10 trillion bits of data onto disk the size of a quarter

[Monkeywoman]

Ting Xu, a professor at the University of California, Berkeley and Thomas Russell, a professor at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst, have created a technique that could, theoretically, pack a disk the size of a quarter with 10.5 terabits (more than 10 trillion bits) of data, the equivalent of 250 DVDs.

The secret to packing that much information on such small real estate--about 15 times denser than the densest data storage device currently in existence--is self-assembly, or tricking the disk's materials into organizing into an array of data-storing dots packed far tighter than what could be accomplished with current techniques.

source and more info; http://www.forbes.com/2009/02/19/nanotechnology-data-storage-technology-breakthroughs_nano.html?feed=rss_technology

[Qkjhfhaiguihfma]

that's only 1.25 TB, and we already have 1.5 TB drives. so they're gonna have to do better than that i think.

[Warboy]

10.5 terabits on a total size of 1.175TB? Hmm, Interesting.

**EDIT**

so they are zipping 1.3125 TB of data to 1.175TB? Big Stuff. Not....

[Monkeywoman]

1.25 TB? lol, i had no idea how to convert that amount so i thought it was alot lol, still though the density is still higher then today's techniques.

[[XC] riptide]

that's only 1.25 TB, and we already have 1.5 TB drives. so they're gonna have to do better than that i think.

ON A DISK THE SIZE OF A QUARTER!!!!!. Not 3.5" drvies.

[Serra]

that's only 1.25 TB, and we already have 1.5 TB drives. so they're gonna have to do better than that i think.

Yeah, but those 1.5TB drives use 3 platters that each have a diameter a number of times greater than the one in the article. Someone could do the actual calculations, but I would imagine the difference is along the lines of getting 80TB on a drive rather than 1.5TB (assuming same size/number of platters).

[Polizei]

With platters that small, you could probably get multiple spindles in a drive... internal RAID maybe.

[perkam]

Let me know when they can get 10TB to fit on something the thickness of a credit card, with read/write speeds of today's best SSDs.

THAT is progress.

Perkam

[Revv23]

It will come Perkam. And it still wont be fast enough. :)

[alfaunits]

When that comes it will be so slow yeah, we'll want something 10x faster ;)

[Qkjhfhaiguihfma]

fine i'll do the math. please correct me if i screw up.

area of a quarter = PI * ((15.5 / 32)^2) = 0.737077769 in^2
(10^13) / .7371 = 1.35666802 × 10^13 bits/in^2

area of a hdd platter = PI * ((3.5 / 2)^2) = 9.6211275 in^2
(4,294,967,296,000) / 9.6211 = 4.46411252 × 10^11 bits/in^2

so the new tech gives us 30x more bits/in^2, better than i thought.

[LaMpiR]

Nice math :)
This will be interesting. I like the idea of internal raid controller...

[Jamesrt2004]

fine i'll do the math. please correct me if i screw up.

area of a quarter = PI * ((15.5 / 32)^2) = 0.737077769 in^2
(10^13) / .7371 = 1.35666802 × 10^13 bits/in^2

area of a hdd platter = PI * ((3.5 / 2)^2) = 9.6211275 in^2
(4,294,967,296,000) / 9.6211 = 4.46411252 × 10^11 bits/in^2

so the new tech gives us 30x more bits/in^2, better than i thought.

-offtopic-.... how do you remeber your username lol?




Very good math this is quite awesome a part from it will never be mass produced tbh

[m^2]

There's a spindle in HDDs and they don't contain any data at the center. Also, there are no 500 GB platters, but at most 500 SI GB.

[K404]

internal RAID is already happening ;) ok..SSD only...I (and im sure other folk too) suggested it for platter-HDDs as well over the years. Should have been completely do-able....except the data storage aspect was pushed so much harder than the speed

[Qkjhfhaiguihfma]

-offtopic-.... how do you remeber your username lol?

just good at remembering i guess.


There's a spindle in HDDs and they don't contain any data at the center. Also, there are no 500 GB platters, but at most 500 SI GB.

you're right i forgot about that. the whole isn't too big and as you approach the center less and less bits would be stored on those "tracks", so my numbers still give a lower bound for the increase in bit density. you could say 31x if you really wanted to.

[CyberDruid]

EDIT: So this is still the same sort of technology using an arm and a head? Have they develped a head that can read/write nanoscale dots?

[Katanai]

EDIT: So this is still the same sort of technology using an arm and a head? Have they develped a head that can read/write nanoscale dots?

Yeah I wonder how a head could make the platter rearrange itself on a nano molecular level?

:confused:

I mean, yeah, professors talking about something is one thing, actual technology another...