 |
Neutron wrote:
> Have you ever dream of 100 terabyte of data per 3.5-inch disk? New
> patented innovation nanotechnology from Michael E. Thomas, president
> of Colossal Storage Corporation, makes it real.
>
> Michael invented and patented the world's first and only concept for
> non-contact UV photon induced electric field poling of ferroelectric
> non-linear photonic bandgap crystals, which offers the possibility of
> controlling and manipulating light within a UV/Deep Blue frequency of
> 1 nm to 400 nm.
>
> It took him 14 years to find a practical conceptualization that would
> work to advance the storage industry; 3D Volume Holographic Optical
> Storage Nanotechnology, for which Michael holds the patents. He was
> invited to present this fascinating discovery to the National Science
> Foundation in February 2004.
>
> Full story at http://www.physorg.com/news785.html
After searching around for the relevant literature, came up with this
paper (PDF):
http://colossalstorage.net/3d_volume.pdf
On the second page, it is mentioned that the "...dipoles (sic)
electrical polarity of the ferroelectric molecule physically changes
the interference, diffraction, surface morphology/topography, opacity,
fluorescence, iridescence, opalescence and Extremely small laser spots
of 300 angstroms and less can be written and read..."
Not very specific, but I'll give a shot at pulling as much science from
this as possible.
PZT index of refraction at 300 nm is ~3, but other ferroelectrics can
go higher (e.g. BaTiO3 n~4 @~300 nm). So the wavelength in the material
would be ~100 nm in PZT, ~75 nm in BaTiO3. So in theory by interfering
two coherent plane waves at the right large angle (as in a hologram),
the periodicity can be made small enough to reach the dimensions
claimed (period=0.5*wavelength/(n*sin(angle)). If you take the "spot"
size to be half the period, the dimensions can be pretty small.
This is all theoretical; practically there are already issues as to how
to couple the light into the ferroelectric at that angle, absorption,
etc.
I don't know why the broad range of "1 nm to 400 nm" is cited above as
UV/Deep Blue. 1 nm is usually considered X-ray. There's also a lot of
jargon thrown around in the paper and on the website that seems
unnecessary and distracting.
Fred
|
|
