Question:
How will be the future memory devices? Does holographic memory like in "i robot movie" really exist !?
surrok
2010-11-27 13:34:49 UTC
How will be the future memory devices? Does holographic memory like in "i robot movie" really exist !?
Three answers:
paul h
2010-11-27 15:26:10 UTC
If we can get a handle on quantum tunneling, entanglement and superposition, faster than light processes might be possible or holographic interfaces. Scientists have possibly? already demonstrated that the speed of light can be exceeded in lab experiments under the right conditions.



"Quantum Tunnelling is the quantum mechanical effect which permits a particle to escape through a barrier when it does not have enough energy to do so classically. You can do a calculation of the time it takes a particle to tunnel through. The answer you get can come out less than the time it takes light to cover the distance at speed c. Does this provide a means of FTL communication?

ref:T. E. Hartman, J. Appl. Phys. 33, 3427 (1962)



The answer must surely be "No!" otherwise our understanding of QED is very suspect. Yet a group of physicists have performed experiments which seem to suggest that FTL communication by quantum tunneling is possible. They claim to have transmitted Mozart's 40th Symphony through a barrier 11.4cm wide at a speed of 4.7c. Their interpretation is, of course, very controversial. Most physicists say this is a quantum effect where no information can actually be passed at FTL speeds because of the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. If the effect is real it is difficult to see why it should not be possible to transmit signals into the past by placing the apparatus in a fast moving frame of reference.

ref:

W. Heitmann and G. Nimtz, Phys Lett A196, 154 (1994);

A. Enders and G. Nimtz, Phys Rev E48, 632 (1993)



Terence Tao has pointed out that apparent FTL transmission of an audio signal over such a short distance is not very impressive. The signal takes less than 0.4ns to travel the 11.4cm at light speed, but it is quite easy to anticipate an audio signal ahead of time by up to 1000ns simply by extrapolating the signal waveform. Although this is not what is being done in the above experiments it does illustrate that they will have to use a much higher frequency random signal or transmit over much larger distances if they are to convincingly demonstrate FTL information transfer.



The likely conclusion is that there is no real FTL communication taking place and that the effect is another manifestation of the Heisenberg uncertainty principle."

http://www.weburbia.com/physics/FTL.html#11



"Some scientists now claim they have broken the ultimate speed barrier: the speed of light.



Particle physicists at the NEC Research Institute at Princeton apparently have indicated that light pulses can be accelerated to up to 300 times their normal velocity of 186,282 miles per second.



In work carried out by Dr. Lijun Wang, a pulse of light was transmitted towards a chamber filled with specially treated cesium gas. Before the pulse had fully entered the chamber, it had gone right through it and traveled an additional 60 feet across the laboratory. In effect it appeared to exist in two places at once, a phenomenon that Dr. Wang explains by saying it traveled 300 times faster than the normal velocity of light."



"Rather than believing that some kind of faster-than-light communication was taking place, Niels Bohr offered another explanation: If subatomic particles do not exist until they are observed, then one could no longer think of them as independent "things."



Thus, Einstein was basing his argument on an error when he viewed twin particles as separate. They were part of an indivisible system, and it was meaningless to think of them otherwise. In time, most physicists sided with Bohr and became content that his interpretation was correct."

http://www.santiagosr.com/interes/speed_of_light



http://www.timetoeternity.com/time_space_light/light_pulses_flout_.htm
Veronica
2010-11-28 00:51:02 UTC
One of the possibilities being looked into is RNA mapping circuits. As you may know, RNA consists of a simple sugar, ribose, connected to an amino acid (either Arganine - Guarnine or Taurine-Uracil). By labeling one pair a 1 and another a 0, you (at least in theory) have a circuit in the femtometer range (1,000,000 fm = 1 nm), or roughly a chip a million times more dense than current technology. The tradeoff? Speed. RNA chips will inherently be slower, since they are biological, than current metal-oxide semiconductors.
?
2010-11-27 22:49:34 UTC
One assumes that a limit for data density and speed of processing will be reached. it is fair to guess technology will beat biological systems but where the limit is is anyones guess.

Flash memory was completelly unexpected and billions is being spent to find even better systems.

We may be almost at the end of the improvement, we may be just starting.


This content was originally posted on Y! Answers, a Q&A website that shut down in 2021.
Loading...