New Nano-Laser Created 84
Many sources are reporting that researchers have created the world's smallest laser since the inception of lasers almost a half-century ago. Dubbed "spasers," as an acronym for "surface plasmon amplification by stimulated emission of radiation," their incredibly tiny size could become a critical component for future technologies like "nanophotonic" circuitry. "Such circuits will require a laser-light source, but current lasers can't be made small enough to integrate them into electronic chips. Now researchers have overcome this obstacle, harnessing clouds of electrons called 'surface plasmons,' instead of the photons that make up light, to create the tiny spasers."
And in other news (Score:5, Funny)
Re:And in other news (Score:5, Funny)
Once heralded as the solution to world hunger, now could be the solution for population control.
Re: (Score:1)
I for one welcome etc, etc...
By the way, does it run linux?
Re: (Score:1)
An there an app for this. Later scientists are looking to scale it up to the Shuffle and the Touch.
Re: (Score:1)
Linux (Score:1, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Enter the following in the console:
apt-get sharkswithfreakinglasers
make laser
sudo intalllaser
At this point you will get a number of incomprehensible error messages.
Spend 18 hours of time searching google discovering that though there are many different instructions out there, nothing works.
Re: (Score:1, Funny)
All while Windows continues to BSOD trying to run lasercontrol.exe, OS X doesn't even have anything close to a working solution, and there's an iPhone app floating around that does all the lasering for you for $.99
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
and there's an iPhone app floating around that does all the lasering for you for $.99
Unfortunately it was deleted from Apple Store
Re:Linux (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Mods? Troll? Seriously? It went quite well with the parent humor. I do not believe there was trollage intended here, nor did it have the teeth to feed with.
Boo mods.
Note: If the parent post is no longer marked Troll, then I commend the mods for correcting an otherwise totally unfair marking.
Re: (Score:2)
Nano-photonic circuitry!!?!?! (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Once you do that make sure you keep it away from the babe in the metallic catsuit.
Optical Hard drives (Score:4, Funny)
Optical Writeable Readable Hard drives that are Giga-giga-bakillion-kazakcipaloo-bytes and are random access/seeking - they're coming.
All this technology and Slashdot's scripts still suck.
Slashcode aspires to suck (Score:1, Funny)
"Suck" implies stable enough functionality to maintain a vacuum.
Re: (Score:1)
Optical Writeable Readable Hard drives that are Giga-giga-bakillion-kazakcipaloo-bytes and are random access/seeking - they're coming.
Yes, but there will still be only 10 kinds of people in the world, us and the marketing drones.
Spaser, huh? (Score:5, Funny)
So do they split into three parallel beams, thus covering a wider area than a single beam could along? And do they do the whole sinusoidal-oscillation thing if combined with a Wave Beam?
Re:Spaser, huh? (Score:5, Funny)
Bah, this existed back in 1994. Problem is, it was mostly useless because you couldn't combine it with a Plasma Beam.
Useless, I say!
Re:Spaser, huh? (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
You're thinking of the widely publicized photon technique, but this is really cool because they've now miniaturized the process.
Previously the process was cumbersome because you need at least three people wearing photon packs on their back, to cross the photon beam OVER the containment trap. Timing is The Key. But this could be error-prone at times, and bad things happened.
For more technical details:
http://www.gbfans.com/equipment/plans/stefan-otto/ [gbfans.com]
Well, that's nice (Score:5, Funny)
But I think I'll wait for the Laser Shuffle.
insead of cirtuit trace? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:insead of cirtuit trace? (Score:4, Informative)
Wake me when they have something in production. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
However
That'd be none then, zero, zilch, nowt, nothing.
Wonder how anything progresses these days...
Re: (Score:2)
refinement of existing tech...
and i think the problem of cost has more to do with not finding a process that can be applied to a henry ford style mass production, then something that can be made for profit (anything can be sold for profit, if the customer is willing to pay the price).
that, and refinements of existing mass production processes outstrip the potential benefit of the new products, before things can be scaled up...
Re: (Score:1)
That'd be none then, zero, zilch, nowt, nothing.
I know, that was the point. "Three out of three never go anywhere..." Of course, there are those rare breakthroughs that actually do something. Sure, it's nice to see Scientific tinkering, but I'm really most interested in stuff that is practical.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The rest of us see what does not exist, and think, why not?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, believe it or not, there are some people who are interested in the "R" part of R&D as well as the "D" part.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Wake me when they have something in production. (Score:4, Insightful)
And without the "R," the "D" has nothing to do.
The kind of thing TFA is talking about is a lot more than "just a nice thought." The researchers have done some very difficult, impressive work. Will it ultimately become a usable product? We have no way of knowing. But they've contributed to the sum of human knowledge in a meaningful way. This is pretty much how the relationship between science and technology works.
Re:Wake me when they have something in production. (Score:4, Insightful)
Nicely said, although it's sad that you have to explain that on Slashdot, of all places.
Re:Wake me when they have something in production. (Score:4, Insightful)
Thanks. And yeah, I was thinking that when I made the original post.
There does seem to be a contingent on Slashdot that sees science as kind of irrelevant. Scientists are ivory-tower eggheads with their heads in the clouds who waste their time on airy-fairy ideas, engineers are tough gritty workin' men with dirt under their fingernails who really make things happen ... that kind of thing. It's bullshit, of course, but it's very appealing bullshit to people who don't actually know that much about how science or engineering actually works, but think they do.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Wake me when they have something in production. (Score:4, Interesting)
Except here we have researchers at Purdue, a university with a history of a particularly strong and fruitful connection between science and engineering, doing solid scientific research which may well (or may not, of course) lead to useful commercial development. Believe me, I agree with you entirely about the "bean counters," and I would very much like to see more money directed toward pure research. (Part of this is pure self-interest, since I'm an academic scientist, but I felt this way back when I was doing corporate DBA work too.) The point is that while it may not happen enough, it does happen ... and "who cares" attitudes, like the one displayed in the OP which I replied to, are a major obstacle to it happening more.
Re: (Score:1)
Thanks for the best laugh I've had in my entire life. I love you, man.
Re:Wake me when they have something in production. (Score:4, Informative)
damn it! I mistakenly modded you redundant (I was going for insightful). Replying to undo the mod and to earn some off-topic mods probably :(
Re: (Score:2)
Thank you! That was a very nice thing to do, and I hope you don't get modded down for it.
Re: (Score:2)
I see about three revolutionary breakthroughs per day, three of which never go anywhere because of cost or something.
You're saying that no fundamental breakthroughs ever "go anywhere", which is patently false. The amazing array of technology around us (from computers to MRIs to satellites to medical drugs) can be traced back to fundamental research breakthroughs.
I will grant you that the majority of breakthroughs do not directly translate into a particular product. But that's the nature of research: we have to study a wide-variety of things to find those that are really significant for technology. Moreover just by push
Re: (Score:2)
Words (Score:2)
"surface plasmons"
Really? Plasmons? Are they just making words up now?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Words (Score:5, Funny)
From the Wikipedia article:
"For plasmon-based electronics to be useful, an analog to the transistor, called a plasmonster, must be invented."
It is dark. You are likely to be eaten by a plasmonster.
Re:Words (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Really? Plasmons? Are they just making words up now?
It's a quasi-particle, like an electron hole.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
"surface plasmons"
Really? Plasmons? Are they just making words up now?
Yeah. It's stupid: we already had the perfectly functional phrase "plasmid" to describe those.
Personally I'm holding out for them perfecting the electricity plasmid.
perhaps (Score:2, Interesting)
someone can use this to further the idea/technologies of creating an artificial brain; use the spaser as an artificial receptors.
how will we be able to hear (Score:5, Funny)
The tiny "pew pew pew" sounds? Hardly sounds fun to me.
Too bad for you . . . (Score:3, Funny)
Horton Hears the Pew!
VCSELs (Score:2, Informative)
"but current lasers can't be made small enough to integrate them into electronic chips."
Yeah, except VCSELs have been around since the 80s. They are definitely small enough to integrate into an electronic chip, and they have been for quite some time.
USELESS TECHNOLOGY!! (Score:3, Funny)
We have NO nano cats to use it with!
Mork from Ork should be proud... (Score:1)
USELESS TECHNOLOGY!!! (Score:1, Redundant)
Nanoo Nanoo! (Score:2)
Never mind. Like anyone here knows/remembers Mork and Mindy.
Really? (Score:1)
Many sources are reporting that researchers have created the world's smallest laser since the inception of lasers almost a half-century ago.
How necessary is the end of that statement? Were they worried someone might assume a smaller laser had been created before the inception of lasers?
Re: (Score:2)
Depending on how you read it, it almost sounds like they were saying that the first laser ever made was the smallest one that had been created, until now. Which seems rather unlikely. But yeah, it was a silly choice of words.
Re: (Score:1)
Clearly they didn't want to count the lasers I will have created 500 years ago after I go back in time next week.
Parses and functions fine for me. (Score:3, Informative)
That formulation parses and functions for me.
It's a compact way of saying:
- Lasers were invented almost a century ago.
- Since then there has been a continuing series of inventions of progressively smaller las
Re: (Score:2)
- Lasers were invented almost a half century ago.
Shoulda previewed. B-(
Something missing. (Score:1, Redundant)
Just where do I get a nano shark to mount one of these ere lasers on?
One of the more interesting talks this week (Score:1)
One of the more interesting talks this week at the UW [washington.edu] is the one on nano-ethics.
At first I thought this was going to be about the ethics of using nanotech to observe or interact, but now I'm starting to wonder if it has to do with the ethics of giving nanobots some frickin nano-lasers to rebel against us with.
Remind me to get some ablative undershorts.
Another Nano-Laser (Score:2)