/sci/ - Science & Math

I'm not directly involved in it, but several people at my university do. By the amount of problems it has, I don't see it getting anywhere soon.

For example, did you know that SEM imaging (and all other sort of electron spectroscopies) of graphene damages it heavily? This makes studying it quite complicated.

>>4427333

>>4427343
Well, dealing with it on that level will require some improvements in low energy imaging technology as well as tech for manipulating it more directly.

I'd agree that it's still a good ways away from being practical much less commonplace but definitely work the investment for future gains.

>or example, did you know that SEM imaging (and all other sort of electron spectroscopies) of graphene damages it heavily? This makes studying it quite complicated.
I had not heard about this at all wow. The article in the OP mentions that you actually can't stop graphene from conducting. This seems to me like a huge intrinsic problem and I have no idea how they could make it work with electronics.

>>4427363
Mechanical logic gates

>>4427367
But they would end up being slow, when the advantage of graphene over silicon is its fast switching speed.

>>4427381
that's an amazing advantage if you can't get graphene to actually switch /sarcasm

bump for interest before I go to bed. This shit is fascinating so jopefully more people will come to discuss.

Actually, I'd say graphene is full of hype. The real deal is optical circuits. I heard some lab actually made an optical transistor and they are now aiming for a 60 times faster data calculation, but they say the limits are at around 10^6 faster.

they have recently solved the conductivity problem, they sandwich calcium between the two sheets.

>At a university which is one of the main hubs for graphene research
>Soon be doing a PHD in the field
>200k starting

Stacked processors should hold us over until we can get graphene or something else to work.
http://www-03.ibm.com/press/us/en/pressrelease/35358.wss

IBM just announced an integrated 3 bit quantum computing chip. Or something to that effect, I forget the details:
http://www.eetimes.com/electronics-news/4237101/IBM-reports-progress-on-quantum-computing

Graphene may be redundant.

>>4427484
I seem to recall reading somewhere that the step to quantum computing actually means jack shit for what we use computers for today. It's only good for it's research and future potential.

And if it finally stagnates, maybe people will start programming more efficiently and stop expecting faster hardware to compensate.

>>4427515
It roughly means jack-shit. Simple arbitrary things you can do with a reg computer are pretty much impossible on a quantum one. Conversely, impossible things on a reg computer are remedial on a quantum one such as encryption.

>>4427525
>reg computers can't encrypt

What?

>>4427528
It's rather the decryption part.
Quantum decryption algorithms make it many, many times faster than a regular computer.

>>4427738
I don't think you understand quantum decryption algorithms.

just use memristic devices based on titandioxid.

http://www.memristor.org/

>>4427525
What procedure takes more time on a quantum computer than on a classical computer? From what I can recall, all problems which are solvable in polynomial time on a classical computer are solvable in polynomial time on a quantum computer and a subset of problems which are not solvable in polynomial time on a classical computer are solvable on a quantum computer in polynomial time with the other non-polynomial time problems being a shared difficulty of the two. So, a quantum computer will not necessarily out-perform a classical computer in all cases, but it should not perform worse than a classical computer in any case.

>>4427484
That article states that they needed to supercool it to get it to work. I doubt this will be seen on the market for us consumers for a very, very long time.

There have been some breakthroughs in graphene lately which has made its commercial productivity a much more likely thing than quantum computers.

Back in the day, people had the same worry about vacuum tubes. We reached a point where we couldn't shrink them any longer. This created research pressure that fueled the next paradigm, transistors.

Now, we will move away from flat, 2D chips and enter the 3rd dimension. 3D molecular computing (i.e. 3D chips) is on the way:
IBM 3D Chip
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0VuOgUrRflU

>>4427367

So, back to coil relays? Fuck off.

What happened with spintronics? At my last university there was lots of research going on with that.

Thanks for getting me to look up graphene again. I was considering making some last year, but realized that contnuous sheets were at most 1 square mm in area. I needed multiple centimeters. Now the largest sheets are 76 cm long. I still won't be making them, however, because I have another material to use.

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn19068-touchscreen-made-from-biggest-graphene-sheet.html

>>4429462
Umm wouldn't this just mean like hundreds of logical cores? We barely make use of 4 as its.

Also, wouldn't this thing set a house on fire? There are so many questions.

think about it.

Atom layered condoms.

That would be incredible.

>>4429584
I'm sure it's been patented. You have no idea how many patents are out there for condoms. I had an idea for a type that would fit only over part of the tip with a water soluble adhesive, but that's also taken.

>>4429609
I just read about tribes that put a tube into their vas deferens so that sperm will travel out of this hole, near their stomach, after they have sex. It's more effective than birth control pills, and can be reversed as soon as the tubes are taken out. You can have unprotected sex with no risk.

>>4429581

No, that's Nvidia, not IBM.

I have to doubt the strength capabilities of what they're claiming. In theory, the only technological obstacle keeping us from making a space elevator is the tensile strength of materials which would make up the cord. If graphene is what it should be, then we've already achieved it.