×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

NCSU's Fingernail-Size Chip Can Hold 1TB

timothy posted more than 4 years ago | from the proof-of-concept dept.

Data Storage 227

CWmike writes "Engineers from North Carolina State University have created a new fingernail-size chip that can hold 1 trillion bytes (a terabyte) of data. They said their nanostructured Ni-MgO system can store up to 20 high-definition DVDs or 250 million pages of text, 'far exceeding the storage capacities of today's computer memory systems.' Using the process of selective doping, in which an impurity is added to a material whose properties consequently change, the engineers worked at nanoscale and added metal nickel to magnesium oxide, a ceramic. The resulting material contained clusters of nickel atoms no bigger than 10 square nanometers — a pinhead has a diameter of 1 million nanometers. The discovery represents a 90% size reduction compared with today's techniques, and an advancement that could boost computer storage capacity. 'Instead of making a chip that stores 20 gigabytes, you have one that can handle one terabyte, or 50 times more data,' said the team's leader, Jagdish 'Jay' Narayan, director of the National Science Foundation Center for Advanced Materials and Smart Structures at the university."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

227 comments

Finger nail-sized chip? (4, Funny)

vertinox (846076) | more than 4 years ago | (#29840413)

Are we talking in units of man hands or lady hands?

Re:Finger nail-sized chip? (5, Funny)

clyde_cadiddlehopper (1052112) | more than 4 years ago | (#29840439)

Mama was apparently wrong about nailbyting.

Attention Windows Clickarounds (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29840809)

Yeah i'm talking to you. The wannabe computer programmer who thinks they are good at computers because they can click around the computer enough times and find the reboot button and 'fix' an inherently flawed windows system. You think you're cool because you can pirate photoshop but not know anything about it, get Microsoft Office for free but have the literacy of a 1st grader when writing a paper, and get a copy of Norton Anti-virus because your inherently flawed system is useless without Administrative privileges. Get a clue, you are not smart, you are just a corporate sheep for a company that will bury you if you ever tried to write any software that did anything remotely useful. You are a clickaround and all you know if your ugly gray existence that is Windows.

Want the sourcecode to windows vista?

head -n 1000000 /dev/random > Windows.com

Re:Finger nail-sized chip? (3, Funny)

fast turtle (1118037) | more than 4 years ago | (#29840825)

The Trim Command works much better as it doesn't fragment the file system as badly as nailbyting does. So no, mama wasn't wrong

Re:Finger nail-sized chip? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29840847)

Learn to spell moran.

Re:Finger nail-sized chip? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29840993)

<joke/>
w.
o.
o.
s.
h.
you.

Re:Finger nail-sized chip? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29841139)

Did you not see that the post you replied to had a spelling error ("moran")? Maybe the "w. o. o. s. h." belongs to you!

Re:Finger nail-sized chip? (5, Funny)

Tablizer (95088) | more than 4 years ago | (#29840471)

Are we talking in units of man hands or lady hands?

I asked a female co-worker to help me compare, and she obliged......by flipping me off. At least I got a good look at her nail. The things we nerds endure for science.
     

Re:Finger nail-sized chip? (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29840961)

That reminds me of a true story.

A few years ago I received my first PDA phone. It was HTC through AT&T and it did have a camera. I went through the office asking people for a picture for my phone. Explaining that when they dialed me, I could see their picture instead of the phone number. I went through about 20 offices and cubicles on my break to get those pictures.

They ALL GAVE ME THE FINGER. Every single one of those comical bastards. No prompting, No hesitation. It was, "Can I get a picture of you for my phone?". They all turned around and flipped me off. Women as well as men.

Even the owner of the company was there that day. He flipped me off too.

Could it have been me? Nah.

Re:Finger nail-sized chip? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29840743)

the real question is:

are we talking about european hands or african hands?

Re:Finger nail-sized chip? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29840977)

That is an important question. As you know european hands are migratory, and this has caused me a great deal of trouble...

Trollin'. (0)

Z34107 (925136) | more than 4 years ago | (#29840423)

...have created a new fingernail-size chip that can hold 1 trillion bytes (a terabyte) of data.

A trillion bytes is a terabyte? You best be trollin', summary.

Re:Trollin'. (3, Informative)

NoYob (1630681) | more than 4 years ago | (#29840497)

...have created a new fingernail-size chip that can hold 1 trillion bytes (a terabyte) of data.

A trillion bytes is a terabyte? You best be trollin', summary.

Uh, yeah! [wikipedia.org]

Re:Trollin'. (1, Funny)

Triela (773061) | more than 4 years ago | (#29840553)

A trillion bytes?

1000000000000 b / 640 kb

That's enough for over 1.5 million people!!

Re:Trollin'. (4, Informative)

Monkeedude1212 (1560403) | more than 4 years ago | (#29840581)

TB:1,000,000,000,000
TiB:1,099,511,627,776

Different notations as to whats a Terabyte, the second one being the binary notation.

But more importantly, the summary* doesn't say which notation they're using, but because they say trillion we can assume the former. Why is that important? Look at the numbers.Thats 99 Gigs of difference.

*(Because I wouldn't read the full article)

Re:Trollin'. (1)

selven (1556643) | more than 4 years ago | (#29840853)

TB is used for both. Operating systems prefer 1.1 trillion while hard drive makers prefer 1 trillion because it makes their stuff seem 10% bigger.

Re:Trollin'. (5, Informative)

maxfresh (1435479) | more than 4 years ago | (#29840905)

The confusion probably arises because not all countries and languages use the same terminology for large numbers.

There are two naming conventions in general use, short-scale, and long-scale. In the short-scale countries such as the US, UK, etc, Trillion = 10^12, but in the long-scale countries, Trillion = 10^18. Obviously, if you are in a long-scale country, a Trillion (10^18) bytes is a (10^6) times more than a Terabyte (10^12 bytes). You can see this article for more on short and long scale: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_and_short_scales [wikipedia.org]

Re:Trollin'. (3, Informative)

Craig Davison (37723) | more than 4 years ago | (#29841035)

It's safe to say now that "trillion", as an English word, means 10^12 in English-speaking places.

Re:Trollin'. (1)

Hurricane78 (562437) | more than 4 years ago | (#29840907)

No. Because if they were any serious, they would be consistent in their meaning anyway, and, as it is standard in the storage industry, and as a SI unit, use TiB, if they meant TiB. And else TB. Period. No need to discuss it. Because that is all and everything.

Re:Trollin'. (2, Insightful)

644bd346996 (1012333) | more than 4 years ago | (#29840981)

The difference between one ISO terabyte and 1 TiB is relatively smaller than the variance among normal fingernails.

damn (2, Funny)

LiquidCoooled (634315) | more than 4 years ago | (#29840431)

that is tiny.
If that had been available earlier this year, I wouldv had it implanted :D

Re:damn (2, Funny)

Rei (128717) | more than 4 years ago | (#29840449)

Implanted? Just like that? Are you one of these people [xkcd.com] ? ;)

Re:damn (1)

LiquidCoooled (634315) | more than 4 years ago | (#29840869)

hahaha
I had an opportunity earlier this year, I considered having a memory upgrade or a stylus inserted.
I made a journal entry about it here when it happened, its still makes me wince.

Re:damn (1)

wjh31 (1372867) | more than 4 years ago | (#29840499)

you only got 1TB in your chip? man you should see all the HD 4D holo video i can fit on my Exabyte implant.

Signed:
Time Traveler from 2030

Re:damn (1)

Tablizer (95088) | more than 4 years ago | (#29840541)

that is tiny. If that had been available earlier this year, I wouldv had it implanted

Do you by chance drive a flying saucer?
     

Re:damn (1)

Culture20 (968837) | more than 4 years ago | (#29840665)

If that had been available earlier this year, I wouldv had it implanted :D

Until we hit the Moore's Law wall, implanting anything will result in multiple surgeries for upgrades or useless tech stuck in your body.

Re:damn (1)

notmyusualnickname (1221732) | more than 4 years ago | (#29841019)

I've thought about some sort of biologically inert sheathing that would allow for out-patient (or in-store) type cut-and-replace upgrades, otherwise digging audiovisual chips out would get unnecessarily messy as the speed of improvements increased. (Either that or early adopters would be stuck with inferior systems for a while, and that would never do...)

Re:damn (1)

mhajicek (1582795) | more than 4 years ago | (#29841135)

The thing to do would be to just implant an interface device. The hardware you interface with will be much easier to replace that way.

What is the ETA? (3, Insightful)

mr_stinky_britches (926212) | more than 4 years ago | (#29840451)

Sounds promising, but how many months/years/decades before we can reasonably expect to see this used on a wide scale?

Re:What is the ETA? (2, Insightful)

RabidMoose (746680) | more than 4 years ago | (#29840473)

Same as always, "three to five years". (I'm just guessing. Of course I haven't RTFA.)

Re:What is the ETA? (1)

Viper23 (172755) | more than 4 years ago | (#29840501)

Not to mention, this a lab chip. How long before it can survive being in a consumer environment?

Re:What is the ETA? (3, Funny)

Tablizer (95088) | more than 4 years ago | (#29840527)

Sounds promising, but how many months/years/decades before we can reasonably expect to see this used on a wide scale?

Don't worry, all flying cars will have at least one. Further, the next version of Duke Nukem will ship on such a chip.
     

The good news (5, Funny)

spun (1352) | more than 4 years ago | (#29840663)

It will be commercially available by January. The bad news is, this is a write only memory device.

Re:The good news (1)

veganboyjosh (896761) | more than 4 years ago | (#29840985)

Write only?

So you can write to it, but you can't read it? Sounds about as useful as skywriting, sparklers, and messages left in below-low-tide beach sand would be for long term storage.

Re:The good news (5, Funny)

fractalspace (1241106) | more than 4 years ago | (#29841183)

Workaround is to make a backup of your data before writing to this device, just in case you need it again.

Re:The good news (1)

TheLostSamurai (1051736) | more than 4 years ago | (#29841005)

It will be commercially available by January. The bad news is, this is a write only memory device.

Wow, that sucks. I was hoping I could read the data after I wrote it.

Re:The good news (1)

riskeetee (1039912) | more than 4 years ago | (#29841011)

I'm not sure which is funnier, the parent post or that it got modded "informative." LOL

Re:The good news (1)

spun (1352) | more than 4 years ago | (#29841201)

"Write only memory" is such a hoary old joke, I'm surprised it got modded up at all. I'm doubly surprised it got modded informative. I'm triply surprised that some people have responded as if I was actually serious.

*sigh*

Modded 'informative'??? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29841033)

Moderators, something just went 'whoosh' over your heads.

Re:The good news (1)

Idbar (1034346) | more than 4 years ago | (#29841051)

So, is this some sort of Schrodinger's box? You write the data, but you just don't know if is there or not?

Re:The good news (1)

Therefore I am (1284262) | more than 4 years ago | (#29841059)

That's not bad news at all. The entire world is waiting for a reliable way of storing massive amounts of data on a permanent basis. If the report is based on truth then it might well be the answer to the vexing problems of lost data.... Counter-intuitively,if they make it too small it will be easy to lose the chip - back to square one!

Re:The good news (1)

eyepeepackets (33477) | more than 4 years ago | (#29841195)

Well, I thought that was pretty damn funny: The guy who marked you informative must be having a very sarcastic day.

Re:The good news (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29841249)

Thank goodness. I've needed a new /dev/null for a while now. The old one was getting full.

But.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29840457)

How many Libraries of Congress can it store?

There is no chip. (5, Informative)

victim (30647) | more than 4 years ago | (#29840475)

They have made a material which could if you designed a suitable chip and associated circuitry, and figured out how to manufacture it at large scale, would let you store a terabyte of data on a fingernail sized chip.

The whoever wrote the article title should be embarrassed, as should timothy for propagating it.

Re:There is no chip. (1)

Kjella (173770) | more than 4 years ago | (#29840561)

Two words: Page hits.

Re:There is no chip. (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29840697)

Two better words: Huge tits.

I even re-used a lot of your letters...

Re:There is no chip. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29840775)

smoke that joint

Re:There is no chip. (4, Informative)

Phat_Tony (661117) | more than 4 years ago | (#29840915)

I found an even more impressive material, and I can already manufacture it myself in bulk.

Each base of DNA can be AGT or C, so that's 2 bits worth of data per base pair.

A terabyte = 1.1259E+15 bits, so a terabyte of DNA is 5.6295E+14 base pairs.

For mass, [5.6295E+14 base pairs] x [660 daltons per base pair] = [3.71547E+17 daltons] = 6.169686786411827E-7 grams = .62 micrograms per terabyte.

That's smaller than my fingernail by a pretty good margin. In fact, my actual fingernail already contains maybe a petabyte of storage.

Unlike their new super material, I've already developed (well, OK, discovered. Well, no, read about other people discovering) techniques for reading, writing, and copying data with this storage medium.

However, like them, I haven't worked out any computer interface yet.

Re:There is no chip. (3, Interesting)

shadowofwind (1209890) | more than 4 years ago | (#29841093)

Years ago I worked a product that had an IC feature that could be manufactured reliably 99.99% of the time. For a real device with millions of such features that averages to almost zero yield, and this problem was not overcome. For some technologies the manufacturing yield hurdle can be overcome, for others it can't be. So although seeing a small number of memory cells work correctly is interesting and worthwhile, by itself that doesn't tell us whether we will ever see this technology in an actual product.

Great , Now The N.S.A. Data Mining Project (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29840485)

of Google's 10 million servers [slashdot.org] can be
carried around in a cell phone.

Yours In Novorossiysk,
Kilgore T.

Is this a real writable chip? (3, Insightful)

dschuetz (10924) | more than 4 years ago | (#29840521)

Or just a demonstration of an artificial structure with resolution / density that'd permit 1 TB in whatever their size is?

I didn't see anything in the article that leads me to believe it's an actual storage device. Come to think of it, I'm not sure it's even necessarily a "fingernail-sized" chip they made, just that if you scaled their research to that size it'd hold 1 TB.

Any information other than this incredibly vague article? (I swear, more and more frequently we're seeing useless articles that say even less than the press release they're drawn from. And aren't the press releases often DESIGNED to be vague and over-promising, possibly to attract more research dollars?) Be nice if we'd just see their actual research, or a rough draft of a paper, or even just a frank interview with the geeks involved.

Re:Is this a real writable chip? (4, Informative)

John Hasler (414242) | more than 4 years ago | (#29840603)

The actual press release does not claim that they "made a chip". That's a fabrication of the ComputerWorld reporter.

Re:Is this a real writable chip? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29841221)

That's a fabrication of the ComputerWorld reporter.

If the reported fabricated it, why wouldn't he report about his chip then?

Good (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29840525)

Now I can store more porn which is the reason you need a new hard disk.

I wonder... (1, Interesting)

allknowingfrog (1661721) | more than 4 years ago | (#29840533)

I wonder when personal computers will catch up with cell phones and mp3 players - any smaller, and we'll just lose them.

"A man with a tape recorder up his nose" . . . (1)

PolygamousRanchKid (1290638) | more than 4 years ago | (#29840535)

. . . so now I know how the Monty Python crew pulled off that trick . . . this music was stored on his fingernail!

I understand we're geeks and all (1)

Viper23 (172755) | more than 4 years ago | (#29840551)

but:

The process would allow them to develop a new generation of ceramic engines able to withstand twice the temperatures of normal engines. The engines could potentially achieve fuel economy of 80 miles per gallon, Narayan said.

Could we at least have mentioned that this technology could potentially double the fuel efficiency of car engines???

Re:I understand we're geeks and all (1)

icannotthinkofaname (1480543) | more than 4 years ago | (#29841169)

Is that sort of like doubling the clock speed of a CPU?

Just trying to get a computer analogy out there, so that I can understand what you're talking about with respect to cars.

Terabyte problem (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29840571)

Gotta have ten bytes I have stored in a short two secs time in that terabyte of data. What do I do to get to it if it isn't super-fast recalled? Like speed...there is a limit to storage cap with speed..............

Performance? (3, Insightful)

saleenS281 (859657) | more than 4 years ago | (#29840597)

It's great that you can store 1TB on it, but what does the performance look like? If it takes me 4 hours to pull a gig of data off of it, it's nearly useless. I could see some very, very corner cases where you need to store data indefinitely, and would be able to recover it with no timeline attached, but that's awfully rare nowadays. I want to see IOPS and access time ;) I'm also wondering how you would even read and write data. They seem to have left that detail out.

nanotech on its way (4, Interesting)

dissy (172727) | more than 4 years ago | (#29840623)

While they are light on details, the article implies this is a long term storage system (IE a flash chip replacement)

One would think creating RAM with a similar density would be possible as well.

I've used a super computer that had 74 TB of main memory, but clearly is something one can not afford nor fit in the home, to put it mildly. In a few years, will we have 1tb dimms at home? That would be sweet.

Even lacking that, a 1tb flash-like chip (not as in technology, but as in purpose/use) is still a huge improvement.

Let's just hope it doesn't go the way of the 100tb optical discs that are 'going into production within a year' for the last 10 years.

On a happier note, just imagine the reactions the RIAA/MPAA lawyers would have to such a thing existing!
"Now all of your 'IP' fits on a nine finger-nail-sized set!"

Re:nanotech on its way (1)

Monkeedude1212 (1560403) | more than 4 years ago | (#29840747)

Yeah, I mean, I haven't used a super computer before, but I did use a Mac Pro once.

I'll be happy when I can Grab a Dell with those specs at a decent price.

Wait!!! (4, Funny)

Dunbal (464142) | more than 4 years ago | (#29840661)

can store up to 20 high-definition DVDs or 250 million pages of text

      Wait, how many Libraries of Congress is that??? Now I'm totally confused, you keep switching the units on me!

      On second thoughts, it can probably store 1 copy of Windows 8.

Re:Wait!!! (1)

colfer (619105) | more than 4 years ago | (#29840899)

DVD's store 20 GB now?

With this chip Windows 8 will be ready to roll out (1)

moxsam (917470) | more than 4 years ago | (#29840739)

Yeah, I know that's humour from the age of floppy disks and Zee-Dee-Roms.

Can someone explain to me... (5, Insightful)

Gordo_1 (256312) | more than 4 years ago | (#29840741)

how we go from the below scientific journal abstract to the Slashdot headline: "NCSU's Fingernail-Size Chip Can Hold 1TB"?

We have investigated the magnetic properties of the Ni-MgO system with an Ni concentration of 0.5 at.%. In as-grown crystals, Ni ions occupy substitutional Mg sites. Under these conditions the Ni-MgO system behaves as a perfect paramagnet. By using a controlled annealing treatment in a reducing atmosphere, we were able to induce clustering and form pure Ni precipitates in the nanometer size range. The size distribution of precipitates or nanodots is varied by changing annealing time and temperature. Magnetic properties of specimens ranging from perfect paramagnetic to ferromagnetic characteristics have been studied systematically to establish structure-property correlations. The spontaneous magnetization data for the samples, where Ni was precipitated randomly in MgO host, fits well to Bloch's T3/2-law and has been explained within the framework of spin wave theory predictions.

Seriously, do you see anything about a chip in there? Anyone? Bueller?

Go Moore! (1)

hrimhari (1241292) | more than 4 years ago | (#29840781)

Hey, if we multiply the capacity x size ratio by 50, does that mean that Moore's Law gets a vacation for the next, uhm... 5-6 years?

Harnessing energy from an electron's spin??!!! (5, Informative)

flajann (658201) | more than 4 years ago | (#29840879)

I find this article a bit confusing, because it speaks of "harnessing the energy of a spinning electron":

"Most energy used today is harnessed through the movement of current and is limited by the amount of heat that it produces, but the energy created by the spinning of electrons produces no heat," the university state in a press release.

Anyone who knows anything at all about quantum mechanics knows that the spin of an electron is quantized and cannot change.

The Wikipedia article has this to say about spintronics:

Electrons are spin-1/2 fermions and therefore constitute a two-state system with spin "up" and spin "down". To make a spintronic device, the primary requirements are to have a system that can generate a current of spin polarized electrons comprising more of one spin species—up or down—than the other (called a spin injector), and a separate system that is sensitive to the spin polarization of the electrons (spin detector). Manipulation of the electron spin during transport between injector and detector (especially in semiconductors) via spin precession can be accomplished using real external magnetic fields or effective fields caused by spin-orbit interaction.

This makes MUCH more sense! Reporters are always notorious for getting the science wrong.

The pest of the retards unit standards. (1)

Hurricane78 (562437) | more than 4 years ago | (#29840881)

that can hold 1 trillion bytes (a terabyte) of data

What's the point of saying "1 trillion"? Do you honestly expect anyone on this site to not know what a terabyte is? Or what is that good for?
Because, you know how the world works: When you lower your standards, and allow dumber people to use it... Then dumber people you shall have!
But not just dumber people. A Gaussian curve of dumber people. Including some, that don't even get *that*.
So if you then continue to sustain that endless cycle, you will soon find out, that only retards you will have left.

Comparison sucks (1)

the person standing (1134789) | more than 4 years ago | (#29840897)

no bigger than 10 square nanometers — a pinhead has a diameter of 1 million nanometers

Why not compare area to area: A diameter of 1 million nanometers is 1000000 ^ 2 * pi = about 3140000000000 square nanometers.

Re:Comparison sucks (1)

Jake Griffin (1153451) | more than 4 years ago | (#29841061)

That, and 1 million nanometers = 1 millimeter, which is much larger than a pin head. The body of most pins is usually less than a millimeter.

awesome news (1)

Icegryphon (715550) | more than 4 years ago | (#29840949)

Now I will be one step closer to having a complete backup of the internet.

Warning: Recursive Content (1)

Tablizer (95088) | more than 4 years ago | (#29841159)

Now I will be one step closer to having a complete backup of the internet.

Won't ever fit because we store the backup on the internet.
   

The Abstract. (3, Interesting)

Jason Pollock (45537) | more than 4 years ago | (#29841015)

Here is the paper's abstract:

Abstract: We have investigated the magnetic properties of the Ni-MgO system with an Ni concentration of 0.5 at.%. In as-grown crystals, Ni ions occupy substitutional Mg sites. Under these conditions the Ni-MgO system behaves as a perfect paramagnet. By using a controlled annealing treatment in a reducing atmosphere, we were able to induce clustering and form pure Ni precipitates in the nanometer size range. The size distribution of precipitates or nanodots is varied by changing annealing time and temperature. Magnetic properties of specimens ranging from perfect paramagnetic to ferromagnetic characteristics have been studied systematically to establish structure-property correlations. The spontaneous magnetization data for the samples, where Ni was precipitated randomly in MgO host, fits well to Bloch’s T3/2-law and has been explained within the framework of spin wave theory predictions.

Now, my question is, how do you store information in that? If the material is paramagnetic [wikipedia.org] , that implies it isn't stored like a disk (read/write using a magnetic field)? How are they planning on storing information in a clump of nickel atoms? (Note: I know absolutely nothing about this stuff)

Can we change the title of this post? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29841017)

Can we change the title of this post to...

NCSU's THEORETICAL Fingernail-Size Chip Can Hold 1TB

Another bogus materials-science article (4, Insightful)

Animats (122034) | more than 4 years ago | (#29841063)

This is yet another of those articles where somebody did something vaguely promising in materials science [harvard.edu] , and it's immediately being touted as if it were a product.

They're not talking about a "chip" at all. The material they've produced sounds more like something that might work as a disk surface. "Under these conditions the Ni-MgO system behaves as a perfect paramagnet." It's not clear what you'd use as a read/write head, even if they can create a surface of "nanodots".

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...