Support NeoGAF

[CrazyDude]

Big things really can come in small packages.

IBM announced it has managed to successfully store data on a single atom for the first time. The research, carried out at the computing giant’s Almaden lab in Silicon Valley, was published in the scientific journal Nature March 8, and could have massive implications for the way we’ll store digital information in the future.

Computers process bits, pieces of information that have two states—on or off, interpreted as 1s and os by the machine. Every computer program, tweet, email, Facebook, and Quartz post, is made up of some long series of 1s and 0s. When information is stored on a computer, it’s generally saved on a hard drive that encodes that same series of 1s and 0s on a magnetic disk or electrical cells. As IBM states in its release, the average hard drive uses about 100,000 atoms to store a single bit of information using traditional methods.

IBM’s researchers found a way to magnetize individual atoms of the rare earth element holmium and use the two poles of magnetism—north and south, as you’d see on a compass—as stand-ins for the 1s and 0s. The holmium atoms are attached to a surface of another material, magnesium oxide, which holds them in place, at a chilly 5 kelvin (-450°F). Using essentially what is a very accurate, sharp, and small, needle, the researchers can pass an electrical current through the holmium atoms, which causes their north and south poles to flip, replicating the process of writing information to a traditional magnetic hard drive. The atoms stay in whatever state they’ve been flipped into, and by measuring the magnetism of the atoms at a later point, the scientists can see what state the atom is, mirroring the way a computer reads information it’s stored on a hard drive.

IBM says the researchers used a single iron atom to measure the magnetic field of the holmium atoms—turning it to measure what states the holmium atoms were in, like a tiny compass—and a scanning tunneling microscope, a powerful microscope developed by IBM (which won its inventors Gerd Binnig and Heinrich Rohrer the Nobel Prize for physics in 1986) to image the surface of individual atoms. The needle tip of the microscope was what researchers used to pass current through the atoms.

“Magnetic bits lie at the heart of hard-disk drives, tape, and next-generation magnetic memory,” Christopher Lutz, nanoscience researcher at IBM’s Almaden lab, said in a release. “We conducted this research to understand what happens when you shrink technology down to the most fundamental extreme—the atomic scale.”

While the feat is exceedingly impressive, much like IBM’s announcement in 2015 that it had created a minuscule semiconductor that would likely eventually form the backbone of the smallest, fastest computer processor in the world, it’s only the beginning of the work. This is just the first step in proving what might be possible with atomic-level computing, as now researchers, and later, chip manufacturers, need to show the technologies can be scaled.

A future where infinitely more massive hard drives are commonplace—IBM envisions the entirety of iTunes’ 35 million-song music library on a drive the size of a credit card—would make computers, phones, drones, and just about anything else that needs to store information considerably thinner and lighter. Now all that remains is to see if that’s feasible, and affordable.

But given IBM’s 19 consecutive quarters of declining revenue, anything that could reinvigorate the company to its former heights could well be existential. Earlier this week, IBM turned another one of its long-term research projects, quantum computing, into its own business unit, in the hopes of finding clients to dream with Big Blue on the promise of how powerful quantum computers could potentially be—even if they aren’t right now.

https://qz.com/927923/ibm-has-figured-out-how-to-store-data-on-a-single-atom/

 

[LookAtMeGo]

Holy shit. Thats crazy, dude.

 

[Earthbound64]

IBM's researchers found a way to magnetize individual atoms of the rare earth element holmium and use the two poles of magnetism—north and south, as you'd see on a compass—as stand-ins for the 1s and 0s. The holmium atoms are attached to a surface of another material, magnesium oxide, which holds them in place, at a chilly 5 kelvin (-450°F). Using essentially what is a very accurate, sharp, and small, needle, the researchers can pass an electrical current through the holmium atoms, which causes their north and south poles to flip, replicating the process of writing information to a traditional magnetic hard drive. The atoms stay in whatever state they've been flipped into, and by measuring the magnetism of the atoms at a later point, the scientists can see what state the atom is, mirroring the way a computer reads information it's stored on a hard drive.

Makes sense and seems straightforward enough, that it was just a matter of having the technology to do it (so "researchers are now able to," not "researchers discover how to").

Most of the article honestly seems to just be "crafting a story" around a rather straightforward matter.

 

[John Kowalski]

Ok so there's no way we're getting any smaller than this right

 

[Sectorseven]

Is this better, or at least more practical than storing data in DNA?

 

[Earthbound64]

Ok so there's no way we're getting any smaller than this right

Considering:

We conducted this research to understand what happens when you shrink technology down to the most fundamental extreme—the atomic scale.

Sure, we can get smaller than that. Up quarks and Down quarks say "Hello!"

 

[kabel]

remember

 

[Makonero]

Considering:



Sure, we can get smaller than that. Up quarks and Down quarks say "Hello!"

I prefer Charm quarks myself.

 

[ColdPizza]

This is awesome.

 

[Stinkles]

Considering:



Sure, we can get smaller than that. Up quarks and Down quarks say "Hello!"

pfffft, string harmonics can store a petabyte, easy.

 

[Earthbound64]

I prefer Charm quarks myself.

That's strange.

 

[adj_noun]

Still waiting for Planck storage.

 

[OnPoint]

And you thought a flash drive was easy to lose track of

 

[cooljeanius]

Sounds like it'd be difficult to mass-produce on a commercial scale

 

[Earthbound64]

Still waiting for Planck storage.

I thought Planking was last year's fad.

 

[Ray Wonder]

remember

That shit baffles me

 

[super-heated plasma]

Nano-technology within reach?

 

[eqqsquizitine]

Ok so there's no way we're getting any smaller than this right

We can store stuff on individual electrons but the world record is 29 minutes until the data 'corrupts'

Is this better, or at least more practical than storing data in DNA?

Storing stuff in DNA is entirely about archiving information because it takes forever to read/write from it but would literally last millions of years without a hitch if stored correctly. This is more about improving current storage methods to the nth degree.

 

[Makonero]

That's strange.

I know. I'm not sure why. I should get to the bottom of it.

 

[adj_noun]

I thought Planking was last year's fad.

 

[BibiMaghoo]

It's impressive, but by my understanding isn't storing data on an atom, rather using a string of them to replicate the same on or off, 0 or 1 equivalent. A single atom cannot store anything, but is a zero or a one itself. Maybe that is semantics, but they seem rather different to me. Pretty cool though.

 

[Earthbound64]

I know. I'm not sure why. I should get to the bottom of it.

I doff my top hat to you.

Puns are punny.

 

[Earthbound64]

It's impressive, but by my understanding isn't storing data on an atom, rather using a string of them to replicate the same on or off, 0 or 1 equivalent. A single atom cannot store anything, but is a zero or a one itself. Maybe that is semantics, but they seem rather different to me. Pretty cool though.

Well, the "data" stored is whether that bit is a '0' or a '1'
But, yes, the article plays fast and loose with many things in order to sound fancier than it is.

 

[Carpe Carnim]

Ok so there's no way we're getting any smaller than this right

Protons and Neutrons have spin, and can exhibit "magnetic dipole moments" which act as a proxy for on/ off. I just wonder if it's possible to isolate these atomic building blocks on a subtratum, as they've done with these atoms.

 

[hydrophilic attack]

I know. I'm not sure why. I should get to the bottom of it.

whats up with all these quark puns

back down with that shit

 

[Nickle]

Can it run Crysis?

 

[ahoyhoy]

That shit baffles me

You can store high Def scans of every piece of some civilizations on an object the size of your thumbnail.

Insane.

 

[Jenov]

That's a shame about IBM still losing revenues while discovering such innovations.

 

[blanchot]

Ok so there's no way we're getting any smaller than this right

unless they cans force data into a higgs boson particle, no. .

 

[LookAtMeGo]

Is this better, or at least more practical than storing data in DNA?

DNA that makes up the human genome is about 6 billion nucleotides and some nucleotides are about 34 atoms. So thats roughly 204 billion atoms.. but how they work with enzymes and proteins and shit... I have no idea.

Its good news for coputers tho.

 

[Anustart]

Can't wait for my first atomic hard drive.

 

[Earthbound64]

unless they cans force data into a higgs boson particle, no. .

You've been missing the Quark discussions.

 

[Plum]

Can it run Crysis?

No, but it should be able to store one, or two current AAA games.

 

[Geist-]

I feel like this has some incredible implications for nanorobotics. Imagine being injected with a swarm of nanobots that heal any wound or can kill any biological disease. Getting data to the atomic scale can mean these robots can potentially have the data storage necessary for complex programs needed to manipulate things at the molecular level.

The implications can be frightening too, but nanobots make a lot of fantastical future tech possible where before it was impossible.

 

[Kelsdesu]

At what point does the Heisenberg uncertainty principle come into play?

 

[Earthbound64]

At what point does the Heisenberg uncertainty principle come into play?

We're not sure.

 

[Brokun]

IBM envisions the entirety of iTunes’ 35 million-song music library on a drive the size of a credit card

Yes please.

 

[kabel]

We're not sure.

Steam message:

This game may or may not be installed.

 

[Netherscourge]

rare earth element holmium

Aaaaaaand how much would it cost to harvest that stuff for mass consumer/business production?

 

[darklin0]

My favorite thing about this is if it becomes a viable consumer product, how much porn will be stored on these things? lol

 

[Piers]

Just imagine the Malware.

 

[lastplayed]

researchers found a way to magnetize individual atoms of the rare earth element holmium

RIP holmium

 

[Orbis Tabula]

Aaaaaaand how much would it cost to harvest that stuff for mass consumer/business production?

About twice as much as hafnium.

 

[vacantseas]

My favorite thing about this is if it becomes a viable consumer product, how much porn will be stored on these things? lol

all of it

 

[NullPointer]

Mind fucking blown to smithereens.

Really cool.

 

[Netherscourge]

About twice as much as hafnium.

Ha

But is it obtainable?

 

[TAJ]

That shit baffles me

That kept getting delayed and I don't think it ever came out. Doesn't keep scammers from "selling" it for $20-50.

 

[gtvdave]

Soon we will be able to store the entire universe.

 

[ag-my001]

I remember hearing an IBM guy speak in graduate school a few years ago. They obviously weren't down to a single atom yet, but they were doing similar stuff. The main point was that you could "scan" a ton of these at the same time (or write), which would let them massively reduce seek times. I'd imagine this is a continuation of that research.

 

[cpp_is_king]

Storing bits on one atom in an isolated environment is going to be a lot different than storing bits on billions of tightly packed together that are moving around and crashing into each other.

Still, gotta start somewhere.