3 ms·
To be the devil's advocate, it is often convenient to represent states of a system with N degrees of freedom as a subset of an N-dimensional space. For example,
by ptero 7y ago
To be the devil's advocate, it is often convenient to represent states of a system with N degrees of freedom as a subset of an N-dimensional space. For example, state space of two balls linked by a rigid rod in 3D would be seen as a 5-dimensional space.
That said, the article is heavy on marketing (13.8 billion year claim is not scientific, at least in spirit) and looks like PR department product.
- soVeryTired 7y agoBy that definition I can double the dimensionality of the storage by adding a second disk.
- lvh 7y agoThe 13.8Gy claim is made by estimating, calculating and then confirming by experiment how quickly wear and tear works (the primary mechanism is nanograting, and the primary contributing physical quantity is temperature). It then specifically grabs 13.8Gy as an example data point because that's the age of the Universe, but they could've picked any other point on a time/temperature scale, like, say, "room temperature". In what sense is this "not scientific"?
- modsiw 7y agoBecause they first chose the result they wanted — age of universe and worked backwards to derive that result. Is it true? Sure, probably. The method flys in the face of the foundations of science and was done for sensationalism. What’s special about 462K? Is it a local min/max? Doesn’t seem so.
- lvh 7y agoThey computed, verified and measured wear and tear (lifespan in Gy) as a function of temperature. The paper, which I linked, includes the full plot. They had to pick _some number_ (temp or years) in order to communicate it as one data point. There's nothing special about 462K -- it's what happens when you pick the age of the Universe as how long you want it to last form now. Pick a billion years, or 10 billion, and you get a different temp. Given that they had a hypothesis, designed an experiment and validated the result, it seems a bit much to say it "flys[sic] in the face of the foundations of science".
- AstralStorm 7y agoAnd finally the disc will never reach that, because it will not physically survive (or it's surroundings) to reach that time. Not on Earth, not in space, when real considerations like impact resistance are in.