4 ms·
I've never been convinced that the memristor is worthwhile to consider as a "fundamental passive device" as everyone seems to want to claim. There are a few rea
by kwantam 16y ago
I've never been convinced that the memristor is worthwhile to consider as a "fundamental passive device" as everyone seems to want to claim. There are a few reasons for this:
(1) It's underspecified compared to the fundamental passive circuit elements. For linear R, L, and C, each has one parameter, its value. Ignoring trivial cases (viz., resistors), a memristor has as its memristance an arbitrary function of V and I. As a result, any interesting memristor is automatically not LTI.
(2) It's not particularly special. Why don't we also define a memcaptor, whose capacitance is a function of its current history? I could easily do this, for example, by making a capacitor where one plate is attached by a spring to a fixed support; then, by adding charge, I move the plate and increase the capacitance (or, by removing, I decrease it). Oh wait, that's just a nonlinear capacitor. In the same way, the memristor is just a funny name for a particular kind of nonlinear resistor.
(3) It's not particularly practical (for the moment). It can't be made in anything but a very specialized, presumably extremely expensive process. I hope this changes---I'm sure it'll encourage someone to use them!---but at the moment this really limits my excitement.
(4) There's nothing I can build with a memristor that I couldn't build already. This isn't like the invention of the vacuum tube: you give me a memristance function, and I can build you a pseudo-memristor out of transistors, Rs, Ls, and Cs. Yes, it could be less {space,power,?} efficient, but this is not a quantum leap in technology the way the vacuum tube was (one could not, with 1890s technology, reasonably build something that emulates a vacuum tube).
I'll admit that strictly interpreting my last argument, the vacuum tube could be made to emulate a transistor and thus the transistor wouldn't count as a quantum leap---clearly ridiculous. However, I'd contend that the real value of the transistor was only evident once it was sufficiently miniaturized and its production was sufficiently cheap. You show me memristors that are six orders of magnitude cheaper than transistors and by golly I'll be a convert. Even then, it'll just be yet another nonlinear device with which we can do interesting things---and just like the transistor, the memristor will simply never be as fundamental as R, L, or C.
- judegomila 16y agomemcapacitor and meminductors have been proposed in 2009. You can build the memresistors out of combinations of components but it doesn't allow for miniaturization and low power usage. I.e. the application in RAM is going to be huge!
- kwantam 16y agoIt'll be huge assuming that they're reliable, can be manufactured cheaply, and perform well. DRAM is a very advanced technology. It'll be a while before memristor-based RAMs enjoy the benefits of that kind of background. In the end, like I said above, you show me memristors that blow transistors out of the water and I'll start designing with them tomorrow. (Of course, I have my reservations that they'll be much help for analog circuit design: with regard to CMOS, the last few generations have been friendly to digital designers but decidedly unfriendly for analog design. (Give me 0.18u or 0.13u CMOS any day.) Really, almost all analog CMOS chips, even at advanced nodes, still have older, bigger devices integrated as well. Even at 65nm, good old 0.35u or 0.25u devices are used for i/o and a large amount of analog design because the advantage of using smaller devices is between somewhere between negligible and negative for a lot of designs.)
- sophacles 16y agoRegarding your (1), I'm not sure I follow, isn't the fundamental unit of resistance, ohms, just a function of V and I? Namely V/A. Likewise for capacitance, the Farad is simply (A/V)s. Basically, your argument feels like it is begging the question -- we gave those functions of V and I names, so now they are fundamental units but not the memristor one... because it doesn't have a name?
- kwantam 16y agoNo, there's a more intrinsic difference. Resistor: V = I R Memristor: V = I M(q) The memristance is itself a function of the integral of I, and that function is arbitrary.