Slashdot Mirror


Pocket SCiO Spectrometer Sends Chemical Composition of Anything To Smartphones

MojoKid writes: Is that a tricorder in your pocket or are you just happy to see me? All joking aside, the handheld SCiO could truly make you feel like a member Bones McCoy's medical team. The SCiO turns science fiction into science fact by shrinking mass spectrometry technology used in traditional lab settings into a device small enough to fit in the palm of your hand. While pricey handheld spectrometers have been available for researchers, the SCiO is the first such device marketed directly at consumers. To get the SCiO down to a reasonable price point, Consumer Physics uses near-IR spectroscopy and optics typically found in smartphones to measure the light reflected from any given object. Held at a distance of 5 to 15 mm from the intended target, SCiO captures reflected spectrum data and uploads it to its own cloud platform. The company's proprietary algorithms then analyze the data and send the information back down to your smartphone (SCiO require a Bluetooth connection). Reportedly, this whole process occurs within 1.5 seconds. The hope is to empower consumers to learn more about the world around them and even about the things that we put in our mouth. You'll be able to ascertain nutritional information about the foods you eat without having to rely on labels, or even determine the ripeness of fruits and vegetables with the push of a button. The Whole Foods crowd will be all over this, one would think.

82 comments

  1. Can I test cocaine and MDMA with this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Can I test cocaine and MDMA with this?

    1. Re: Can I test cocaine and MDMA with this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or weed? No more paying extra for "the good shit" if the thc level isn't high enough.

    2. Re:Can I test cocaine and MDMA with this? by luckytroll · · Score: 2

      It wasnt my first thought, but giving this to drug buyers to identify not the drug (which it could) but rather if there was anything horrible in what the drug was cut with, might be a terrific harm-reduction tool. Not getting burned would be how you would market it to the drug buyer - but having it set off an alarm if the stuff was cut with rat poison or something equally deadly when put in ones (nose/veins/eye/toes/orifice) could save some grief. Of course, the cloud would probably just send a text to the local DEA saying it got a hit on substance-X complete with GPS coordinates, so you might want to spring for the Developers kit and have it filter the signatures for you for privacys sake.

    3. Re:Can I test cocaine and MDMA with this? by Spy+Handler · · Score: 1

      I was thinking more like crystal meth. Is the product I'm buying really 99.1% pure?

  2. this is not mass spectrometry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    near-IR spectroscopy does not = mass spectrometry

    1. Re:this is not mass spectrometry by methano · · Score: 2

      You're right, this article is garbage. This may or may not be a neat device and may or may not be capable of doing cool things but you need to go somewhere else to find out. Mass spect would be cool but without some kind of separation up front for all the components, it would just give noise. I don't think they've figured out how to get mass spect this small. Near-IR also sounds suspicious. As an organic/analytical chemist all my life, we've used spectroscopy from radio waves (NMR) to x-rays (crystallography) and everything in between. There's very little structural information to be gleaned in the near-IR region. A lot human tissue is actually clear to near-IR and we're using special dyes that show up in the near-IR to image tumors. So maybe if someone puts those special dyes in your cheese, you could tell with this device. No, this article is garbage.

    2. Re:this is not mass spectrometry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      So because near-IR spectrometry "sounds suspicious" (i.e. you haven't looked it up) this is "garbage". Thank you for your expert opinion. You're correct that it's not mass spectrometry per se but everything else you've supposed about NIR spectroscopy is utter bullshit, and worse garbage than the article contains. Read the Wiki article.

    3. Re:this is not mass spectrometry by methano · · Score: 3, Informative

      Come on AC, be nice. You can't use near-IR to identify unknowns when you have a nearly infinite number of possibilities. There are devices for monitoring reactions using Near IR, but their use requires intimate knowledge of the contributing components and calibration of each one. If some new unknown shows up you don't get enough information from their near IR absorbance to assign identity. I 've been doing this stuff for 40 years so I don't need to read the wiki article and become an instant expert like you. However, I will read the wiki article and see if I can understand why you've been mislead.

      I just looked at the article. You owe me an apology.

    4. Re:this is not mass spectrometry by KGIII · · Score: 1

      It has reached the point where I am inclined to trust a random slashdotter more than I am inclined to visit Wikipedia. There are so many things that a Wikipedia article simple can not, does not, cover. I am often at a loss for words when I see articles that are ostensibly about subjects that I am fluent in. My doctorate is in Applied Mathematics and you would be amazed at the number of things I have found that are not necessarily wrong but not right either. They are just either mis-represented or simply not actually related to the subject. I lack initiative so I will not bother going to dig out a few of these issues but, frankly, go read some pages on subjects for which you have an intimate knowledge. It is not even worth editing them. If you check the revision pages you can often see where someone has come along and reverted a good edit with no talk and no real discernible reason for doing so.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
  3. MASS spectrometry? by petes_PoV · · Score: 3, Insightful

    shrinking mass spectrometry technology used in traditional lab settings into a device small enough to fit in the palm of your hand

    Surely this device has nothing whatsoever to do with a mass-spec? It doesn't appear to use any of the techniques that a mass spectrometer does (even if it produces results to the non-technical consumer that appear similar) and to use the term sends a misleading message.

    Maybe I should buy a whistle and re-badge it as a "sonic screwdriver"?

    --
    politicians are like babies' nappies: they should both be changed regularly and for the same reasons
    1. Re:MASS spectrometry? by jandersen · · Score: 4, Informative

      Surely this device has nothing whatsoever to do with a mass-spec?

      Of course not - in fact, already the headline should arouse suspicion that somebody in the chain of communication hasn't got a clue: "... chemical composition of anything ...". There no instrument at all in existence on this planet capable of doing this. It may be reasonably easy to measure the relative abundances of chemical elements and their isotopes in a sample, but not with a simple 'near infrared spectrometer', I would have thought, and as for analysing such a spectrum to get the 'chemical composition of anything', the fact is that there are millions or billions of common molecules arounds - such as proteins - and we do not have any simply understanding of what their spectral fingerprint might be. Single atoms have well-defined, discrete spectra, but complex molecules may not even have discrete spectra.

      On top of that - even if we were able to calculate and measure spectra perfectly, and assuming that the very limited 'near infrared' bandwidth is sufficient to distinguish all molecules, the analysis part is likely to require massive processing power. All in all - a load of hyped up nonsense.

    2. Re:MASS spectrometry? by Hognoxious · · Score: 2

      All in all - a load of hyped up nonsense.

      On our slashdots, posted by MojoKid?

      Sir, I put it to you that you are jesting!

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    3. Re:MASS spectrometry? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Would be interesting to see the results in metallurgy. Is that really lead free solder in compliance with ROHS? Can it tell solder from lead. Can it tell stainless steel varieties? Can it tell a US nickel from a Canadian one? Can it tell the cubic zirconium from a diamond? Maybe it can scan a blood sample for diabetes since it seems to be able to respond to sugar.

    4. Re:MASS spectrometry? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One word answer to all your questions....

      NO.

    5. Re:MASS spectrometry? by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 1

      Surely this device has nothing whatsoever to do with a mass-spec?

      It doesn't matter. Package it up to look like a Star Trek Tricorder, and sell them at Star Trek conventions. They will be an instant hit. Trekkies will have a hoot and a half running around scanning each other.

      Maybe I should buy a whistle and re-badge it as a "sonic screwdriver"?

      That would sell well at Dr. Who conventions. Maybe Vikorinox could bring out a Dr. Who Sonic Screwdriver Swiss Army Knife . . . ?

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    6. Re:MASS spectrometry? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Think of it like a camera. It has limited wavelength response, limited resolution, and computing anything from the images is really really hard.

      But until you have the camera, you won't get face recognition or object tracking or AR or Deep Dream, and once you have the camera and it's cheap and processing power increases sometimes you can be amazed at what can be done within its limitations.

      You basically seem to be saying the camera is a pointless invention because we don't completely understand photography yet. It's completely usual for articles to contain hyperbole. You just need to distinguish between potential applications and provable current applications, then it's all pretty clear. This is a new type of sensor, and considering what's been done with much simpler sensors plus computation, there's every reason to be excited for the potential future applications.

    7. Re:MASS spectrometry? by avandesande · · Score: 1

      I also think the processing on the server seems suspicious- I hardly think there is anything you could do with a single image that can't be processed on a modern smartphone. Seems like a marketing/data gather play more than anything.

      --
      love is just extroverted narcissism
    8. Re:MASS spectrometry? by luckytroll · · Score: 2

      NO, but there are gadgets that can do some of those - look up XRFs - they tend to do better with bulk/surface/soil analysis of atomic species, especially the heavier ones. I worked with one of these a bit (Older Niton unit with a non-excited X source) when helping my wife with her PHd research, which involved finding the Manganese levels in soil. People use these all the time to find lead in kids toys, and alloy analysis as you queried above.

      A device that can do XRF and NIRS (the one in the article) at high resolution and low cost would be a game changer, but also might be hard to buy, because anything that gives off X rays is probably never going to go consumer grade.

  4. Cloud? Meh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If the company ever goes out of business, or discontinues the supporting service because it's 'legacy', then your fancy device is good for nothing.

    1. Re:Cloud? Meh by invictusvoyd · · Score: 1

      Reverse engineered open source analyzer running off the phone?

  5. Investment opportunity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Can I short this, if they go public?

    1. Re: Investment opportunity by loufoque · · Score: 1

      Are you seriously using Slashdot for research?

    2. Re: Investment opportunity by KGIII · · Score: 1

      I have some play money that I use to invest. I do surprisingly better than I thought. I actually average between 8 and 13% which is pretty impressive, if I say so myself, as I do all of it "myself" and have absolutely no training. My first few years I averaged -2% or so but I have long since made up for it. Anyhow, yes - I do use this site in my considerations. I do not take investing advice from anyone here but it is good for noticing trends and catching things that may be game changers in the near future. If, for instance, you see a number of people start to recommend a new site in their comments then it may be wise to throw some VC in that direction in hopes that an IPO happens. Rumors or interest also translate into mergers and outright purchases - those things can be noted here and are less likely to be subject to intentional misinformation because, frankly, only a moron would take investing advice from /.ers.

      So no... It is not a tool for a deterministic approach. It is a tool, one of many, for information concerning trends and potential futures. It is not, nor should it be, a single source of information but is a fine metric to be used in combination with other sources. It really depends on what you are expecting, how you make use of the information, and how you filter the information and weigh it appropriately.

      I have not had to add any money to my play money fund in quite a while. I actually have more investment capital now, because of this site, than I had when I started my hobby and that total is much higher than the amount that I have put into it. I have been enjoying my hobby (which is more people watching than investing) for about fifteen years which is longer than I have been retired.

      It works for me... Just chose an area that you are interested in and a community that follows those interests or is populated by people employed in those interests. It is amazing what you can glean from comments - even from Anonymous Coward comments. I make notes (with links even) to myself and follow the trends. Sometimes I do some scraping and some statistical analytics or aggregate from sites like Google News and similar and then manually review the results. It really is more about people watching, we are herd animals even though we like to think we're independent and unique-minded individuals, and then capitalizing on the trends. Remember, you're unique - just like everybody else.

      Example:

      Microsoft - They were a great investment if you got in at the right time. Now? They are great for holding capital with little risk. No major changes here.
      Apple - They were great to get into when you heard people raving about the advent of the iPhone and iPads. Be cautious now, they are cash-on-hand/asset wealthy though.
      RedHat - Slow but progressive. Not a bad choice as open-source is going to continue to experience growth. It will be slow growth but it will be a decent average.
      Google - Inconsistent. Good growth, usually, but not a wise long-term strategy (debatable) for my particular desires. Great if I could have jumped on it in time. I did not play the game then.

      Anyhow, to me it is a hobby. I fully expect to lose all of my money and that is okay. I started investing in my hobby at a much higher level when I sold my business eight years ago. (The company does vehicular and pedestrian traffic modeling - that actually correlates well with investing.) In that time, I have more than doubled my investment total. Well, no... In the full fifteen years I have more than doubled my investment total. Considering my total investment is ~300k USD this means I have made a tidy profit. This profit is based almost entirely not from news sources but from observing the comments *at* the news and aggregation sites and limited to only areas of investment where I also have an intimate familiarity or a layman's interest.

      I do think that this strategy would be harmed if more people attempted to do so. I suspect there would be more insidious attempts to control the narrative if this b

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
  6. Smartphone as powerful as 80's supercomputer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Difficult to see why they can't do the calculation in the smartphone, given a modern smartphone is as powerful as an 80's supercomputer.

    I see this spectrometer has its own processor: an TI-OMAP, which is an old Arm chip not very powerful, running Android:

    http://www.denovix.com/ds-11-specifications/

    1. Re:Smartphone as powerful as 80's supercomputer by Rei · · Score: 2

      Smartphones are still drastically slower than individual PCs, let alone cloud services.

      I know they're overstating the case, and that it's a near-IR spectrometer, not a mass spectrometer. That said, I still like the general concept. Does anyone know whether near-IR spectroscopy can be used for identifying mineral species (for example, between different types of zeolites and the like)? I love rock hunting but many species have similar visual appearances.

      And even on the food standpoint I find it interesting... I'm a tropical plant nut, and lots of people I know over on the forum breed unusual varieties of common fruits as well as rare fruits (some of which don't even have scientific names). It's be neat to be able to get a basic compositional profile - no, not "this fruit contains X ppb of this gigantic-complex-unique-protein", but just the major constituents. It'd help, for example, the mango breeders to know if their fruits are compositionally different from the fruit of the parent cultivar.

      --
      "You see, Government is a system that is based on weapons." -- Timster
    2. Re:Smartphone as powerful as 80's supercomputer by drinkypoo · · Score: 2

      Smartphones are still drastically slower than individual PCs, let alone cloud services.

      Most of the time that I'm not at home, my smartphone is exactly as fast as my smartphone plus cloud services, because I don't have internet access for it. I live in the sticks where it's worthless. Any device which requires a cloud connection is a non-starter for me. And I am precisely the target market for this device, if it suited my needs; I have the money, and I want to be able to do what it claims to do.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    3. Re: Smartphone as powerful as 80's supercomputer by tmosley · · Score: 1

      IIRC it is used mainly to examine organic bonds and their spatial relationships. Pretty sure ionic bonds are transparent at those wavelengths.

  7. Interesting; likely more limited than advertised by geogob · · Score: 5, Informative

    Designing spectrometer is what I do for a living and with my experience and knowledge, I have serious doubts this device has sufficient resolving power to do what they claim it can/would/should do. To identify chemical components, you need a minimum spectral resolution (depending on the species you want to identify). To do quantitative analysis, the requirements are event higher. Typically, for solid NIR spectroscopy, I would aim at 2 to 4 cm^-1 spectral resolution. Under this, you can maybe check for the presence of a specific compound or compound family, but the capability to do so will be very dependent on the overall chemical composition.

    Its possible to reduce the size of a spectrometer while somewhat keeping the resolution. But that goes only up to a certain extent... and that goes only with trade on signal to noise ratio. At some point physics overtakes wishful thinking. Reducing the instrument, and thus the optical throughput, you need longer measurement times to achieve adequate signal quality. Quantitative analysis with a (large) lab NIR spectrometer can take minutes, depending on the material being analysed. When you design spectrometers, you are constantly trading on aspect for another and by bringing a NIR spectrometer to that size, you traded a LOT of stuff away.

    I also see spectral calibration being an issue with this device, then it works in reflectance and not in transmittance. It cannot be self-calibrating and directly provide a transmission/absorption spectrum. Maybe it is calibrated once during the production and assumed to be stable? If that is sufficient is, from my experience, questionable.

    On the other hand, this is a very exiting breakthrough. I might even get my hands on one for fun. Why? because its, as they so well market it, a liberalisation of matter. Its a first step in being able to identify any substance that we get our hands on. While it may not yet be able to provide a full chemical make-up of a product, with enough a priori information it may be very useful.

    Let me give you an example where such a device can be its money worth. When you buy fruits and vegetables that are bio/organic, you want them really to be that way. This decision to spend more money on these healthier food items is solely based on trust, which is often exploited. I doubt that the analysis of such a product can do what they claim (most of the return information is most likely deduced from the a priori information provided). But even with a limited spectral resolution and sensitivity, it should be able to identify spectral signatures of typical herbicides and pesticides.

  8. Re:Interesting; likely more limited than advertise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well said.

    I look forward to them producing lots of spectra of air and water with tiny sample signals.

  9. Re:Interesting; likely more limited than advertise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There are a lot of times where it's difficult to determine if something is plastic (and what kind), metal (gold? copper? silver? steel? titanium? some alloy? what percent of each?), glass or ceramic, and so on. I wonder if this thing would be capable of making that determination, because that could be quite useful for a lot of people.

  10. Re:Interesting; likely more limited than advertise by iserlohn · · Score: 1

    There are way more Kickstarter failures than successes and seeing that this is one of the more ambitious projects, it is very unlikely to actually deliver anything close to what was promised.

    Here is another analysis of the product by a analytical scientist.-

    http://www.cnet.com/news/kicks...

  11. Re: Reality by loufoque · · Score: 2

    Dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) might not be bad, but fracking certainly is.

  12. Re:Interesting; likely more limited than advertise by Rei · · Score: 1

    Thanks for your insights. Still trying to decide whether something like this should go on my wish list ;) (see above for my potential uses).

    How accurate, exactly, do you think such a device could be? Obviously it's not going to be pulling out the sort of precision of a professional spectrometer. But you mention, for example, being able to identify the signatures of herbicides and pesticides. Do you mean, for example, "This contains imidacloprid", or more like, "This contains a nicotinoid of some variety"?

    How useful do you think it could be on identifying mineral species - say, distinguishing between different zeolites? Or, back to food, if given, say, a mango, to get readings of, say, water, sugar (in general, or specific sugars), fat (in general, or specific categories of fats, or specific fats), protein (in general, or specific categories of proteins, or specific common protiens... obviously it's not going to be able to pull out 5 ppb of Some-Complex-Unique-Protein), common vitamins (generally found in dozens of ppm quantity - some more, some less), minerals (likewise), etc?

    --
    "You see, Government is a system that is based on weapons." -- Timster
  13. Re: Interesting; likely more limited than advertis by loufoque · · Score: 1

    Most of the materials you cited are usually marked with a symbol or code that you can look up.

  14. Re:Interesting; likely more limited than advertise by geogob · · Score: 4, Informative

    You will not be able to determine raw elements with a NIR spectrometer. With a NIR-LWIR spectrometer, you can only identify molecular compounds, because what you are observing is actually the vibration modes of the molecules. In this spectral range, you will have a lot of signature for organic compounds. So you may be able determine if something is made of plastic. Determining the kind is trickier because most plastics are actually very similar and would require a device with higher spectral resolution to make such a determination.

    For elementary elements (iron, copper, gold, etc.), you can forget it. That device will not help you.

  15. Re:Interesting; likely more limited than advertise by Rei · · Score: 2

    That actually doesn't sound that bad:

    "For example both alcohol (ethanol) and water produce large peaks on an IR spectrum and from the video it would seem that the user provides some background data on what the sample is via the app, so that saves a lot of work. It would be easy for the algorithm to say, 'the user says this is drink and I can see that about 40 per cent of the total spectrum is ethanol so I should give a reading of alcoholic beverage with 40 per cent alcohol content'. Or 'this is a plant and 70 per cent of the spectrum is water so it must be 70 per cent hydrated'. This could also be done with total sugar content for common sugars such as sucrose and fructose," he said.

    "Similarly, it would be possible to get a spectrum good enough to recognise something like fruit or Tylenol and then send back generic data (easily found via Google)

    That would hardly be useless. I presume that the person knows whether what they're looking at is a fruit or an alcoholic beverage. It's not a big deal to ask the user to do whatever degree of categorization that they can to help it out. And being able to pick out common drugs? Definitely not useless.

    --
    "You see, Government is a system that is based on weapons." -- Timster
  16. Re:Interesting; likely more limited than advertise by geogob · · Score: 1

    That article hits the nail on the head, although I do not share the negative view on the conclusions.

  17. For what purpose? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why should ordinary citizens need spectrometers? Sounds like terrorism to me. AUTHORITIES!!!

  18. Re:Interesting; likely more limited than advertise by iserlohn · · Score: 1

    That's the best case scenario. I'm usually an optimist, but this is Kickstarter we are talking about.

  19. I take issue with the cloud software by BlueCoder · · Score: 1

    What happens when the company goes out of business or decides to stop supporting the product? I can also see the government compelling them not to reveal certain chemical signatures. Software should not be dictated from the "cloud". It needs to be users that are in control. Specifically I don't see a reason why we can't have the software and install it on our own servers if we wish to. So long as we have the option of our own servers I can then concede to using non personal cloud servers for processing speed.

    1. Re:I take issue with the cloud software by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      It shouldn't be terribly difficult to write some spectral analysis software for it, if you can figure out how to talk to their hardware.

    2. Re:I take issue with the cloud software by John+Jorsett · · Score: 1

      Software should not be dictated from the "cloud". It needs to be users that are in control. Specifically I don't see a reason why we can't have the software and install it on our own servers if we wish to. So long as we have the option of our own servers I can then concede to using non personal cloud servers for processing speed.

      Seems to me that's the the dev kit will get you. People will develop their own versions of the app to use a local or their own cloud database and let the user be dependent on the vendor.

  20. Re:Interesting; likely more limited than advertise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Holy hell, there are still people that know what they're talking about on Slashdot? Before they made all the articles clickbait you guys were everywhere. I miss the interesting analysis of articles by professionals in relevant fields and I don't know of any web site that still has that.

    Thank you for taking the time. Every time I come back to this website it's because I'm hoping to see a post like yours.

  21. Re:Spectrometry is for cows. by tshawkins · · Score: 2

    You should get one, you will be able to check your meds are not out of date......

  22. Re: Interesting; likely more limited than advertis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes, there are lots of coins out of China marked Au or Ag that are simply plated.
    Unfortunately, this requires an expensive XRF Analyzer to determine.

  23. Re:Interesting; likely more limited than advertise by tshawkins · · Score: 1

    It should also be able to do validations, ie you can say "is this valium", and it would be able to say yes or no, by matching the signature of valium as seen through its hardware. I guess that why the cloud db is there, its not so much doing analysis and working out what the thing is from its consituents, but matching the signal it gets with a db of things that have been scaned by tbe device that are already known.

  24. Re:Interesting; likely more limited than advertise by defnoz · · Score: 1

    But even with a limited spectral resolution and sensitivity, it should be able to identify spectral signatures of typical herbicides and pesticides.

    I would be amazed if it could. With a sufficiently large database to draw from, and clever processing, I can imagine being able to identify the bulk constituent, but anything else would be lost in the noise. It might be able to tell you if your apple is waxed or not, but not if it's got ppm levels of pesticides. TBH, I'll be pretty impressed if this could identify different plastics or other relatively pure materials. It is certainly a nice idea though.

    There's a reason IR spectroscopy has fallen by the wayside in chemistry - it doesn't give you enough information, and just hasn't kept up with other techniques. It's used for specific tasks, such as monitoring a reaction, but it's not a go-to analysis technique any more.

  25. Re:Spectrometry is for cows. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hey, "sexconker (1179573)", just don't make yesterday's mistake of forgetting to tick the "post anonymously" box:

    http://news.slashdot.org/comme...

  26. This device seems to be very similar to TellSpec by frontloader · · Score: 1

    These guys have been marketing a device that looks rather suspiciously like a spectrometer for inspecting food for a few years now:

    http://tellspec.com/

    I've been following this for near two years now and was debating getting signed up on the beta program. The barrier for me has been the monthly service cost, expecting that the device may be rather limited without a good corpus of crowd-sourced data propping it up.

    --
    - yummy rootbeer.
  27. NanoLambda Apollo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    One of these new chips that do spectroscopy in smt sized chips. Accuracy 1nm, Resolution 10nm. Below 10$ per pop.
     
    Sounds useable. From what i remember these chips have many tiny coated windows to filter different wavelengths which (after post processing) results in the actual reading.

  28. Re:This device seems to be very similar to TellSpe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    My thoughts exactly. I "purchased" one through indiegogo almost two years ago: https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/tellspec-what-s-in-your-food#/story To this day, still vaporware. Supposedly developer units are shipping soon.

  29. Re:Interesting; likely more limited than advertise by geogob · · Score: 1

    There's a reason IR spectroscopy has fallen by the wayside in chemistry - it doesn't give you enough information, and just hasn't kept up with other techniques. It's used for specific tasks, such as monitoring a reaction, but it's not a go-to analysis technique any more.

    I couldn't disagree more (although one would say I'm somewhat biased on the applications of IR spectroscopy). First I know no research or production analytic lab without at least one IR spectrometer. In quality insurance they are also used a lot. For in-situ monitoring of reaction, IR spectrometer are generally not appropriate because to slow at sufficient spectral resolution. You can only monitor very slow reactions.

    Maybe you are thinking of a specific branch, where other techniques are more appropriate or practical?

    And I am surprised by the statement that vibrational spectroscopy doesn't give you enough information. Maybe not enough for a specific task such as identifying elementary elements, but you get a lot of information on the molecular structure of a compound. With gasses you can also do very precise quantitative analysis. I think only NMR spectroscopy will give your more information on the molecular structure and an NMR certainly does not fit in the palm of the hand.

  30. Re:Interesting; likely more limited than advertise by geogob · · Score: 2

    Thanks for your insights. Still trying to decide whether something like this should go on my wish list ;) (see above for my potential uses).

    Don't expect to much of it for the first generation / first product. Once you get a few competitors and iterations on the technology, you can have a serious look at it. I'd also wait to see a view "in-depth technical reviews" with labor-based comparison studies. To satisfy your curiosity, if your budget allows it, it will definitely be worth it (assuming it at least work a little). I expect the results at first to feel a little like translating something in some language with google translate and translating it back with bing.

    How accurate, exactly, do you think such a device could be? Obviously it's not going to be pulling out the sort of precision of a professional spectrometer. But you mention, for example, being able to identify the signatures of herbicides and pesticides. Do you mean, for example, "This contains imidacloprid", or more like, "This contains a nicotinoid of some variety"?

    It's hard to say without having more detailed information on the spectral range, spectral resolution, illumination source, detector type and sensitivity, and, most importantly, the type of spectrometer. From the description, it seems that it is a diffracting spectrometer, but that again comes in different flavours. Long story short, I can only guestimate the performance of it based on my experience designing such devices with the information they provide. Now, some molecular basis have specific signatures even a low resolution device could identify. Because these molecular basis are shared by various different molecules, it may be difficult to do more as to identify a group such as nicotinoids. And for the same reason you will have a lot of false positives.

    This is where the apriori information play an important role. If you are looking at an apple, the spectral database-based/cloud-based analysis program knows what to expect and can raise a warning flag if it sees something which might be a nicotinoid, because that's not expected in the spectra of a "clean" apple. The same analysis program will ignore the warning if you say you are analysing a cigarette. This, btw. may also lead to false negative... but with low spectral resolution, I believe that the cloud-based analysis will play a crucial role. And this is actually the most interesting part of this innovation.

    How useful do you think it could be on identifying mineral species - say, distinguishing between different zeolites?

    I've never saw an IR spectrometer used for mineralogy or metallurgy. I doubt it can provide you with any significant information in those fields. Other factors you cannot see in vibrational spectroscopy play a too large role.

    Or, back to food, if given, say, a mango, to get readings of, say, water, sugar (in general, or specific sugars), fat (in general, or specific categories of fats, or specific fats), protein (in general, or specific categories of proteins, or specific common protiens... obviously it's not going to be able to pull out 5 ppb of Some-Complex-Unique-Protein), common vitamins (generally found in dozens of ppm quantity - some more, some less), minerals (likewise), etc?

    This is where I believe the advertisement is way to promising and optimistic. I'd occupy your day to do that on a very expensive and high-performance laboratory IR spectrometer. Under laboratory conditions.

    Take this example of sugar spectra from the Agilent website. They don't specify it, but that's most likely 4 cm^-1 resolution. You see that it is possible to identify specific sugar compounds, but also that the spectra are quite alike. Now reduce the spectral resolution to something like 128 cm^-1 and you'll have a hard time identifying the exact type of sugar.

  31. Pocket spectrometer? by Culture20 · · Score: 1

    Good thing Gollum didn't have one of these; he would have won the riddle game!

  32. Re: Interesting; likely more limited than adverti by tmosley · · Score: 1

    Xrf will just show you the composition of the plating, unless its just really, really thin. Sonic and conductivity tests are the preferred non destructive test methods for precious metals.

  33. I thought that too but.... by wezelboy · · Score: 3, Insightful

    But their cloud platform can immediately send your personal data to the DEA. This is one of those things where you look at the ToS very carefully.

    1. Re:I thought that too but.... by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

      It won't be the Whole Foods crowd that will have a field day with this story, but the conspiracy theorists.

      If this device actually works, another application I could envision would be amateur prospecting. But smartphones know your location, so same problem.

    2. Re: I thought that too but.... by ArmoredDragon · · Score: 2

      I don't think the "Whole Foods" crowd would benefit at all. For example, they'd use it on a banana and see aspartic acid, which is *gasp* a CHEMICAL!!! And after that they'll go back to snake oil organic food and not bother using their new toy on it because they'll just remember the one ironclad rule: Natural is ALWAYS better.

    3. Re:I thought that too but.... by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      another application I could envision would be amateur prospecting. But smartphones know your location, so same problem.

      So? The smart phone will report it's location at the time that you analyse your specimen. Which will probably be in the hotel/ motel that you go to when you get back to something resembling civilisation.

      You think that you'll have a mobile phone signal out in the field at your prospect? Damned all chance of that, because mobile phone companies don't put transmission towers where they don't have customers, and if there are any significant numbers of people in an area then it has probably been gone over already by mineral prospectors.

      I'm an amateur mountaineer and professional geologist. I don't normally have signal on my mobile when I'm out on the hill. Likewise when I do onshore jobs in the deserts of Arabia or the tundra of Russia. And when I'm 100km out at sea, again, no signal.

      Look at this map ; get out into unpopulated areas and you've got little chance of getting a signal. If you're in a populated area, then it's almost certainly already been prospected.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
  34. Re:Bill Gates to roll out remote control microchip by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

    But because it's a Microsoft product, it will be too riddled with bugs and viruses to work as intended. A woman who has this implanted will shoot out babies like a Pez dispenser.

  35. What are the specs? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I work with laboratory NIR spectrometers.
    On the product site https://www.consumerphysics.com/myscio/technology
    there are no specifications for wavelength range, stability, spectral resolution, or signal-to-noise ratios.

  36. Re: Interesting; likely more limited than adverti by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Or you could just use Archimedes' 2200-year-old approach and find the density.

    (Okay, might not work if they've alloyed it with tungsten or uranium or something.)

  37. Re:Interesting; likely more limited than advertise by maestroX · · Score: 1

    Perhaps you'd like to share or recommend a list how to identify different materials without advanced machinery? like http://www.instructables.com/i...

  38. Re:Interesting; likely more limited than advertise by defnoz · · Score: 1

    We don't have one in our lab! My company makes functionalised materials (so solid state) but most of the synthesis and research we do is standard organic chem. GCMS, NMR and ICP do us just fine. We did test a reflectance IR instrument but never managed to get any useful data - in fairness that's probably partly due to lack of expertise.

    Interesting that you mention IR not being suitable for reaction monitoring: Mettler's ReactIR has generated quite a bit of hype (well, perhaps 5-10 years ago) and is really quite a nice bit of kit. Easily good enough for reactions on the ten-minutes to hours timescale.

    And I am surprised by the statement that vibrational spectroscopy doesn't give you enough information

    OK, perhaps that was unfair: for certain tasks it can be useful, and can give information that other techniques can't like bond strengths (and angles/strain perhaps?), but only with nice, pure samples. For routine organic synthesis though all the information you need can be got much more simply and intuitively (albeit expensively!) with NMR. You can get half-decent desktop NMR now, about the size of a PC.

  39. 5 to 15mm? by ArcadeMan · · Score: 1

    Held at a distance of 5 to 15 mm from the intended target, SCiO captures reflected spectrum data...

    I don't think most smartphones can even focus properly at those distances.

    1. Re:5 to 15mm? by KGIII · · Score: 1

      I don't think ...

      You could have just stopped there. ;) I keed, I keed...

      Anyhow, this will not be relying on the phone's camera I do not believe. It looks like it will be using an add-on device which has a specialist's camera (probably multi-lensed with different filters) instead. I am not, nor should I be considered, either an expert or a valid source of information other than observations. So, yeah, it should be a whole separate unit that is attached and used through an existing phone.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
  40. Re:Interesting; likely more limited than advertise by tww-china · · Score: 1

    According to their video, https://www.youtube.com/watch?..., one of the uses is to detect the sweetness of certain fruits. The video shows them scanning an apple to determine the level of sugar. This would be useful if you are in the grocery store and want to pick the sweetest from among apples, peaches, etc. Do you think their tool is sufficient for this purpose? What about fruits with skins you do not eat like watermelon? Or, what about fruits like pomegranates? If their tool would not be sufficient, is there a handheld spectrometer that could be used?

  41. Thinking out a little further by John+Jorsett · · Score: 1

    Maybe bars could license this technology and build in overhead sensors that continually scan patron's drinks for date-rape drugs. And maybe the cops could put them at strategic locations to look for drug or gunpowder or explosive residue on passers-by, who they could then stop because they'll have probable cause.

  42. Re:Interesting; likely more limited than advertise by plcurechax · · Score: 1

    [...]I have serious doubts this device has sufficient resolving power to do what they claim it can/would/should do. To identify chemical components, you need a minimum spectral resolution (depending on the species you want to identify). To do quantitative analysis, the requirements are event higher. [...]

    So this device might be actually able differentiate between a block of cheese and an apple :-), (like suggested by the article photos), but expecting to be a smartphone CSI able to solve mysteries with a click of an app will lead to buyers' remorse.

    That said, I believe the device producers are not trying to mislead potential buyers, but the media coverage of the device has been largely hyperbolic.

  43. Re:Interesting; likely more limited than advertise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But the important question not addressed: does it make the cool Star Trek tricorder sound when you use it?

  44. Re:Interesting; likely more limited than advertise by KGIII · · Score: 1

    I thought spectrometry was destructive testing. I was under the impression that it was burned and the gas was analyzed. It turns out that that is, more specifically, gas chromatography - mass spectrography. I did not know this. Your posts motivated me to learn a little bit more, it is not my area of expertise, so I appreciate it. One of the things I value most about this site is the diversity of experts who are here and willing to share their education with us unwashed masses.

    Anyhow, mass spectrometry is done by bombarding the item with electrons. What is the difference between that and this and how would this be able to make any determinations just by observing the IR data? I am assuming/guessing it is reflective in nature and that the reflection is then interpreted?

    --
    "So long and thanks for all the fish."
  45. Re:Interesting; likely more limited than advertise by KGIII · · Score: 1

    I had a tricorder app on my phone at one point. It did not do anything interesting (I seem to recall it used signal strength and GPS data to make numbers that meant nothing) but it was fun to pull out and play with. It served absolutely no function other than amusing me and bewildering the occasional onlooker.

    --
    "So long and thanks for all the fish."
  46. Re: Reality by thegarbz · · Score: 1

    Maybe, the point was not what is or is not bad, but rather what uneducated people THINK is or is not bad.

    What was the latest craze that I heard? We shouldn't be consuming chemicals that a 5 year old can't pronounce. Like what in the actual fuck.

  47. Re:Interesting; likely more limited than advertise by geogob · · Score: 1

    Vibrational spectroscopy is non-destructive. You simply observe the vibrational (or translation, or rotation) modes of molecules. Most systems measure what is absorbed (ie. you have an known IR source and measure what of it doesn't get through - assuming the absorbed photons corresponds to vibration modes of the molecule). Although this is an active measurement approach, the energy needs are too long to cause damage to the molecule or samples. But you could go in at higher energy level... this is basically what a microwave oven does, exiting the rotational modes of water molecules. It also work to some extent with reflection, but it will be dependent upon the nature of the sample.

    But a vibrating molecule will also emit radiation at wavelength corresponding to the energy of the vibration modes. This enables passive measurement which is not only non-destructive, but also allows measurement without any kind of interaction. Emission IR spectroscopy is used a lot for remote sensing of the atmosphere for example.

    So either you are totally passive or only sending a week IR signal which partly gets absorbed and partly transmitted/reflected. A typical IR source for laboratory instruments is a glowbar. That simply a small wire heated to about 800C... it looks a lot like a car cigarette lighter. You won't rip of electrons of your samples with that ;)

  48. Re:Interesting; likely more limited than advertise by KGIII · · Score: 1

    Much thanks. That is, for the most part, how I understood it would likely be. I appreciate your time. Thank you for putting it into words that even I can understand. It is neat taking a look into other areas of expertise.

    --
    "So long and thanks for all the fish."
  49. Re:Spectrometry is for cows. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't think that would really work. Most meds are good long long after the "expiration" date.

    However it might be good to see if your meds were really good in the first place, like that "Viagra" you got from India.