"Michael A. Terrell" on Thu, 31 Jul 2014
23:35:45 -0400 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
pyotr filipivich wrote:
"Michael A. Terrell" on Thu, 31 Jul 2014
14:15:58 -0400 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
"Lloyd E. Sponenburgh" wrote:
"Michael A. Terrell" fired this volley:
Did they ever state how long they remained where you put them? That
would be a way to put permanent serial numbers on expensive
components..

Well... xenon might not be the best candidate there, as it's a gas at
STP, but I'm sure other atoms - like precious metals - might be
manipulated the same way.

The problems are mass and reactivity. Higher electron beam energies to
move more massive atoms. Xenon was probably chosen because it is inert
and light. No real dangers of its entering into chemical reactions with
the substrate, which might move the dots.

Helium might have worked, too, but the atoms are so small that maybe even
scanning-tunneling might not have shown them up very well -- if at all.


I felt it was a Gee-Wiz, PR type of thing when they first announced
it. The magazine I saw it in proclaimed it as the perfect computer
memory. Useless trade journals strike again!

Proof of concept. "Okay, we know it works, can we do it in a
manner which will scale up and be 'commercial'?"
Sort of how Henry Ford built a horseless carriage in his shop, but
built a factory to churn them out by the hundreds.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=eXQf0JG8Uj8

Ah, an oldy, but a goodie.

--
pyotr filipivich
"With Age comes Wisdom. Although more often, Age travels alone."