500 TB PER SQUARE INCH
http://gizmodo.com/record-setting-hard-drive-writes-information-one-atom-a-1783740015
Well I guess we now know exactly how dense storage can possibly get
>>55639425
>terabits
>TB
End you're selve.
>>55639459
no u
>>55639425
Too bad it needs to be done at subzero temperatures and a vacuum
>>55639425
>gawker media
>hard drive has to be stored at -200 C to make it work
>>55639533
whats gawker?
>62,5 terrabyte per 2.54cm^2
>-200 C
>vacum
>8000Bits so far
>>55639648
>In its current form, the atomic hard drive can only operate in clean vacuum conditions and at liquid nitrogen temperatures, which is -346°F (-321°C).
>absolute zero is − 273,15 °C
>>55639667
>>55639648
Maybe its good for massive datacenters or the NSA
>>55639682
>massive datacenters
>-321°C
>>55639637
bankrupt shit.
>>55639682
>million dollar cooling cost daily
Lads, what are we gonna do once storage devices reach the point where they encode information as 1 atom per bit? That's the end of physics. How can we possibly progress past that?
Within the next 50 years, will we see technology hit a massive stall?
>>55639792
we could store dara in alternative demensions where we have enogth space and than wire them throgh a small wormhole
>>55639792
Dive down to quarks.
Its not like we're lacking anything beyond atom. Things always go smaller. You can divide quarks as well. Once past that, physics has to change to go smaller. So "limits of physics" can be bypassed with different physics theory.
>>55639830
is that even possible? I thought alternate dimensions didnt exist
>>55639765
The taxpayers can afford it.
>>55639941
So processors might use quarks once transistors are less than 1 atom in size?
>>55640061
They might use DNA, they might use photons, etc.
Doesn't mean much when the speculative physics aren't in reach for a while.
>>55639530
It's definitely going to be paired with quantum computers which need those temperatures anyways.
This is the dumbest fucking shit I've ever read. Max storage density per square inch could be 500TB but this is not taking into account V-NAND which stacks additional memory cells on top of each other to increase storage size. So max storage size per square inch cubed would be like 250,000 TB.
This is all assuming we never figure out how to manipulate dark energy or some shit to store data in.
Wasn't there a much more dense storage solution just recently?
>>55640350
oh, oh well.
http://www.zmescience.com/research/technology/quartz-disk-5d-storage-52543/
>500 TB PER SQUARE INCH
TERA BITS NOT BYTES YOU FUCKING IDIOT
>500Tb PER SQUARE INCH
FTFY
>>55639667
>-346°F (-321°C)
-346 F is -210 C.
Nice calculations you've got going there
>>55639765
If only certain places had infinite cold... Perhaps some sort of giant natural freezer.
>>55639792
I don't know a ton of quantum, but we would probably have to start using dark matter and energy in a way. I don't think we can prove the existence of alternate dimensions with our current technology, though that's a possibility
