Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Technology Hardware

Universal Surface Scanner Detected 104

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."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Universal Surface Scanner Detected

Comments Filter:
  • 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.

      • by mikael ( 484 )

        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

        • by tibman ( 623933 )

          They would probably only need debris from something destroyed. There should be usable residue on it.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by MChisholm ( 1115123 )
      42! 42! 42!
    • Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • Re:Summary (Score:4, Funny)

      by Achromatic1978 ( 916097 ) <robert@nospAm.chromablue.net> 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...

    • by vrmlguy ( 120854 )

      This [blogspot.com] is what I thought of as soon as I read the summary.

    • "...now is build a system able to decode the light signatures."

      Yea, and I can travel through time. The only thing I need is to build a time machine.
    • Now we know! (Score:3, Insightful)

      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.
  • Now where can I get some dilithium crystals?
    • 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)

        by mcgrew ( 92797 ) *
        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) Homepage 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!

    • That that is what that little round thing with the flashing light thingie is.

      It is the surface material scanner doo-hickey!

  • Bacteria? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by hcdejong ( 561314 ) <hobbes@x m s n e t . nl> 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.

        • while i'm a little too scientifically-illiterate to understand some of the other explanations that have been given, the use of a universal laser + universal spectrometer does make sense to me. i believe photovoltaic materials only react to a certain frequency range, and then its current output only reflects the intensity of the light, not the frequency or spectrum of light being absorbed, so that wouldn't be useful for this application.

          i don't know how small a compact spectrograph can be made, but couldn't

          • There's no such thing as a universally tunable laser, or even an universal spectrometer, although it's easier to come close with the detection side of things...

            Anyhow, the big problem is the laser. If you want an "universal surface sensor" you might want a laser that tunes from 500 micrometers to 200 nm. Fat chance. It's really annoying how these university press releases overhype the technology. You could use this technology to make a nice sensor that targets a specific set of molecules with well-defined s

    • Exactly. It's a neat step forward, but surface plasmon resonance is nothing new at all. Lots of companies make SPR devices (Biorad, Texas Instruments, etc etc) and publications about using gratings date back at least twenty years.
    • Actually, it seems to be Intelligently Designed.
    • You have to chemically engineer receptors. That's also very non-trivial.

      What kinds of receptors are needed for these kinds of devices? TFA describes possibilities for "small and portable" devices, which would be nice for field testing work, if the cost is low. I'm assuming small and portable equate with 'low-cost' which may be a bad assumption.

      News articles about the melamine problem in China say there's not routine testing for melamine because it's expensive, so cheap generic sensors would be a great adv

  • 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.

    • by Fizz753 ( 773692 )
      I read your post then glanced down to the "witty saying" /. puts down at the bottom of the page and could not help but laugh. The saying was: ""What I've done, of course, is total garbage." -- R. Willard, Pure Math 430a"
    • You're a little off the mark.

      The problem here isn't strictly a hardware limitation, its mainly a problem interpretting the data. Get a few of these built and test a couple of pure samples, use these readings to create your database. Increasing in complexity as you go.

      The light analyzing sensor would be the biggest hardware limitation I see. I don't imagine current spectroscopy technology will suffice (I could be wrong, God knows its happened before). The real trick will be in differentiating the
      • 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!

    • Did you patent those devices? Because I am totally going to steal the plans like music from the RIAA. :D
    • by CODiNE ( 27417 )

      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)

    • Look, without the Flux Capacitor, your reactor is useless.
  • After all, Google scans lots of books for posterity and what not. Considering that something like only FOUR IPOs happened this year, relative to some SIXTY in some of the previous years, getting investor money is hard these days.

    BUT, if Google wants to enhance or add to their "image", they can fund the hiring of scanning employees, the purchase of optical sensors and databases, and then maybe ask the DOD or some university labs for samples of any and all non-military specimens that would be scanned for for

  • ... 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.
    • "It does seem humorous that the scientist claimed he built a multi-surface detector which actually doesn't detect anything in particular...."

      It is the same as when they discovery spectroscopy. They knew they could detect elements and componds but they knew they'd have to first build up some experiance with the technique. Same here

  • 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)

      by Anti_Climax ( 447121 )

      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.
  • Now we just need to find the surface of the Universe, and we'll be able to scan it.
  • 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

  • by Anonymous Coward

    Surface Plasmon based sensing has been around for a long long time. From what I've read, it doesn't seem that this method/technique is anything revolutionary, nor is it ever going to magically determine what bacteria/explosives are on a surface. As someone mentioned in a previous post, you need to chemically engineer probe molecules for any bio-target that you are trying to specifically detect. All the device is going to tell you is that you have some shift in frequency due to some sort of binding/contamina

  • 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

  • Great - just let me know when I can pick up the finished tricorder product

    Thanks

  • How do they clean the thing after using it?

    Yes, that's a serious question.

  • I have this AWESOME tool that can examine the surface of any material through a grid of holes!

    All I need now is the examining part!

    AH Hahahahahah...

    I'm going to be frigging RICH!

    AH Hahahahahah...
  • Macguyver already did this with an old coke can, a pin and a flashlight!

"The one charm of marriage is that it makes a life of deception a neccessity." - Oscar Wilde

Working...