Graphene Barristor : The 300 GHz Chips is possible but what about the other components of a computer, you do not have a complete solution

Samsung’s greatest R&D division, the Samsung Advanced Institute of Technology has reportedly published and detailed research on the Barristor in the journal Science on the 17th of May. This is the wonder chip that researchers were looking for.
We’ve talked about the amazing properties of Graphene before here. And we also reported on silicene’s arrival to the market before graphene in this article.
The most important fact about graphene is that this material allows electrons to move through it 200 times easier than silicon.
Practically, if you build a CPU using graphene instead of silicon, it will likely run at 300 GHz instead of 3 GHz, considering that the technology only achieves half of the normal graphene electron mobility.
IBM even thought about theoretical 1000 GHz chips using graphene.
Graphene was a difficult material to work with because it is a semi-metal, and the electron flow can’t be easily stopped.
Using it in cooling solutions is indeed a good idea as no current is passing through it, but the higher electron mobility might help dissipate the heat energy faster in a cooling base.
There was talk about a combination between silicon and graphene, but it seems that such a combination is not desirable.
Trying to transform graphene in a semiconductor radically decreases the much wanted electron mobility. That was the silicene research.
Getting back to our wonderful Samsung graphene chip, we can tell you that the Korean scientists developed the graphene-silicon Schottky barrier.
This will allow or stop the electron flow by controlling the height of the barrier.
Samsung also built a basic logic gate device and demonstrated that the device can successfully fulfill one function. The basic operation the device can manage is adding.
The transistor-like gate was called a Barristor.
Samsung’s research institute owns other 9 major graphene-related patents and is currently the only company to have built a working graphene computing micro device.

Everything on a chip, CPU, Ram and OS for mobile devices

ScienceDaily (May 18, 2012) — The first purely silicon oxide-based ‘Resistive RAM’ memory chip that can operate in ambient conditions — opening up the possibility of new super-fast memory — has been developed by researchers at UCL.

Resistive RAM (or ‘ReRAM’) memory chips are based on materials, most often oxides of metals, whose electrical resistance changes when a voltage is applied — and they “remember” this change even when the power is turned off.
ReRAM chips promise significantly greater memory storage than current technology, such as the Flash memory used on USB sticks, and require much less energy and space.
The UCL team have developed a novel structure composed of silicon oxide, described in a recent paper in the Journal of Applied Physics, which performs the switch in resistance much more efficiently than has been previously achieved. In their material, the arrangement of the silicon atoms changes to form filaments of silicon within the solid silicon oxide, which are less resistive. The presence or absence of these filaments represents a ‘switch’ from one state to another.
Unlike other silicon oxide chips currently in development, the UCL chip does not require a vacuum to work, and is therefore potentially cheaper and more durable. The design also raises the possibility of transparent memory chips for use in touch screens and mobile devices.
The team have been backed by UCLB, UCL’s technology transfer company, and have recently filed a patent on their device. Discussions are ongoing with a number of leading semiconductor companies.
Dr Tony Kenyon, UCL Electronic and Electrical Engineering, said: “Our ReRAM memory chips need just a thousandth of the energy and are around a hundred times faster than standard Flash memory chips. The fact that the device can operate in ambient conditions and has a continuously variable resistance opens up a huge range of potential applications.
“We are also working on making a quartz device with a view to developing transparent electronics.”
For added flexibility, the UCL devices can also be designed to have a continuously variable resistance that depends on the last voltage that was applied. This is an important property that allows the device to mimic how neurons in the brain function. Devices that operate in this way are sometimes known as ‘memristors’.
This technology is currently of enormous interest, with the first practical memristor, based on titanium dioxide, demonstrated in just 2008. The development of a silicon oxide memristor is a huge step forward because of the potential for its incorporation into silicon chips.
The team’s new ReRAM technology was discovered by accident whilst engineers at UCL were working on using the silicon oxide material to produce silicon-based LEDs. During the course of the project, researchers noticed that their devices appeared to be unstable.
UCL PhD student, Adnan Mehonic, was asked to look specifically at the material’s electrical properties. He discovered that the material wasn’t unstable at all, but flipped between various conducting and non-conducting states very predictably.
Adnan Mehonic, also from the UCL Department of Electronic and Electrical Engineering, said: “My work revealed that a material we had been looking at for some time could in fact be made into a memristor.
“The potential for this material is huge. During proof of concept development we have shown we can programme the chips using the cycle between two or more states of conductivity. We’re very excited that our devices may be an important step towards new silicon memory chips.”
The technology has promising applications beyond memory storage. The team are also exploring using the resistance properties of their material not just for use in memory but also as a computer processor.
The work was funded by the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council.

Not only Design but Physics can also benefit

Is it just me, or does it feel like the “future” we all saw in TV shows and movies is getting closer and closer to reality? A team of researchers at MIT created a small atmosphere, the ZeroN, where you can interact with objects floating in your own space. This could be the potential birth of a live user interface where we can touch, instruct, and play with objects and images in the air.
“Our body and minds have developed great capacities for understand and manipulating physical environments,” said researcher Jihna Lee said in a video about the ZeroN. “The long-term vision is to embed computation and physical materials that can directly interact with us. In this way, we seek to redefine the relationships humans have with materials, space and digital information.”
Lee, who researches with MIT’s Tangible Media Group, created the ZeroN, a small, unenclosed space that uses electromagnets to suspend a ball in mid-air. The ball (and the space holding it) can remember a human’s touch and mimic the movement in space. The ball can also move along per-programmed paths that are fed to the magnet and the machine holding the magnet using software.
“Even if the user moves the ZeroN to a different position, the system can re-stabilize and keep the ZeroN suspended,” said Lee.
It can also act as a camera, recording 3D objects in its space, as well as work with a light source, showing how shadows would exist in real life on small models.
The magnet moves the ball, pulling and repelling it dependent on where it is commanded to go. The whole system exists on an arm that moves the magnet up and down and side by side, increasing the distance able to be traveled. The researchers used a “hall sensor,” which is constantly checking the ball’s position to record its movements.
The design industry could benefit from the technology, being able to build and interact with 3D models that can move and be manipulated without having to program it first into a computer. And as FastCo.Design points out, it could lead to even cooler inventions such as floating holograms that we can wrap around our arms and move in mid-air like Ironman.

In engineering, mathematics, physics, meteorology and computer science, multiscale modeling is the field of solving physical problems which have important features at multiple scales, particularly multiple spatial and(or) temporal scales. Important problems include scale linking (Baeurle 2009[1], de Pablo 2011[2], Knizhnik 2002[3], Adamson 2007[4]). Horstemeyer 2009[5] presented historical review of the different disciplines (solid mechanics, numerical methods, mathematics, physics, and materials science) for solid materials related to multiscale materials modeling.
Multiscale modeling in physics is aimed to calculation of material properties or system behavior on one level using information or models from different levels. On each level particular approaches are used for description of a system. Following levels are usually distinguished: level of quantum mechanical models (information about electrons is included), level of molecular dynamics models (information about individual atoms is included), mesoscale or nano level (information about groups of atoms and molecules is included), level of continuum models, level of device models. Each level addresses a phenomenon over a specific window of length and time. Multiscale modeling is particularly important in integrated computational materials engineering since it allows to predict material properties or system behavior based on knowledge of the atomistic structure and properties of elementary processes.

What Singapore benefits from Big Brother?

By Palash R. Ghosh: Subscribe to Palash’s RSS feed

May 15, 2012 5:57 PM GMT

While Asian giants China and India rapidly build up their already huge military arsenals, the tiny, prosperous Southeast Asian city-state of Singapore has been quietly ramping up defense expenditures at a rate disproportionate to its size and population.

On a per-capita basis, Singapore’s arms-buying spree is topped only by the U.S., Israel and Kuwait.
Singapore’s Defense Minister Ng Eng Hen told parliament recently that the government may spend up to 6 percent of GDP on defense — overall, military expenditures have climbed 4 percent annually from S$10.7 billion (US$8.6 billion) in 2008 to reach the S$12.3 billion ($US9.7 billion) level in 2012.
“Our overall approach is to maintain a stable defense budget that grows gradually in absolute terms, and to manage that prudently,” Ng told lawmakers.
“Such steady spending is a critical enabler, because it allows [The Ministry of Defense] to take a long-term view and obtain the best value for our defense investments.”
Put another way, almost one-fourth of Singapore’s national budget will be spent on defense this year, making the Defense Ministry the No. 1 recipient of the budget allocation.
(By contrast, Israel, which is surrounded by enemies and lives under the constant threat of military attack, spends about 15 percent of its GDP on defense, andit pays much more in social and health care costs than does Singapore.)
Ng defended Singapore’s military spending, insisting the Ministry of Defense only buys what is required to satisfy its security needs.
“[We are] mindful of our responsibility to spend carefully and wisely,” he said.
“We buy only what we need, scrutinize available options for the most cost-effective solution.”
In fact, Southeast Asia, as a whole, has embarked on a bewildering armament spree in recent years. Singapore’s nearest neighbors, Malaysia and Indonesia, have also been buying guns, tanks and missiles and other expensive toys at a hectic pace.
In 2011, the region’s defense expenditures jumped by 13.5 percent to $24.5 billion, according to IHS Jane. By 2016, that number is expected to reach $40 billion.
Strangely, there have been almost no conflicts between Southeast Asian nations in several decades. Thus, the mania for acquiring weapons appears to be based on some existential worries and has, of course, been financed by rapid economic expansion.
However, Singapore appears to be unique in its paranoia. Not only does Singapore buy arms, but the Borgia-like city-state also sells an array of weapons to other nations (both developed and emerging).
Part of Singapore’s obsession with security lies with the Strait of Malacca, the narrow stretch of water that serves as a crucial link between the Indian and Pacific Oceans and which Singapore heavily depends upon for trade and transport. About 40 percent of global trade passes through this narrow conduit of water.
Duncan Innes-Ker, Asia analyst with the Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) said Singapore has long been a relatively high spender on defense.
“In the very early years this was probably at least partly driven by its poor relations with much larger neighbors, which left it feeling insecure,” he said.
“China may now be playing the role of the intimidating neighboring power, but these days strong defense spending is more a reflection of the city-state’s need to police the region’s shipping lanes. Singapore depends on seaborne trade for its prosperity, so ensuring the smooth passage of vessels through the Strait of Malacca is vital.”
In the past, Innes-Ker noted, Indonesia and Malaysia tended to underspend on defense, leaving wealthier Singapore to bear much of the burden.
In keeping with its security priorities, Singapore has established very close relations with the U.S.
In fact, Singapore just signed a $435 million deal to sell laser-guided bombs, vehicles and aerial refueling services, among other things, to the U.S.
Indeed, American defense contractors account for 43 percent of Singapore’s arms purchases.
In recent years, Singapore has also signed contracts to purchase 12 F-15 fighter jets from Boeing; 110 Leopard-2 battle tanks from Germany; and six missile frigates from France – all, highly sophisticated, state-of-the-art devices.
Singapore’s military ties with Washington go deeper than just arms transactions. The city-state recently agreed to permit American warships to deploy in its waters for a 10-month engagement, raising fears in China, as Washington shifts its military focus from the Middle East and South Asia to the Far East.
As part of that strategy the U.S. will base four of its Littoral Combat Ships in Singapore.
Singaporean Defense Minister Ng told The Straits Times newspaper: “The U.S., I would say, is our closest security partner, and I don’t see any country displacing the U.S.
as that.”

However, Singapore’s single-minded devotion to its military and defense goes all the way back to its chaotic founding in 1965, when it separated from Malaysia in a messy “divorce” partially exacerbated by racial tensions between Malays and ethnic Chinese.
For example, since that time, all males in Singapore have been mandated to military service. According to Globalfirepower.com, Singapore’s military currently has about 72,000 active personnel and about 300,000 active reserves. This means that almost 8 percent of the country’s population is either on active or reserve duty.
In a thesis paper on Singapore’s defense policy, Maj. Lee Yi-Jin of the Singapore Armed Forces wrote: “The magnitude of the country’s defense expenditure has… led to the occasional raised eyebrow. For example, Singapore’s reported defense budget for 2009 was more than that of Malaysia’s and Indonesia’s put together, which some may find surprising given the relative sizes and populations of these three neighboring countries.”
[Indeed, Malaysia and Indonesia boast a combined population of about 270 million, 54 times the manpower of Singapore.]
Lee further declared that military spending in Singapore is not directly proportional to any perceived security threat, but rather is designed to expand the small nation’s role in international affairs.
“The role of Singapore’s defense policy has since evolved alongside changes in the security environment,” he wrote.
“As the threat of inter-state conflict has receded, the significance of Singapore’s defense policy has become increasingly associated with its contributions to Singapore’s non-military instruments of power, and in particular its economic and diplomatic instruments… The primary motivation underlying Singapore’s defense policy has shifted away from a provision of security and toward an increase in the country’s international influence.”
Lee also said he expects to see no change in Singapore’s heavy emphasis on defense and military upgrades.
“Singapore’s leaders would appear to have skillfully removed any debate on Singapore’s defense policy from the realm of economic cost-benefit analysis,” he wrote.
“Instead, the current policy is couched as necessary to maintain the unquantifiable concept of ‘deterrence’, and to provide the stable environment necessary for foreign investment and productive economic activity.”
Moreover, given Singapore’s healthy financial status, the government is highly motivated to maintain exorbitant defense spending.
Innes-Ker of EIU noted that the country has a large trade surplus and its fiscal position is extremely healthy, so there is little pressure for it to reduce military spending on either of these accounts.
“While defense spending may divert some resources away from social priorities, this does not appear to be a major concern for most [Singaporean] citizens,” he said.
Dr. Tim Huxley, executive director at The International Institute for Strategic Studies-Asia, commented that Singapore’s defense policy and strategy provides the city-state with an enviable degree of external security which has, in turn, reassured local and foreign business investors, thereby providing one of the bedrocks of Singapore’s economic success over the last 45 years.
“While Singapore spends a lot on defense, some of this spending has fed back into the wider economy, partly through the development of a local defense-industrial sector, which provides a significant part of the SAF’s material requirements and has also exported defense equipment on a small scale.”
To report problems or to leave feedback about this article, e-mail: p.ghosh@ibtimes.com
To contact the editor, e-mail: editor@ibtimes.co.uk

As a net importer of defence technology, Singapore has little hope of creating it’s own technologies for export, everything it needs to rely on Big Brother with second-hand hand me downs, will it pose even a threat to other nations? Singapore is too small to be even considered with Isreal, maybe it just have to totally rely on Big Brother, to watch it’s own backside.
Throwing money at defence budgets is a very unsecure way to build trust and confidence, capabilities and technologies might be built by a more intelligent way like the defence of Vietnam War. If I have such a budget, I rather buy the technology to build and modify my own capabilities. I will rather expand the capabilities of my police patrol boats rather than the navy, and scale down battleships to missile launching submarines, retire the entire F16s & F5 with subsonic 5th generation trainer fighter jets, and increase my radar and air defence capabilities.
– Contributed by Oogle.

Necrotizing fasciitis and Stem Cells Treatments

Necrotizing fasciitis (NF), commonly known as flesh-eating disease or flesh-eating bacteria syndrome,[1] is a rare infection of the deeper layers of skin and subcutaneous tissues, easily spreading across the fascial plane within the subcutaneous tissue.
Necrotizing fasciitis is a quickly progressing and severe disease of sudden onset and is usually treated immediately with high doses of intravenous antibiotics.
Type I describes a polymicrobial infection, whereas Type II describes a monomicrobial infection. Many types of bacteria can cause necrotizing fasciitis (e.g., Group A streptococcus (Streptococcus pyogenes), Staphylococcus aureus, Vibrio vulnificus, Clostridium perfringens, Bacteroides fragilis). Such infections are more likely to occur in people with compromised immune systems.[2]
Historically, Group A streptococcus made up most cases of Type II infections. However, since as early as 2001, another serious form of monomicrobial necrotizing fasciitis has been observed with increasing frequency.[3] In these cases, the bacterium causing it is methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), the antibiotic used in the laboratory that determines the bacterium’s sensitivity to flucloxacillin or nafcillin that would be used for treatment clinically.
Some published case reports have implied a possible link between use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and NF, though the evidence of the link was said to be weak because of a small number of case patients and it was unclear whether the drugs just masked the symptoms of a secondary infection or were a cause per se.[4]

Stem cell treatments are a type of intervention strategy that introduces new cells into damaged tissue in order to treat disease or injury. Many medical researchers believe that stem cell treatments have the potential to change the face of human disease and alleviate suffering.[1] The ability of stem cells to self-renew and give rise to subsequent generations with variable degrees of differentiation capacities,[2] offers significant potential for generation of tissues that can potentially replace diseased and damaged areas in the body, with minimal risk of rejection and side effects.
See also: Cell therapy
A number of stem cell therapies exist, but most are at experimental stages or costly, with the notable exception of bone marrow transplantation.[citation needed] Medical researchers anticipate that adult and embryonic stem cells will soon be able to treat cancer, Type 1 diabetes mellitus, Parkinson’s disease, Huntington’s disease, Celiac Disease, cardiac failure, muscle damage and neurological disorders, and many others.[3] Nevertheless, before stem cell therapeutics can be applied in the clinical setting, more research is necessary to understand stem cell behavior upon transplantation as well as the mechanisms of stem cell interaction with the diseased/injured microenvironment.[3]
———————————————————————————————————

Thursday, May 17, 2012
Reuters

ATLANTA – A Georgia college student who has already lost a leg to a rare, flesh-eating bacterial infection is now expected to suffer the loss of her fingers too, her father said.
Aimee Copeland, 24, was kayaking and zip-lining along the Little Tallapoosa River near Carrollton, Georgia, on May 1 when the line broke and she sustained a cut to her calf.
Emergency room doctors closed the wound with 22 staples and released the woman, a graduate student at West Georgia University, her father wrote in a post on Facebook.
The next day, Copeland complained of severe pain and returned to the emergency room where she was given a prescription pain killer. The pain continued and the following day she went to a doctor who gave her a prescription for antibiotics. The doctor also ordered a magnetic resonance imaging test which was negative, her father said.
On May 4, Copeland was pale and weak and went to a hospital where doctors diagnosed her with necrotizing fasciitis, a rare flesh-eating bacterial infection.
Copeland, who already suffered the amputation of a leg at the hip, was still listed in critical condition on Sunday, said Barclay Bishop, spokeswoman for Doctor’s Hospital in Augusta.
She would not provide any other details, but Aimee’s father, Andy Copeland, said in a web posting over the weekend that her fingers were also likely to be lost to the infection ravaging her body.
He said she may retain the use of her palms after surgery, however, something that would potentially leave her with enough muscle control to use prosthetics.
Doctors are “awaiting a safe time” before conducting further surgery, the father wrote.
Necrotizing fasciitis is often initially overlooked by doctors because it invades tissue deep inside the wound while the outer wound appears to be healing normally, Dr. William Schaffner of the Vanderbilt University Medical School said.
“This often is a very subtle infection initially,” Schaffner said. “These bacteria lodge in the deeper layers of the wound. The organism is deep in the tissues and that’s where it’s causing its mischief.”
—————————————————————————-
I have started more than 10 years back by stripping a black box and hitting it with inputs to study the outputs to learn everything about the black box, improvising it to software with closed codes to uncover it’s secrets, learning all the links, associations and groupings in the process, even finding out about the missing pieces, now I can even use my technologies to fill in the gaps, or find out the missing pieces of the jigsaw, incorporating it into my 3D search engine to help mankind find all the solutions and answers, as I have demonstrated many a times on my website, where I have found all the answers to research on diseases with the closest links that is available on the internet, with just a basic understanding on the topic without being a mad scientist, and I will freely give to mankind according to God’s wishes, you can continue to test my knowledge, but there are others I need to monetised, to help UN raise money to fight Hunger and Poverty, which I am sorry I am not able to help, because I have an obligation to God, for all the poor and the hungry of the world.
– Contributed by Oogle. 

There should be a Creative Commons Patent Licences

There should be Non Assertion Pledges and Assertion Pledges – For Standard Research work for Non-commercialisation and Commercialisation of Patent Licenses – if there is, I would be the first to sign up, cause it will simplify the process and legal costs of the minefields of patents. I would not mind to pay some costs for registration, but due to it’s simplicity, it will definitely be cheaper than registering an IP Patent which is so complicated.  – Contributed by Oogle.

Drafter’s Comments

Estoppel

Some commentators suggested that the estoppel theory that we rely upon for this pledge has uncertain enforceability. Particularly, in some countries, estoppel requires for there to be some pre-existing relationship between the parties. Due to this uncertainty, it was recommended that the Research Non-Assertion Pledge be implemented in a form that requires some form of execution or signature process (or registration). While this is a possible implementation of the Non-Assertion Pledge, I do not think it is necessary to implement a signature process. In particular, it follows the model established by the IBM Non-Assertion Against Open Software, the Eco-Patent Commons, and the Microsoft Open Specification Promise, all of which rely on estoppel.

Definition of Non-Profit Institution

An earlier draft included government agencies as a qualified non-profit institution, but this was removed due to the failure among our commentators to agree on the appropriateness of including government entities, other than educational institutions (educational institutions are already included as one of the categories).
It was pointed out that the definition of a Non-Profit Institution under sub-clause (ii) is a U.S.-centric definition, and alternative definitions of other countries, or under other countries’ laws were suggested. However, because an exhaustive list of such statutes is impracticable, sub-clause (iii) should be interpreted as being a catch all provision for non-profit entities in other jurisdictions.

Exclusive Licenses and Conflicting Transfers

IMPORTANT!!
It was pointed out by some commentators that a conflict could exist between an exclusive licensee and the beneficiary of the non-assertion. In some jurisdictions, for example, an exclusive licensee has the right to bring an infringement suit independently of the patent owner. Therefore, if the patent owner has already granted an exclusive license, then a beneficiary of the non-assertion may nevertheless face the possibility of suit from an exclusive licensee. It was recommended that we add a warranty that the patent owner has granted no exclusive licenses to the pledge patents. This, I decided not to do, due to the risks to the licensor in making that warranty. However, I strongly urge patent owners who are making the pledge to identify and specifically remove any patents that have been licensed exclusively from the non-assertion pledge to prevent such a conflict.

Subsequent Ownership Transfers

Some commentators pointed out that the Pledge may not be binding upon a subsequent assignee of the patent rights (such as a company that acquires the patent owner’s assets), because it is not well-established whether the unilateral promise on which the Pledge is based would be binding upon the assignee. This could depend on the details of the transaction (e.g., whether it’s an asset purchase or merger), whether the assignee has promised to honor the commitments of the assignor, and the legal doctrine applicable in a specific jurisdiction. It was suggested that I add a clause to the Non-Assertion Pledge that would either (a) require the patent owner to condition any sale or assignment of the patent rights on the continuing validity of the Pledge, or (b) recite within the Pledge itself that it is binding upon future purchasers of the patent rights. I declined to do this due to the risk pointed out by some commentators that such a clause might complicate or jeopardize future mergers & acquisitions involving the grantor. However, whenever possible, grantors are strongly encouraged to ensure that any future transfers of the patent rights are done subject to the Pledge.

Time for Global Zero's Nukeout

20 years after the Cold War, NATO still has 200 US nukes in Europe. It’s time we got the world back on track to zero nuclear weapons.

As a founding member of the board of Global Zero, an international movement aiming for a world without nukes, we have done a lot of research into the nuclear weapon issue. The evidence is overwhelming that nukes are dangerous, useless and expensive. What’s more, by removing nukes from Europe we could clear the road for the US and Russia to agree on unprecedented cuts to their arsenals, which now represent more than 90% of the nuclear weapons on the planet.

President Obama, who endorses Global Zero, has declared abolition of these weapons to be a long-term policy goal for the US. Some progress has been made so far, but – as a former commander of the United States’ nuclear forces said in the New York Times this week – the US must push ahead with further cuts. Everyone knows every single US ICBMs are a security breech and are sitting ducks waiting to be shot down.

On May 20th, world leaders will meet at the NATO Summit in Chicago, where the future of hundreds of US nuclear weapons deployed in Europe is on the agenda.

It’s time to get these relics of a bygone age out of Europe, and we can all help make it happen. Sign Global Zero’s NukesOut petition to urge the leaders of NATO countries to get nukes out of Europe.
By Richard Branson. Founder of Virgin Group