Electron Strobe Makes Movies of Atoms 33
holy_calamity writes "Some grainy black and white movies are receiving rave reviews from scientists. They are taken by a new microscope which, thanks to a 'strobing' electron gun, can image movement at sub-nanometer scales. Until now, only still images that smeared out movement were possible at such scales. The press release notes, 'The researchers first blasted the sample with a pulse of heat. The heated carbon atoms began to vibrate in a random, nonsynchronized fashion. Over time, however, the oscillations of the individual atoms became synchronized as different modes of the material locked in phase, emerging to become a heartbeat-like "drumming."' Further details and a few animations are available at Caltech's site."
Mmmm (Score:2, Funny)
Genre? (Score:5, Funny)
Clearly it's orgy porn.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
First Atomic pr0n title: (Score:2)
Threadjacking.
Very import research (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Very import research (Score:5, Interesting)
graphene for memory has hit 10nm now and may become 3D, which will make a very large factorial change to the scale of memory.
More info here: http://www.physorg.com/news146497821.html [physorg.com]
Re: (Score:2)
some guy here on /. pointed me to 'accelerando', it's a neat sf book that deals with the 'omega point', the singularity at which the rate of change of technology becomes so high that there is no more relation between 'before' and 'after'.
While I'm not sure I buy the premise of the book it is still quite interesting to see how fast tech is now changing. It used to be possible to be more or less current, I don't think that is possible any more.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Unfortunately, you won't be able to get much useful dynamic protein folding info from this setup. For one, protein molecules are too low mass to be visualized except at very low resolutions. Also, being in a hard vacuum, proteins are either dry or encased in ice when in a TEM, making study of their motions moot.
As for graphene memory deviating from Moore's law, keep in mind that conventional fabbing is rapidly approaching the 35 nm scale. Also, graphene fabrication is still a long way from commercializat
Re: (Score:2)
Ah, found it here [wapedia.mobi]. It turns out the ref is from Kurzweil (shudder) and is for price per computation, not exactly Moore's law but a similar conceit and arguably a better metric.
Re: (Score:2)
IANAC ( I am not a clairvoyant. ) My nephew works in protein folding and a friend of mine works in the area of nanotech and biotech mix. I work with all these technologies , cloning, and many open source tools. The transition from a model that has held for 100 years is hardly earth shattering. A step beyond the manufacturing model is what I think is in process.
My friend and I took a lab together recently and we were able to take a device that was generated by nanotech and clone it into an organism which ac
Not having an experience with this field.... (Score:3, Interesting)
It's rubbish (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I have significant doubt the images are very important. The result may be important, but the images fail.
It's been a long time since I've seen a more underwhelming set of visualizations.
Re: (Score:2)
TEM is generally poor at visualizing individual atoms. At the electron energies used, most matter is fairly transparent. It's like trying to view glass beads in a light microscope. Very heavy atoms such as uranium can be seen individually in special circumstances in a TEM. For the most part the images you see are the result of many, many layers of atoms lining up and causing diffraction effects in the beam.
Heisenberg? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Heisenberg? (Score:4, Informative)
I think the uncertainty principal is still safe. What they are doing is equivalent to what they've been able to do before, only fast enough to give an impression of motion.
If you think about measurement at that scale as being equivalent to throwing tennis balls at a basketball and looking at where the tennis balls end up to calculate where the basketball must be, then even if you throw more tennis balls you are still affecting the basketball in an unpredictable way.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
heisenberg's uncertainty principle applies to subatomic particles, e.g. electrons, protons, neutrons, etc.
It actually applies to everything. (Score:4, Informative)
It's just that the bigger something is, the less significant the uncertainty is.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
I know the [Heisenberg uncertainty] principle basically says that when you measure (take pictures of?) the atom that you're moving it in some small unknown way
This is a common misconception. What you just mentioned was the observer effect [wikipedia.org]. The Heisenberg uncertainty principle [wikipedia.org] states that the upper limit to the accuracy of the position of a system times the accuracy of the momentum of the system will not exceed Planck's constant. It was originally believed to be related to the observer effect, until they found ways to make multiple particles with the same property. You could then measure the speed of one and the position of the other. Knowing they both have the sa
old news (Score:1, Interesting)
Summary (Score:2)
Summary:
- there's no sound
- looks like a bunch of vibrating strings.
From whence (Score:1)