[Link] Physcists say they can encode magnetic data using heat pulses

post by MatthewBaker · 2012-02-08T08:45:11.220Z · LW · GW · Legacy · 10 comments

http://www.physorg.com/news/2012-02-physicists-magnetic-breakthrough.html

Anyone have a strong opinion on this one? thanks :)

10 comments

Comments sorted by top scores.

comment by NancyLebovitz · 2012-02-08T18:12:16.525Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

Why is this important? More efficiency by scavenging waste heat?

Replies from: Normal_Anomaly
↑ comment by Normal_Anomaly · 2012-02-09T22:19:44.315Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

I know approximately nothing about this, but the article claims that the physicists claim that it will allow for faster transfer of information to hard drives. I don't know what parts of the computer-using experience that would speed up though.

Replies from: None
↑ comment by [deleted] · 2012-02-11T15:45:33.887Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

Hard drives are obsolete.

comment by Thomas · 2012-02-08T08:59:47.725Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

From your link:

Until now it has been believed that in order to record one bit of information – by inverting the poles of a magnet – there was a need to apply an external magnetic field. The stronger the applied field, the faster the recording of a magnetic bit of information.

Technically that is not true. A rotation of a magnet applying some nonmagnetic force was always known as possible and an everyday matter. Still, this is a very good news.

Replies from: shminux
↑ comment by shminux · 2012-02-08T20:27:12.056Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

A rotation of a magnet applying some nonmagnetic force was always known

Can you give an example?

Replies from: Thomas
↑ comment by Thomas · 2012-02-08T20:54:25.842Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

A rotating magnet inside an electric generator, for example. It is not a magnetic force which changes the direction of the magnet many times every second.

Replies from: shminux
↑ comment by shminux · 2012-02-09T15:47:15.575Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

That's silly, you are not changing its magnetization, only position. And you are certainly not flipping a single domain inside a magnet in this way.

Replies from: Thomas, Thomas
↑ comment by Thomas · 2012-02-09T21:43:05.312Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

Or, if you prefer this one - Mechanism of surface magnetization by friction of ferromagnetic materials

Replies from: shminux
↑ comment by shminux · 2012-02-10T03:28:59.962Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

That one is indeed interesting, as the magnetic domains are flipped/transferred, albeit not in a controlled way.

↑ comment by Thomas · 2012-02-09T20:42:57.623Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

Then tear apart a magnet! You'll get two magnets. Would you say, that there is no re-magnetization?