Breathing new life into the old technology of "books".

Hello,

If all information on todays computers would have to be printed it's safe to say we would be short on earths full of trees ;)

However books might have one adventage: the information retention time is probably much higher than our electronic systems of today.

So here is a crazy idea how to make books a little bit more relevant in todays information age:

Instead of using big fat letters taking too much space, make the letters much smaller, maybe even nano-meter small.

Then instead of trying to read it with your eyes... have a special reading device, like a super magnifieing glass... so the information can still be read :)

If this idea makes any sense, depends on the data retention time.

I'd feel more comfortable with a storage technology with a high data retentation time.

I don't like books though, so this idea is not ment for me mostly, but for books lovers.

Though perhaps it could even be interesting for me if printers could print at such a nano scale.

Perhaps I could then print out some of my source codes, or other pieces of information at the nano scale ;)

Bye, Skybuck :)

Reply to
Skybuck Flying
Loading thread data ...

Ever hear of microfilm, you blithering idiot?

Reply to
Robert Wessel

In de eerste plaats is er een verschil tussen informatie en gegevens, waarbij er veel meer gegevens zijn dan informatie. In de twee plaats kun je niet alle soorten gegevens af drukken. Zo veilig is je aanname niet...

--
Grinnikend door het leven...
Reply to
Izak van Langevelde

Please stop these posts with stupid content, you need to seek help from a doctor

Or better yet, spend all your time on this idea and stay away from SED :-)

Reply to
Klaus Kragelund

Wow are you suggesting we store worlds information on "micro film" a substance so fragile that it takes only a sony walkman to break it and fumble it up ?!

I am glad you not in charge of our information ! LOL.

I'd take book technology over micro-film any day of the week ! LOL.

Even if there is a burn/fire hazard ! ;)

Bye, Skybuck.

P.S.: Please think and try gain to come up with a much more robust technology that "micro flimsy film".

Reply to
Skybuck Flying

Clay tablets, or even better flint stone, an invention of the great Fred Flintstone.

--
VG 
Karlos
Reply to
karlos

What on earth do Sony Walkman players have to do with microfilm? I'm sure if I put microfilm in my table saw or my washing machine, they would break it and fumble it up too.

Or are you actually confusing microfilm with cassette tape?

Reply to
Robert Wessel

" What on earth do Sony Walkman players have to do with microfilm? "

I assume micro film will tear and mess up as easy as sony walkman casettes when the coils/rotors spin out of control ;)

Bye, Skybuck =D

Reply to
Skybuck Flying

Roll style microfilm is tougher than the magnetic tape in a cassette (not to mention bigger), as it's basically photographic film, and much thicker. If you don't like roll-style mechanisms, use fiche cards. There used to be a paper based (as opposed to film) variant of fiche cards as well ("microcards"), but that went away a long time ago.

I don't know the relative popularity of the roll and fiche formats, although both were heavily used. In my experience, roll formats were more popular for archives of things like newspapers, while fiche was more common for documentation and direct machine output ("Computer Output Microfilm", aka COM), although roll format COM did exist (blank fiche stock for COM was roll based, but it would be cut into standard sized cards after being "printed"). Fiche was in many ways easier to handle, you could store many cards in a single box, and you didn't have to wind through a roll looking for a particular page. The roll probably made duplication easier.

An image of a typical fiche card (same size as an A6 sheet of paper

105x148mm):

formatting link

But any handling of any media, poses a danger to that media if things go wrong. It's not hard to destroy an ordinary book either. And certainly any media with microscopic detail, no matter how it's constructed, will be vulnerable to scratches and other damage.

Reply to
Robert Wessel

Laser etching on diamond is pretty durable. As you say, nothing (that we know of) is invulnerable to damage.

George

Reply to
George Neuner

FSVO "durable". Diamonds are quite brittle.

Reply to
Robert Wessel

" Laser etching on diamond is pretty durable. As you say, nothing (that we know of) is invulnerable to damage. "

I always like diamands as I was a kid... the idea of trapping light inside a diamond fascinated me.

There must be a reason for that fascination.

So far I have read of some scientists being able to trap light and/or quantum particles inside diamonds...

So perhaps diamonds could be the storage medium of the future ! ;)

Maybe a book of diamands ? lol... a diamand book ;) :)

Neh... it will probably be a crystal like in the superman movie ! ;) was it green ? yak... or perhaps it was nice white or transparent ;)

Whatever you come up with... make it beautifull ok ?! LOL.

Bye, Skybuck.

Reply to
Skybuck Flying

I think I just figured out (one of the) reasons for my fascination with diamonds and trapping light in it...

Besides from all the nice colorfull sparkles and such... like the idea of capturing photos/history in it and such... etc, etc, etc.

The reason could be:

Photons are incredibly small, light, untouchable almost... invisible, yet contain information.

If information code be encoded onto a single photon, the perhaps the photon would be a very good/dense storage medium.

I am not sure what currently the state of the art is at storing information at the tiny scale.

But perhaps I am on to something...

Perhaps the photon is incredibly small compared to everything else.

I will have to look into this later sometime ;)

Another particle which comes to mind is: "the electron"... but as far as I know... it needs something else to exist...

Perhaps not so with the photon ? Though in this case.. the something else would be a diamond... but perhaps not a diamond per photon...

Perhaps all photons can be stored into a single diamond...

Failing that... perhaps the idea... of storing a single photon into a micro or nano diamong might offer some hope of storing photons efficiently.

The photon would ofcourse have to reflect endlessly between micro/nano mirrors.

Perhaps 1 atom special materials might have some great properties for mirror effect/reflecting effects or perhaps not at all...

Perhaps it's very/surprisingly easy to reflect photons at the 1 atom scale or something like that... or perhaps not easy at all...

More stuff for research I guess ! ;)

And ofcourse eventually the mirror would need to bent, open up or something to let the photon in: write, and out: read.

Bye, Skybuck.

Reply to
Skybuck Flying

Windows Live Mail or Mail server is acting up weirdly lol... maybe has something to do with other nuclear war posting lol... (wow really weird software behaviour oh well)

But anyway... I'd like to share the following thought with you:

The data retention time of light seems to be great !

Our own universe proves it every day to astronomers !

They are staring at light of stars from billions of years ago !

So I'd say:

The data retention time of light/photons is: billions of years ! LOL... please correct me if I am wrong ! ;) =D

So the funny thing is:

THE ULTIMATE SOLUTION to our data storage problem might have been staring us in the face for all this time without us realizing it's full potential ! LOL.

Bye, Skybuck =D

P.S.: I might further add to that: SHAME on Philips/Sony for implementing it so badly with crappy compact disc technology... but they were close.... the laser... it's getting in the ball park :)

Reply to
Skybuck Flying

(Off topic: Hmmm I think I may have discovered a problem with Windows Live Mail...

Perhaps Windows Live Mail will start to malfunction when the Windows System is running out of memory... and starts swapping to page file...

Cause as soon as I closed some browsers windows live mail functioned again... and was able to send some stuff...

Hmm interesting... Or perhaps it was running low on CPU. )

I'll leave photon interesting text below ;) :)

Windows Live Mail or Mail server is acting up weirdly lol... maybe has something to do with other nuclear war posting lol... (wow really weird software behaviour oh well)

But anyway... I'd like to share the following thought with you:

The data retention time of light seems to be great !

Our own universe proves it every day to astronomers !

They are staring at light of stars from billions of years ago !

So I'd say:

The data retention time of light/photons is: billions of years ! LOL... please correct me if I am wrong ! ;) =D

So the funny thing is:

THE ULTIMATE SOLUTION to our data storage problem might have been staring us in the face for all this time without us realizing it's full potential ! LOL.

Bye, Skybuck =D

P.S.: I might further add to that: SHAME on Philips/Sony for implementing it so badly with crappy compact disc technology... but they were close.... the laser... it's getting in the ball park :)

Reply to
Skybuck Flying

Nou ja, je gat er gezond verstand op los laten?

Ik heb nog een core dump met line printer op chain feed papier liggen die ik ooit eens cadeau gekregen heb. Genoeg kladpapier voor tien verdere levens dus.

En dat was nog maar de core van een heel klein computertje, naar hedendaagse maatstaven,

Jan

Reply to
J. J. Lodder

And diamonds will burn.

Nothing like baked clay tablets,

Jan

Reply to
J. J. Lodder

Een zgn. hex dump kan altijd hoor.

--
Ifrit 
http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ifriet
Reply to
Ifrit

Geef dan 'ns even een hexdump van wat je ziet?

--
Grinnikend door het leven...
Reply to
Izak van Langevelde

Printscreen -> JPG -> Hexdump.

--
____________________________________________ 
                             Bye, BugHunter.
Reply to
BugHunter

ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.