Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Universal Surface Scanner Detected

Posted by ScuttleMonkey on Fri Sep 26, 2008 02:54 PM
from the and-all-they-have-to-do-is-crack-the-code dept.
mcgrew writes to tell us that scientists at the University of California, San Diego, have created a new system that can test any surface for just about anything. "Their idea uses a thin layer of metal drilled with nanoscale holes, laid onto the surface being tested. When the perforated plate is zapped with laser light, the surface plasmons that form emit light with a frequency related to the materials touching the plate. A sensitive light detector is needed to measure the frequency of light given off. The team says devices using this approach can be small and portable, will work on very low power, and could detect everything from explosives to bacteria. All that needs to be done now is build a system able to decode the light signatures."
+ -
story

Related Stories

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • Summary (Score:5, Funny)

    by Umuri (897961) on Friday September 26 2008, @02:57PM (#25170665)

    R&D: We have this awesome device! And it can tell you everything about anything!

    Boss: That sounds great, so what does it say about, say, this test material?

    R&D: ....

    R&D: We don't know yet. We don't know how to read it yet.

    • Re:Summary (Score:5, Insightful)

      by fotbr (855184) on Friday September 26 2008, @03:01PM (#25170729) Journal

      Sounds like a good way to obtain more funding.

      Write up another grant proposal or three, have another round of graduate students write their thesis/dissertations on the project, etc.

      • You will see this happening a lot with anything to do with materials analysis (defect analysis/ quality control).

        Project proposal #1 : Develop a method of acquiring the data
        Project proposal #2 : Build up a database of samples
        Project proposal #3 : Classify new samples based on database
        Project proposal #4 : Develop methods of creating synthetic data from existing database entries

        If they were to apply this method to security, they would have to get samples of different home-made, industrial and military explos

          • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

            by Anonymous Coward

            Asians are far from boring; they're soft, slick, and tight like a closed fist even when well into the MILF stage.

            And that's just the men!

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      42! 42! 42!
    • aaaah fuck. I was trying to do something like this...

      heh they hit the stumbling block I was thinking that would be a problem. The decoding of all that data... mmmm... unleash the fury of Fourier on that shit.

    • Re:Summary (Score:4, Funny)

      by Achromatic1978 (916097) <robert.pennyonthesidewalk@com> on Friday September 26 2008, @04:07PM (#25171581)
      Reminded me of Dilbert:

      Co-worker: I've not slept for a whole week trying to write this report. I thought I'd never make it, but last night I caught a lucky break, and got a visit from some Monkey Gods who wrote the entire thing for me.

      Dilbert: Wow. Lucky break.

      Co-worker: Now all I need is someone who can translate his simple yet beautiful language...

    • Finally we know what goes between:

      1. Shine a laser on a surface full of nanoscale holes. ...and...

      3. Profit!

  • Finally! (Score:5, Funny)

    by Bicx (1042846) on Friday September 26 2008, @03:01PM (#25170735)
    Maybe now we will be able to determine what can be found McDonald's hamburger patty.
    • Re:Finally! (Score:4, Funny)

      by xerxesVII (707232) on Friday September 26 2008, @04:14PM (#25171655)

      Maybe you can help me. I accidentally a whole McDonald's hamburger patty.

        • I saw a picture of a guy that deliberately a whole patty, and sideways! You can see his website at .cx!

    • Food Tricorder (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Tetsujin (103070) on Friday September 26 2008, @06:18PM (#25172859) Homepage Journal

      Maybe now we will be able to determine what can be found McDonald's hamburger patty.

      You laugh, but what I'd like to do with such a thing ain't so far off the mark from that...

      Basically, my wife has Celiac disease - if she eats food that has wheat flour or bread crumbs in it (even in very small quantities) it makes her sick. Long-term consequences from repeated poisonings include a higher risk of intestinal cancer...

      So the problem is, eating out, it's often hard to know what's safe to eat. If I could get some kind of scanner that could detect gluten in food... that would be awesome.

      Of course, from the way this thing works it sounds like the gluten would have to be somewhere near the surface of the food... So I guess it's way too early to get excited...

  • Bacteria? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by hcdejong (561314) <acme@xm[ ]t.nl ['sne' in gap]> on Friday September 26 2008, @03:03PM (#25170765)

    Would this type of detector be able to differentiate between species of bacteria?

  • by Anonymous Coward

    The computer prints the following:

    1. Your tap water is too hard. Get a water softener.
    2. Your dog has ringworm. Bathe him with anti-fungal shampoo.
    3. Your daughter has a cocaine habit. Get her into rehab.
    4. Your wife is pregnant...twin girls. They aren't yours. Get a lawyer.
    5. If you don't stop playing with yourself, your elbow will never get better.

  • from the Simpsons:

    Professor Frink:

    Brace yourselves gentlemen. According to the gas chromatograph, the secret ingredient is... Love!? Who's been screwing with this thing?

  • by seeker_1us (1203072) on Friday September 26 2008, @03:07PM (#25170825)
    Using nanoholes is just a variation on the grating method, and these people are combining it with SPR polarization work trailblazed by a Russian scientist that I had the good fortune to meet several years go. Nice gadget, but it's evolutionary, not revolutionary.

    And the optical sensor, while being non-trivial, doens't just sense magically everything from explosives to bacteria. You have to chemically engineer receptors . That's also very non-trivial.

    • by lysergic.acid (845423) on Friday September 26 2008, @03:24PM (#25171023) Homepage

      if it's just down to detecting the frequency of the light emitted, couldn't some sort of photovoltaic or photoelectric sensor be designed so that you wouldn't have to chemically engineer receptors for different kinds of surfaces, but rather just program the software to identify the surface material?

      • Re:yes, but can it detect explosive bacteria?

        Hey, I had a macho combo bean burrito for lunch. You don't need any fancy equipment to detect the presence of these explosive bacteria.

      • by seeker_1us (1203072) on Friday September 26 2008, @03:49PM (#25171357)

        It's not about detecting frequency. It's about detecting the conversion of light energy to plasmon-polariton energy. This is typically done by monitoring the change of intensity somehow. The polarization work that I mentioned was a very interesting method of detecting this conversion, because only one polarization (p-polarization) will convert.

        Plasmons are very sensitive to the localized index of refraction at a surface. To put it simply, you change the localized index of refraction by sticking something to the surface, like a chemical or a virus envelope protein or a bacteria. When something sticks, it changes the conversion efficiency of light.

        However, ANYTHING sticking will change the conversion efficiency of light: the amount depends only on the relative index of refraction of the adsorbed material and it's thickness.

        To have a chemical or biological sensor, you have to engineer receptors, so that only certain things stick to certain places. One of the nice things about this gadget is that it is an array sensor, so they can put numerous receptors down (e.g. one for hepatitis-c virus envelope protein in one spot, one for e-coli in another spot).

        • So what you're saying, and correct me if I'm wrong, is that it's done by... magic?

          Any sufficiently advanced Arthur C. Clarke quote is indistinguishable from omniscience.

      • if it's just down to detecting the frequency of the light emitted, couldn't some sort of photovoltaic or photoelectric sensor be designed so that you wouldn't have to chemically engineer receptors for different kinds of surfaces, but rather just program the software to identify the surface material?

        Yes, what you're describing is effectively using a vector of many pieces of information to distinguish between various samples as opposed to relying on a binary receptor. Many detection mechanisms work that wa

      • by Biff Stu (654099) on Friday September 26 2008, @06:49PM (#25173113)

        if it's just down to detecting the frequency of the light emitted, couldn't some sort of photovoltaic or photoelectric sensor be designed so that you wouldn't have to chemically engineer receptors for different kinds of surfaces, but rather just program the software to identify the surface material?

        This is clearly their intention. However, for a spectroscopic solution to work, they must have clear spectral features for their target species, they must have a laser that can cover all the possible frequencies of interest, and a detector that will detect all the relevant frequencies. So, if they combine a universal laser with a universal spectrometer, their universal surface sensor will be complete.

        For some target materials, the problem of distinct and unique spectral features can be a big one. For things like bacteria, containing a multitude of molecules with similar spectral features but slightly different function, you end up with spectral soup. I believe that there are some spectral features that indicate that you have bacteria, and not some other generic background material, such as pollen. However, you then need to say that you have some nasty material, and not just the usual microbes that are everywhere. I don't know how you do that without chemical receptors. Finally, if the receptors rely on DNA, you need to do a bit of biochemistry to actually get to the DNA.

        Explosives could work, since you're dealing with specific molecules. However, in many scenarios if you need to touch the sample you're too damn close.

    • Actually, it seems to be Intelligently Designed.
  • by Robert1 (513674) on Friday September 26 2008, @03:07PM (#25170827) Homepage

    I'll start.

    It's called a transporter, it dematerializes and re-materializes anything placed on a raised platform. I have built the platform, all that needs to be done now is to figure out how to de/re-materialize objects.

    I've also invented a portable fusion reactor. The concept is that I can fuse everyday objects - garbage - to make unlimited energy. I've got a bunch of garbage, all that needs to be done is figure out how to fuse at room temperatures.

    Ok, now you guys come up with amazing inventions. You know, just like the guy in the article did.

    • Sounds like a GREAT business plan! If you can just call them eFusion and eTeleport I can guarantee massive VC funding!
      (iFusion and iTeleport also work)

      • You're a little off the mark. The problem here isn't strictly a hardware limitation,

        Neither was his teleporter idea... He has a way to take pictures of the items you want to teleport, you just have to figure out how to use the pictures on the other end of it (ie, assemble the "data" in the pictures). All that's needed is something that can generate atoms in the order specified by the data in the pictures!

  • ... by putting a piece of material with nanoscopic holes in it directly on the explosive and zapping it with a laser strongly enough for it to emit light?

    I'd expect there to be no problem detecting explosives that way - except for having any explosive left after you detect it. B-(

  • by Bicx (1042846) on Friday September 26 2008, @03:19PM (#25170963)
    It does seem humorous that the scientist claimed he built a multi-surface detector which actually doesn't detect anything in particular. However, even if a few surfaces can be detected, this invention could be extremely useful in several fields. For instance, you might be able to use it to differentiate between very similar minerals or metals, or possibly even determine what combination of materials exist in a single surface. This could save a significant amount of time in testing and traditional analysis.
    • It's a surface detector because the receptors are immobilized on a surface (this is typical of surface plasmon resonance sensors, where the surface belongs with the plasmon, not with the sensor), not because it analyzes surfaces. If you read the patent, it actually analyzes stuff in solution that flows past the surface.
  • by cortesoft (1150075) on Friday September 26 2008, @03:19PM (#25170969)

    A Universal Surface Scanner Detected? Did it show up on radar suddenly or something?

    Radar Operator: Chief, we have detected something on radar!

    Chief: What is it?

    Radar Operator: It appears to be some sort of Universal Surface Scanner.....

  • by camperdave (969942) on Friday September 26 2008, @03:21PM (#25170983) Journal
    Universal Surface Scanner Detected

    I wasn't aware that a universal surface scanner existed, nor that there was a detector built to detect universal surface scanners. Now that I know that such a detector exists, and that it has detected a universal surface scanner, I am wondering: was there some sort of SETI-like project - a vast array of detectors just searching for signs of a universal surface scanner? I don't recall anything like this coming up on Slashdot before. How do we know that the detectors haven't registered a false positive. Maybe this isn't a universal surface scanner, but merely a universal surface sensor. Maybe it isn't a universal surface scanner, but one of those surface scanners that can scan the surface of most things, but has problems when it comes to surfaces that are shiney.

    Where is this universal surface scanner? Is it something that we can duplicate, now that we know it exists? Is it something that we can retrieve from wherever it is and start scanning surfaces?
  • by onkelonkel (560274) on Friday September 26 2008, @03:24PM (#25171037)
    Right Next to the Hottest Furnace, and it's reserved for people who utter the phrase "All you gotta do now is write the software"

    From the summary - "All that needs to be done now is build a system able to decode the light signatures.""
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      While I appreciate the joke you've made, it's important to keep in mind - this system seems to have taken a very difficult and tedious chemistry/physics problem and relegated it to the slightly less difficult and tedious realm of signal processing.

    • "All that needs to be done now is build a system able to decode the light signatures."

      Don't astrophysicists already do that to determine the composition of stars, planets, comets, and such?

  • by Nom du Keyboard (633989) on Friday September 26 2008, @03:40PM (#25171219)
    Whenever an article about an amazing new breakthrough contains the words all that needs to be done I deflate my expectations and walk quietly away. All that needs to be done here is to actually get it working. Who knows, the scanner plate is small, but it may require a computer the size of a major city's sports arena to handle the results.

    Move along, there's nothing to see here yet.
  • For a virtual product.
    Have they've been reading MicroSoft's playbook or something?
  • Note that the submitter merely quotes the article. The submitter may not be able to evaluate the article properly. The source, New Scientist, should know better. They've either knowingly passed along crap out of sheer laziness, or the they assigned it to someone completely unable to spot the fatal flaws in the press release that serves as their sole source.

    "All that needs to be done now is build a system able to decode the light signatures."

    If there is as yet no decoder, there is no evidence the device does

  • So, basically, we have tricorders that spit out pure gibberish that sounds important. Just like real Star Trek!
  • The categories are:

    ... Community, Opportunity, Energy, Environment, Health, Education, Shelter and Everything Else ...

    My project will involve searching for alternative nomenclature for these categories, and generating a taxonomic vocabulary that may be searched and combined using genetic algorithms to synergistically coalesce a hyperbolic trans-categorical acronym. This as-yet-undiscovered acronym will be marketed via extensive cross-licensing and open-source profit redirection to instill a public sens

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      it's not a tricorder. you need to lay the perforated metal sheet against the surface you want to scan with it.
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        It's an early model tricorder. In 200 years you'll be able to point it at something across the room. Look at the first telephone [mechanicsn...albank.com] and a modern telephone [welectronics.com], and it's only been a hundred years between the two. Look at the Wright Brothers airplane in 1903 and the Saturn V that went to the moon just 65 years later, or a stealth fighter/bomber.
    • by mcgrew (92797) * on Friday September 26 2008, @03:34PM (#25171151) Journal

      Actually "Star Trek tricorder invented" is what I had for a headline in the original submission, and it's what the blurb on New Scientist's page said.

      Don't let anybody tell you ScuttleMonkey doesn't edit!

      • Actually they often can, especially if they have a link. My sig on the old sm62704 account linked to its explanation.

        But on topic, light's wavelength can be measured exactly (or close enough to "exact" that it doesn't matter), and TFA wasn't too clear and I was too lazy to read the patent application, but it looks like that's how this thing works. If not, I'm sure someone smarter than me will correct me.

    • Even before then, a lot of animals started using these tools called "Eyes" that help us read the light signature of an item to figure out what it is.