Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

New Smartphone Camera Could Tell You What Things Are Made of

Posted by samzenpus on from the scan-me dept.

Zothecula writes How would you like to be able to know the chemical composition of something, just by taking a snapshot or video of it with your smartphone? You may eventually be able to, thanks to a compact hyperspectral imaging camera being developed at Tel Aviv University. "Hyperspectral imaging involves scanning light spectra not visible to the human eye, in order to identify the unique electromagnetic 'fingerprints' of various substances and processes. While this can already be done with larger cameras, a team led by Tel Aviv's Prof. David Mendlovic is developing a much smaller optical component that could conceivably be built into a smartphone. It utilizes MEMS (microelectromechanical systems) technology, and is reportedly 'suitable for mass production and compatible with standard smartphone camera designs.'"

78 comments

  1. So, a tricorder? by mpercy · · Score: 1

    Is that where we're headed?

    1. Re:So, a tricorder? by jellomizer · · Score: 2

      Well yes.
      Wouldn't that be great.
      Infrared camera, to detect if the heart is beating or not. Being able to see what things are made out of.
      The thing Star Trek missed, was the fact that they had horrible screens, and are really bulky, and they never seemed to play flappy bird on it.
       

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    2. Re:So, a tricorder? by meta-monkey · · Score: 2

      And with their pads, the concept that a pad could hold more than one document at a time. You'd see someone who "had a lot of work to do" carrying a dozen pads or have them strewn about his desk.

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
    3. Re:So, a tricorder? by newcastlejon · · Score: 1

      It was undoubtedly done for artistic effect, but consider people who use multiple monitors instead of constantly switching what's displayed on a single one.

      --
      If God forks the Universe every time you roll a die, he'd better have a damned good memory.
    4. Re:So, a tricorder? by meta-monkey · · Score: 1

      Of course, but I'm talking about cases where the assignments are being handed to them one pad at a time. The pads are being used at that moment for storage, not display.

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
    5. Re:So, a tricorder? by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      I figured it was a military thing. Most of the time the CO reads the data and marks that he read it, and gives it back down the chain. Having it on separate devices probably adds to security.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
  2. Still waiting on MEMS to set the world afire by damn_registrars · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I saw an academic talk on MEMS applied to mass spectrometry about a decade or so ago. It was promising to be the next greatest sensor; smaller, faster, lower power and sample requirements, with better resolution across wide mass ranges. For the most part it hasn't made it yet. It has turned out some interesting data in a few labs but it is far from being commercially viable.

    Hopefully this group has figured out some other way to make it work for this specific application, and someone can build on it from there. It is impressive technology.

    --
    Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
    1. Re:Still waiting on MEMS to set the world afire by Arkh89 · · Score: 1

      It has turned out some interesting data in a few labs

      Do you have some references?

    2. Re:Still waiting on MEMS to set the world afire by damn_registrars · · Score: 2

      An embedded microchannel in a MEMS plate resonator for ultrasensitive mass sensing in liquid. This is one published paper on (proteomics) mass spec using MEMS.

      Real-time particle mass spectrometry based on resonant micro strings. This is another one.

      Single-protein nanomechanical mass spectrometry in real time. Some times they call it "nanomechanical" instead, making it NEMS instead of MEMS.

      As I said though it seemed like this would turn the world on its head for mass spec; tiny accurate sensors the size of eraser heads. It hasn't happened yet, and I'm not connected to it well enough to know why.

      --
      Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
    3. Re:Still waiting on MEMS to set the world afire by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

      An embedded microchannel in a MEMS plate resonator for ultrasensitive mass sensing in liquid. This is one published paper on (proteomics) mass spec using MEMS.

      It's happening, you just don't notice it.

      Have a toy helicopter or drone with a gyro or accelerometer or both? Guess what those are.

      Etc. Like most true innovations that are adopted, it affects us mostly in a quiet way, used in things you don't even think twice about.

  3. Not to be used... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Not to be used on chicken McNuggets.

    1. Re:Not to be used... by Tablizer · · Score: 5, Funny

      That would trigger a DMCA takedown notice, and you'll get belted by an orange and yellow clown.

      --
      Table-ized A.I.
    2. Re:Not to be used... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and you'll get belted by an orange and yellow clown.

      You mean that guy from China that had the stolen cell phone?

  4. Like in CSI! by pruedz · · Score: 1

    Now we just need one those software that generates a full HD image from 100x zoomed 186 pixels pictures.

  5. Nerd quiz by ArcadeMan · · Score: 1

    What is this a reference to? (and yes, it is on-topic if you know the answer)

    http://travelinlibrarian.info/...

    --
    Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
  6. Surface Only or Detection In Depth? by tiberus · · Score: 1

    So the question is, "Will it detect saline or silicone under flesh?"

    1. Re: Surface Only or Detection In Depth? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Subsurface measurements require the laser ablation attachment.

    2. Re:Surface Only or Detection In Depth? by Dashiva+Dan · · Score: 1

      So the question is, "Will it detect saline or silicone under flesh?"

      My guess is it won't be long after this tech is made available to the public that some hackers will write a filter to give us the x-ray goggles I read about it the back of old comic books, for real...

      (Note: I mean hackers in the oldschool use of the term)

      I'm not a light expert by any stretch, but from what I understand there are wavelengths of light that the human eye cannot see (but potentially these new cameras could; they already see infrared) that can penetrate substances that human-visible light cannot.

      This will then bring up a whole new slew of privacy issues.... and clothing marketing opportunities :)

      --
      "lt;dr" is the correct response to most of my posts.
  7. No need by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 2

    If I want to know the chemical makeup of anything, I'll just ask Moss to smell it for me.

    --
    #DeleteChrome
    1. Re:No need by o_ferguson · · Score: 1

      #win

      --
      - In Soviet Korea, only old people loose all their bases to Natalie Portman's petrified hot grits overlords.
  8. putting military radar & satellite tech by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    into the hands of consumers. :)

    drrobertduncan.com

  9. Obligatory XKCD by Fortran+IV · · Score: 2

    Atoms.

    --
    I figure by 2030 or so my 6-digit UID will be something to brag about.
    1. Re:Obligatory XKCD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is that supposed to be funny?

    2. Re:Obligatory XKCD by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1
      From TFS:

      How would you like to be able to know the chemical composition of something, just by taking a snapshot or video of it with your smartphone?

      Or, more simply, I can tell things are made of "stuff" just by looking at them. Not sure why a casual user with a cell phone would care about anything more specific.

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
  10. Nice for jewelry by paulpach · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Would come in handy to see if that piece of jewelry is really gold and the diamond is not just cubic zirconia

    Of course, it could be fooled by gold coating, bit it is still better than nothing.

    1. Re:Nice for jewelry by Rei · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Nice for a lot of things.

        * I'm somewhat of a rockhound. The ability to ID an unfamiliar mineral would be great.
        * I like mushroom hunting. The problem is that one has to ignore the vast majority of mushrooms because there's just so vastly many species and some can only be distinguished microscopically. But the list of dangerous mycotoxins is actually surprisingly short. The ability to accurately detect whether there's a dangerous amount of a mycotoxin in a sample would help alleviate a lot of doubts. Those who like mushrooms for their recreational uses rather than cullinary uses would also like to know how high the psilocybin levels are.
        * The same applies to usefulness for identifying dangerous or useful compounds in unfamiliar plant species

      Hypochondriacs would kill for a device like this, if it worked - aka checking for various contaminants on every product they buy and everything they put into their body. I'm sure environmental groups would love to just be able to walk around the outskirts of a chemical facility that they're protesting and take and analyze samples with their phones rather than having to send them at significant cost into the lab. Plant growers breeders could check to see whether their fruits, vegetables, etc have a unique nutritional / etc profile, or how that changes depending on climactic conditions, soil, and fertilization practices - again without taking huge numbers of samples. Vegetarians could check for chemicals only found in meat in their food. And on and on.

      Really, there's no shortage of things one could do if they could ID chemical compositions without the effort and cost of laboratory testing today. So long as the system works well enough, that is. I have a suspicion that even if such a thing hits the market, it's probably going to only be able to pick out really pronounced spectral signatures - one might not have so much luck at detecting say an arbitrary protein at ppm quantities.

      Still, even a very limited system would be useful.

      --
      Trump's plan to get rid of Mueller appears to be 'be so guilty of so many things that Mueller works himself to death.'
    2. Re:Nice for jewelry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The problem with spectral imaging is that you need to build up a model library as the spectra are just levels of reflectance or transmittance in particular wavelengths. Identifying unknown substances hinges upon there being models of like substances in the database. Having a "camera" in the use of consumers would be the first step, coming up with a way to have the community at large produce quality models will be one of the primary challenges. Identifying fringe objects will hinge on those models.

    3. Re:Nice for jewelry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You would eat a mushroom just because you phone says its safe?

    4. Re:Nice for jewelry by Dashiva+Dan · · Score: 1

      You would eat a mushroom just because you phone says its safe?

      I might take the time to further investigate a mushroom if my phone said it was safe, and to ignore a mushroom if my phone says it is unsafe, all depending on how accurate I found my phone to be. Only a fool would trust a tool further than it's proven reliability.

      --
      "lt;dr" is the correct response to most of my posts.
    5. Re:Nice for jewelry by ToddInSF · · Score: 1

      Why not ? The software and hardware would make it possible to IDENTIFY the species. Troll.

  11. Flying cars by inflamed · · Score: 1

    Without reading TFA I can assert that this area of work is not going to let the consumer unambiguously determine the composition of anything. Right now the chemical analytical techniques to figure out what the composition of a substance require huge machines and significant training in spectroscopy and there's no way of miniaturizing those techniques and automating the interpretation of the data. I'm sure you can get some information but not enough to say anything for-sure :-)

    1. Re:Flying cars by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Without reading TFA I can assert that this area of work is not going to let the consumer unambiguously determine the composition of anything. Right now the chemical analytical techniques to figure out what the composition of a substance require huge machines and significant training in spectroscopy and there's no way of miniaturizing those techniques and automating the interpretation of the data. I'm sure you can get some information but not enough to say anything for-sure :-)

      Without reading your post I can assert that you don't know what you are talking about.

  12. Technological limitation by geogob · · Score: 2

    Hyperspectral imaging devices based on MEMS are not new. I've seen the first practical devices presented in conferences about 10 years ago. But I doupt we'll see flexible hyperspectral imaging devices like mobile telephones. Even for bigger hand-held spezialized devices it is far fetched. The problem is simply the data quantity. I deal with this problem daily with hyperspectral imaging; you are producing GB/s of data... Processing that near realtime is a true challenge.

    What I can see possible with the state of the art are devices that are specialized to identify specific compounds. But a device that can do a generic and nonspecialized retrieval and identification of chemical compounds requires a lot of processing power - especially when dealing with hyperspectral data in contrast to simple spectral data. If you want to do a quantitative analysis, its even worse.

    1. Re:Technological limitation by Arkh89 · · Score: 1

      That is why people want to use compressed sensing for this. Then you never have to deal with the full bandwidth, as you're directly acquiring compressed data. Then, you also do the inference in the compressed domain.

    2. Re:Technological limitation by Rei · · Score: 1

      Out of curiosity, why would it be producing GB/s of data? First off, I don't even see why there would be a "per second" component in that, wouldn't there be a fixed data size per scan based on the spectral resolution? And even if that was too much the chip could pre-process that into a compressed form - while there's a lot of "noise" in some regions, spectrums also have huge regions of constant or near-constant slope.

      Where does the GB/s come from?

      BTW, there are now dozens of cell phones that record 4k video. Next gen chips can do so at 120p. That's over 3 GB/s raw if 24-bit color - processed in realtime into H264 video.

      --
      Trump's plan to get rid of Mueller appears to be 'be so guilty of so many things that Mueller works himself to death.'
    3. Re:Technological limitation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >The problem is simply the data quantity. I deal with this problem daily with hyperspectral imaging; you are producing GB/s of data..

      But but but... cloud computing!!!

    4. Re:Technological limitation by geogob · · Score: 2

      Its coming from my personal experience designing hyperspectral imagers capable of doing analysis such as what is presented in the example.

      The compression is not really the problem. The biggest issue is data analysis and interpretation.

      And the time component is obvious... you don't wand to look at the same object without moving with your handy for 2 hours to get the required SNR to be able to do a spectral analysis. You have minimum requirements in resolutions, spectral band and SNR. Theses parameter will vary lot depending on the species you are trying to identify and with which precision you want to do that. But for a comfortable observation time, with a non-specialized device, you'll quickly come in the range of GB/s... and that even at low spatial resolution.

    5. Re:Technological limitation by Rei · · Score: 1

      Okay, that doesn't really answer the question (not doubting your personal experience here). The question was:

      " why would it be producing GB/s of data?"

      And the time component is obvious... you don't wand to look at the same object without moving with your handy for 2 hours to get the required SNR to be able to do a spectral analysis.

      Again, I don't see how that explains a "per second" aspect. If you need X bytes of data, you need X bytes data, why would one be sitting around for shorter or longer than necessary? And how does improving your SNR increase your data flow? You only need one value per frequency, what could possibly be the purpose of repeatedly reporting new data for a given frequency rather than just the final result?

      And again, not really getting how this could possibly be gigs of data, let alone "gigs per second times 2 hours". If you're scanning - I don't know what wavelengths are typical, so lets say 100-5100nm. And lets say each measurement is 8 byte double precision. 2 gigs per second for two hours is 600 TB, or 74 trillion spectral readings. That means your spectral resolution precision is 6,8e-11nn. There's no way you're seriously recording that high of a precision, is there?

      --
      Trump's plan to get rid of Mueller appears to be 'be so guilty of so many things that Mueller works himself to death.'
    6. Re: Technological limitation by jd2112 · · Score: 1

      Just wait until Verizon sends you a $50k phone bill...

      --
      Any insufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology.
    7. Re:Technological limitation by Rei · · Score: 1

      Or perhaps I'm misunderstanding the concept. I was picturing that it was not taking spacial information into account, that it was just recording the spectral information for whatever was in front of the sensor. But I went to the Wikipedia page for hyperspectral imaging and it sounds like it records a full spectrum for each pixel of a whole detailed image.

      Now I think I understand what's going on here and why the data recorded would be so large. But I don't think the limitations are as great as you make them out to be. If you really need a large number of pixels spectrally imaged, then you probably have some very specific task in mind, rather than trying to pick out rare compounds' spectral signatures from a complex mixture, and so can afford to be selective on what spectral components you observe. If you're trying to identify some particular compound, then you probably don't need highly detailed positional information and can just throw it away, bin everything together, and rapidly reduce your SNR.

      I can also readily envision all sorts of hybrid approaches between these two endpoints. For example, one could gather more detailed spectrums for a small number of pixels and less detailed spectrums for a greater number of pixels, and associate the two together. This could be done generally, just by having your "detailed" pixels scattered evenly across the scene, or intelligently, by having the results from your lower spectral resolution / higher spatial resolution scan influence the selection of pixels for your higher spectral resolution / lower spatial resolution points (or vice versa). For example, if you're looking for a very precise spectral signal in a scene that will exist in only a few pixels, you could provide to the chip some sort of descriptive format that describes the spectral signature you're looking for, and the chip would start out with a scan that rules out "clearly the wrong spectrum" pixels, keep collecting data on the scene, rule out "okay, now I'm pretty sure these are wrong too" pixels, and so forth until it's only collecting data on a very small number of pixels.

      But honestly, most of the sort of applications that I would have interest in have no need for spatial resolution of any kind. I'd prefer to have the object take up the full sensor, or choose what portion of the sensor to use and bin it all together.

      --
      Trump's plan to get rid of Mueller appears to be 'be so guilty of so many things that Mueller works himself to death.'
  13. In theory, thermal too? by Videospike · · Score: 1

    So if this thing is hyperspectral, and contains the infrared spectrum as well, couldn't the output from the sensor be bandpass limited to have it act as a thermal camera as well? Cause I could actually use that. There's a gap somewhere in the insulation of my house so large that I contribute significantly to global warming.

    1. Re:In theory, thermal too? by geogob · · Score: 1

      You can already buy that. FLIR, for example, is doing a thermal imaging module for iphone. And that's much easier than including a hyperspectral imager in the device.

    2. Re:In theory, thermal too? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      have it act as a thermal camera as well? Cause I could actually use that.

      Flir One may be what you're looking for. The current version is ~$250 and a newer version is coming out this year that supports Android and iOS. (Note that I have no ties to Flir but I found this over the weekend and plan to buy the newest model when it's available)

    3. Re:In theory, thermal too? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seek Thermal has a better camera (much higher resolution sensor) than FLIR. Android & iOS compatible.
      http://www.thermal.com/

    4. Re:In theory, thermal too? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The main downside AFAIK is that Seek Thermal doesn't do the overlay of visible spectrum like FLIR does. That is supposedly quite useful. (I am still researching my options and might decide that it's okay not to have that feature)

  14. Why not? by sjbe · · Score: 2

    Right now the chemical analytical techniques to figure out what the composition of a substance require huge machines and significant training in spectroscopy and there's no way of miniaturizing those techniques and automating the interpretation of the data.

    "No way"? There are lots of things that used to require huge machines and significant training that don't anymore. While I don't think we're going to see a mass market pocket spectroscope in the next few years, but I would never say it cannot be done just because we can't do it yet. I've seen cell phones used for infrared imaging already. I see no reason why they couldn't perform some rudimentary spectroscopy tasks. Sure it won't match the professional lab equipment but I doubt anyone expects it to.

    1. Re:Why not? by inflamed · · Score: 2

      The problem is that the spectroscopic techniques capable amenable to implemention on a small device can only give some general information about a material or mixture. This may be enough to select one option from a narrow set of possibilities (eg: is that drain pipe PVC or ABS plastic?). However, it is not going to identify the presence of a toxin in a bowl of soup or tell you that your gold watch is only gold-plated.

    2. Re:Why not? by Dashiva+Dan · · Score: 1

      The problem is that the spectroscopic techniques capable amenable to implemention on a small device can only give some general information about a material or mixture. This may be enough to select one option from a narrow set of possibilities (eg: is that drain pipe PVC or ABS plastic?). However, it is not going to identify the presence of a toxin in a bowl of soup or tell you that your gold watch is only gold-plated.

      I fully expect one of the first uses would to have a database of common toxins and their signatures, and would indeed be able to detect a sufficient sample, the real question will be sensitivity, which may limit the number that can be usefully detected until the technology is inevitably improved. And once this is in the hands of the public and accessible to develop this is the sort of thing that I expect to make some quick initial advances as others build better databases once there's a need for them, and work out better algorithms of detection and data processing for ever more accurate results...

      --
      "lt;dr" is the correct response to most of my posts.
    3. Re:Why not? by inflamed · · Score: 1

      Sensitivity is a factor but selectivity is much more crucial to any such analysis. Without physically separating the constituent materials as part of an analysis, "signatures" will overlap and obscure each other. Anyhow, I'm not pooh-poohing this technology, just trying to add some balance to the conversation, which (around here) trends towards science fiction more than science.

  15. XRF Analyzers by N3tRunner · · Score: 1

    Handheld materials analysis has been possible for quite some time now with XRF technology. I guess hyperspectral imaging would be preferable to handheld XRF analyzers because of the lack of any x-ray emissions, but this is just a new solution for a problem that has already been solved for years.

    1. Re:XRF Analyzers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      XRF and UV/Vis/NIR deliver different types of information. There have been miniature spectrometers available for many years longer than XRF. However, the problem is not one of hyper spectrometry fitting in your hand, but one of ubiquity and data rate.

  16. Thermal already on the market by sjbe · · Score: 1

    couldn't the output from the sensor be bandpass limited to have it act as a thermal camera as well? Cause I could actually use that.

    There already are thermal imaging cellphone cameras on the market today. Haven't gotten my hands on one yet but they're pretty reasonably priced.

  17. Add some of these capabilities to regular cameras! by kimgkimg · · Score: 1

    I would like to see hyperspectral capabilities added to regular cameras and then algorithmic rendering of the spectra as overlays to the visual layers. This would be useful say in smoothing skintones by blending in data from the infrared range (or similarly for lightening foliage.) The only problem there would be that focal point for different spectra is different, so it would have to be a multishot merge (like is done with HDR.)

  18. Probably not in consumer phones by davidwr · · Score: 1

    Enough people (all it takes is a few) will scream in alarm if most consumer cell phones can see infra-red well enough to create "infrared-porn" by seeing through clothing that most cell phone makers won't touch it with a 10-foot pole.

    "Is that a cell phone hidden in your pocket pointed directly at my mid-section or are you just checking to see if I'm happy to meet you?"

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
    1. Re:Probably not in consumer phones by Dashiva+Dan · · Score: 1

      As soon as the tech for cameras to take 'x-ray' images is available to appear in phones, manufacturers will be scrambling over each other to get it in.
      It will be marketed for everything aside for the x-ray imaging, and that ability will not be implemented, so they'll be 'OK'.
      Hackers will immediately make the functionality available to the public, the cat will be out of the bag, and it'll just become another fact of the world, that you can't presume to hide your physical form if you go out in public (although a market will open for special material clothing in order to do so if you can afford it - perhaps even become the solution) or perhaps the world will in a generation or two get accustomed to the new norm and stop caring - the 'european' attitude will become the norm.

      I hope it happens in my lifetime, will be terribly entertaining to watch it unfold.

      Also curious as to that patent and how it bounces around.

      --
      "lt;dr" is the correct response to most of my posts.
  19. Silicone or real? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Finally a camera to figure out... wait. Who cares?

  20. Also: why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Also: why would we need that? And the answer is different from the "because it is there" from Sir Hillary. Why would people want molecular analyzers on the phone? Personally I have rarely felt the need to do an instant molecular analysis of a compound I happened to encounter.

    3D camera: yes

    Small beamer: yes

    IR/See-through-clothes camera: obviously!

    Molecular analyser: what could possibly be the use case?

    1. Re:Also: why? by spacepimp · · Score: 1

      Environmental remediation tasks. Although I'd imagine this is not great for finding trace elements present in a soil sample.

  21. Knowing if a drink is roofied would be nice... by tlambert · · Score: 1

    Knowing if a drink is roofied would be nice... Just sayin'.

    1. Re:Knowing if a drink is roofied would be nice... by swillden · · Score: 1

      Knowing if a drink is roofied would be nice... Just sayin'.

      I suppose. However, I'd say that if your life choices make this a question you find yourself asking regularly, you might want to think about why that is... Just sayin'

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    2. Re:Knowing if a drink is roofied would be nice... by sjbe · · Score: 1

      I suppose. However, I'd say that if your life choices make this a question you find yourself asking regularly, you might want to think about why that is... Just sayin'

      Lovely example of blaming the victim. People go to bars because they like to drink and socialize. Nothing wrong with that and people aren't making poor life choices because of it.

    3. Re:Knowing if a drink is roofied would be nice... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "People go to bars"

      "because they like to drink" ... sound precisely like poor life choices.

    4. Re:Knowing if a drink is roofied would be nice... by swillden · · Score: 1

      I suppose. However, I'd say that if your life choices make this a question you find yourself asking regularly, you might want to think about why that is... Just sayin'

      Lovely example of blaming the victim. People go to bars because they like to drink and socialize. Nothing wrong with that and people aren't making poor life choices because of it.

      Do a lot of the bars you go to put roofies in your drinks? If so... you might want to consider frequenting a higher caliber of establishment. Note that this doesn't make the victim not a victim, or the perpetrator any less wrong. It just means that the victim should consider making safer choices.

      You don't have to rely on society/technology to keep you safe.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
  22. Pill/drug purity analysis in your mobile phone! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This would be a big hit in the community where people are buying quantities of chemicals to put into their system and don't know the exact makeup. Is there rat poison in there? A bit of K mixed in with some MDM? More flour than ...? This would really revolutionise the buying of such things were it possible and put into mobile phones.

    It would also enable people to say "on, another letter full of flour" rather than "OMG! Letter filled with anthrax!"

  23. Perfect is the enemy of good by sjbe · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The problem is that the spectroscopic techniques capable amenable to implemention on a small device can only give some general information about a material or mixture

    It doesn't have to do everything to be super useful. There is this tendency by a lot of people here on slashdot to think that something has to be a perfect replacement for existing technology to be viable. I could use something that could tell the difference between PVC and nylon right now. If it could do more that would be nice but even basic uses could be hugely beneficial.

    However, it is not going to identify the presence of a toxin in a bowl of soup or tell you that your gold watch is only gold-plated.

    That is a limitation but it's like saying that the camera in my cellphone is useless because it doesn't have a telephoto lens. There are a huge number of applications for a rudimentary spectroscope. I could use one in my factory today to check wire jacketing composition or conductor composition. (Brass or Bronze-Phosphor or Copper, etc)

    1. Re:Perfect is the enemy of good by e3m4n · · Score: 1

      or knowing you really did get a good price on plenum cable and not some cheap pvc knockoff. Agree 100% with your assessment that despite many limitations, it will have an abundance of cheap, useful applications. Considering some of the 3rd world uses smart phones are playing in the medical field, this could only enhance the usefulness of doctors without borders.

  24. Modular Smartphone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This sounds perfect for Project Ara:

    "Project Ara is the codename for an initiative that aims to develop an open hardware[4] platform for creating highly modular smartphones.[5] The platform will include a structural frame (endoskeleton that holds smartphone modules of the owner's choice), such as a display, camera or an extra battery."

    Video One

    Video Two

  25. Tons of uses by sjbe · · Score: 1

    Molecular analyser: what could possibly be the use case?

    My company manufactures wire harnesses and wire products. Sometimes the materials we are shipped are not what is on the label, particularly materials coming from parts of China. It would be super helpful to have way to check whether a cable jacket is made of PVC or nylon or polyethylene right on the receiving dock without having to send it to a lab. Same for wire composition. A company I know that deals in somewhat unusual types of steel and other metals had to buy an expensive spectroscope because sometimes the material they are shipped is simply not what the manufacturer claims it is. It's not unusual to see a crooked manufacturer try to pass off a low grade steel for a more expensive high grade one. You need a means to check.

    There are innumerable research and industrial uses for a simple spectroscope. I can even think of uses in the home. Looking for certain allergens perhaps? (not sure of the feasibility of that) Checking for presence of toxins. Checking to see if the vitamins you bought actually have the ingredients on the label. Etc.

    1. Re:Tons of uses by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course there are possible uses for such a device, and it is cool. But is this the most-needed feature on a cell phone? For commercial/industrial uses I would not trust it anyway.

  26. Any Drawbacks To This? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Could something like this determine the chemical composition of cash money?

    1. Re:Any Drawbacks To This? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or if the 20 dollar bill you just got handed has been used to snort coke with in the past...

  27. Wednesday, April 01, 2015 1:30:00 AM by Mirar · · Score: 1

    "Where No Smartphone Has Gone Before

    Wednesday, April 01, 2015 1:30:00 AM

    TAU researchers move Star Trek's fictional "Tricorder" into the real world" ...yeah.

  28. blablabla SCIO scum by user.aaaaa · · Score: 0

    yea spend your money on izraely fairy tales

  29. Air pollution by gmuslera · · Score: 1

    Some time ago i saw some students measuring air pollution by doing a spectrogram. It could had been great to be able to scan all the photos on the internet for that kind of information, a good percent of which have associated time and location where they were taken, but you can't get that information from what normal cameras output. Maybe with this new camera, if get popular enough, the information gathered could be useful to do that kind of global measurements.

  30. Why the buzzword ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It is just spectography, but rather than make a snapshot of a single substance or point, they do it over a whole 2D field of view. it is still only spectography : i.o.w. comparing the database of known spectra of various substance over the sensor range, against the observed substance. I am a bit doubtful on what substance it can identify without making a mistake, to properly identify a variety of compound we used a spectra which extended widely in UV, or we used NMRI for organic substance in addition to IR. Only IR (as they don't have an UV source available to get the absorption spectra on those wavelength) and you get a lot of mis-identification.

  31. From spy satellite to cellphone ? by bdubSOv1iKIJ403M · · Score: 1

    There's some older data on hyperspectral imaging at https://www.schneier.com/blog/...

    General limitations.
    It's only skin deep. It's not a tricorder.
    Composite and mixed signals, aren't labeled for you. While hyperspectral imaging gives more-unique material signatures than RGB imaging, figuring out the most likely combination of known pure signatures, to match a noisy input signal, is still hard. Have fun with linear algebra and matrix inversion ?

  32. No, Geordi La Forge's VISOR by storkus · · Score: 1

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    Sure, this "real" hyperspectral imager can't do VISOR's "1 Hz to 100 PHz" (per the above), but it's still impressive nonetheless--assuming it's not vaporware, of course.