven, and it is not like microwave ovens need to be much smaller.

    3. Re:Microwaves and 2.4 GHz by dtmos · · Score: 1

      I think the special part is that 2.4 GHz is a convenient frequency where there is a balance between a larger amount of energy being absorbed by water and a smaller amount of energy being absorbed by glass and plastic.

      No, 2.4 GHz was just one of seven convenient open frequency bands when, in 1947, the FCC assigned frequencies for the industrial heating, diathermy, and other RF sources that were causing interference on communication systems. These bands were scattered from 25 MHz to 20 GHz. See p. 8 and p. 50-51 of the Thirteenth Annual Report of the FCC, and the 1947 US Frequency Allocation Proposal to the Atlantic City International Radio Conference (see pdf page 464 of this pdf file). They were collectively called the "ISM bands", because the FCC aggregated Industrial heating, Scientific uses, and Medical heating (diathermy) equipment into bands that would minimize interference to communication systems. The microwave oven (called an "electronic cooker" in the FCC report) was so new that it was explicitly mentioned, and lumped in with other "industrial" heating systems.

    4. Re:Microwaves and 2.4 GHz by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

      and 900MHz is USA only.
      it's used for cell phones everywhere else.

    5. Re:Microwaves and 2.4 GHz by benthurston27 · · Score: 1

      I'd hate to see what single word you'd give a 10.

  19. Re: Huh? by ClickOnThis · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The reference to 4G limits has exactly what to do with this story?

    I suppose about as much as a Space Shuttle has to do with a person standing next to it. I took it as a scale-comparison, but I understand your point about the story creating a potentially false impression that this is an evolution of 4G.

    --
    If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
  20. Re:2.5m radio transmissions. by flyneye · · Score: 1

    "which is 30 times faster than 4G LTE wireless technology in use today."

              Hey, there are old grandmothers out there 30 times faster than 4G LTE. Still a long walk to Mars.

    --
    *Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
  21. Re:WTF? It is not a slow news day by squiggleslash · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Yeah, more politics! Less of that nerdy tech stuff! What do they think we are, a bunch of geeks who get excited by things like communications technologies and networking?

    --
    You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
  22. Re:Not sure I like 30 ghz to 300 ghz frequencies by LordLimecat · · Score: 1

    Yea, you gotta be careful. 1 watt of absorbed energy might heat your tissue by up to 0.001 F.

  23. Re:Huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The reference to 4G helped put the speed in perspective for readers to better understand how fast 32Gb/s is.

  24. You people forget too quickly by ArcadeMan · · Score: 1

    Dr. Egon Spengler: There's something very important I forgot to tell you.
    Dr. Peter Venkman: What?
    Dr. Egon Spengler: Don't cross the streams.
    Dr. Peter Venkman: Why?
    Dr. Egon Spengler: It would be bad.
    Dr. Peter Venkman: I'm fuzzy on the whole good/bad thing. What do you mean, "bad"?
    Dr. Egon Spengler: Try to imagine all life as you know it stopping instantaneously and every molecule in your body exploding at the speed of light.
    Dr Ray Stantz: Total protonic reversal.
    Dr. Peter Venkman: Right. That's bad. Okay. All right. Important safety tip. Thanks, Egon.

  25. Re:2.5m radio transmissions. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The structure in such transmissions drops of with distance really fast since it has a lot of higher order structure than just waves coming out of a dipole.

  26. Same old by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1, Interesting
    Seems like once or twice a year, People discover phase encoding. Promises of narrow bandwidth and high transmission rate are so tempting.

    And just to really get people excited, you can give the signal another "twist", and another, and another - "HEY! It looks like we can achieve infinite bandwidth!!"

    Along with using infinite spectrum and requiring infinite power

    This really isn't anything all that new. Hams have been using phase change modes for around 15 years now. Some of these modes, like PSK-31, allow worldwide communications using tiny amounts of power.

    But see that "31"? That's the baud rate. It was chosen because that is about the rate that a decent typist can type. Mighty slow.

    But it's all scalable, There are much higher rates available. But they all have a price of bandwidth, and the signal needs to be all that much better. Read that as higher transmitting power. There are a few really clever modes, like "MultiPSK, which achieve a higher transmission rate by multiple 2 phase transmissions. They require less power to transmit, but take up some more bandwidth, and the software is more complex because all the separate signals have to be recombined.

    The biggest ability of these "OhmaGawd" super transmission systems we hear about a few times a year is to attract dollars for more research.

    Final? The system can work as long as they don't try to stuff too much into it. But I doubt in the present day form. Think a big increase in the number of cell towers, an overhaul of wi-fi devices. Note: I haven't seen the bandwidth needed, so am not certain, but this might mean less available channels for wifi devices.

    No free lunch here kids.

    --
    The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
  27. Re:WTF? It is not a slow news day by real_b0fh · · Score: 1

    Senior Lead Astronaut, that would impress even chicks.

    --
    "Contrary to popular belief, UNIX is user friendly. It just happens to be selective on who it makes friendship with"
  28. And the implied point is the same by justthinkit · · Score: 2

    And the implied point is the same: 60 dB away from practical means a factor of million improvement is still needed.

    --
    I come here for the love
  29. I wonder if by kilodelta · · Score: 1

    This is like QAM? I recall back in the late 1980's some AM broadcasters had played around with Quadrature Amplitude Modulation. In essence twisting the phase of the carrier around to get channeling, etc.

  30. Interesting but . . . by jhumkey · · Score: 1

    Interesting and a good start but . . .

    (Hard to tell clearly from the two articles but) these seem to use feed horns of a specific design and configuration (microwave transmissions usually do), that must be POINTED AT the receiver feed horn, so . . . if anyone is planning on "just plopping down the laptop" in any old orientation . . . it won't line up the transmission signals. Sure, for a trunk line between sites (buildings/planets) where critical alignment can be achieved . . . it'll work fine.

    And some of the comments below seem confused . . . its not "faster" . . . its a "bigger pipeline". If it takes (on average, depending on planet position) 12.5 minutes for a signal to "reach mars" . . . it will still take 12.5 minutes. The signal won't "go faster" to get there in 6 minutes. When they say "faster" they mean . . . once the signal crosses the 12.5 minute distance . . . you can pump a higher bandwidth of data on that signal. But we won't be using this for "live control" of something like a Mars Rover. That's not the "faster" they mean.

    Also, in terms of the "don't need USB cables any more, just put them close to the computer" . . . so, next time I enter the datacenter, I won't have to actually sneak in a USB thumb drive to tap the servers and steal data . . . I can just "walk nearby" and tap in? Sounds like a path ripe for exploitation. I know, its not that simple, and theoretically we can "tap into" keystroke/mouse streams that are RF now . . . but a USB "tap" seems more capable of nefarious activity than just a keyboard sniffer.

    And I'd agree with the one point . . . (just like regular WiFi) other factors come into play and the high rate will drop off fast with distance . . . still. Always good to push the envelope . . . congratz all around to the dev's.

    --
    No, I don't remember your name. But the memory mapped screen on a TRS80 from 1977 is from 15360 to 16383 if that helps.
  31. Re:Huh? by s.petry · · Score: 1

    No, it wasn't. Most people here know how fast 32Gb/s is. In fact most of us work with, or on, gear that may not be wireless, but is much faster than 32Gb/s.

    --

    -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

  32. But then what? by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

    Ahhh...the goal of continuous, direct-to-brain, high quality porn streams continue to be driven apace.

    Excellent.

    --
    (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
  33. Maybe it will, Re:This won't amount to anything... by whit3 · · Score: 1

    It's been shown that all these "helical" polarization schemes are degenerate forms of MIMO essentially, and can't achieve speeds better then what MIMO antenna configurations can.

    While it may be argued that circular polarization is another MIMO scheme, it CAN achieve better speeds, because it DOESN'T REQUIRE EXTRA CHANNELS. MIMO, generally, does. There's nothing 'degenerate' about the relationship of the two schemes.

    The real limitation here, is that this is a beam technology, it isn't for broadcast (i.e. you have to aim the sender and receiver antennae). The article mentions a 'phase plate', which implies the beam is directed perpendicular to the plane of that plate...
    The real benefit, is that you get a factor of two without using any extra bandwidth from the available RF allocation.

  34. Re: Not sure I like 30 ghz to 300 ghz frequencies by suutar · · Score: 1

    Let's see. Assume body weight is 75kg, and 65% of that is water, for 48.75kg water or 48750g. 1 watt-hour = 860 calories, enough to raise the temperature of the water 0.018 degrees Celsius. The extra heat would then spread to the rest of the tissues, leaving the entire body an average of 0.011 degrees warmer.

    Better?

  35. Re:Huh? by JohnMadsen · · Score: 1

    Add a one and two zeros onto that and well be in business!

    --
    Fuckers
  36. Re:Huh? by dave420 · · Score: 1

    You were wrong. Accept it and move on, Senior System Engineer/Architect/Asshat.

  37. Re:Huh? by Mattcelt · · Score: 1

    zmodem was SUCH an improvement over xmodem. The ability to re-start interrupted transfers brings a smile of relief to my face thinking about it to this day.