Submitted via IRC for Bytram
We're one step closer to atomic radio
Scientists at the National Institute for Standards and Technology in Gaithersburg, Maryland, have brought us one step closer to "atomic radio" by using an atom-based receiver to make a stereo recording of music streamed into the laboratory—namely, Queen's "Under Pressure." They described their work in a new paper in AIP Advances.
So-called "Rydberg atoms" are atoms that are in an especially excited state well above their ground (lowest-energy) state. This makes them extra-sensitive to passing electric fields, like the alternating fields of radio waves. All you need is a means of detecting those interactions to turn them into quantum sensors—like a laser. That means, in principle, that Rydberg atoms could receive and play back radio signals.
[...] The recordings aren't going to challenge the dominance of digital recording any time soon, since they are of much lower sound quality, more akin to an old vinyl record. That said, "My vision is to cut a CD in the lab—our studio—at some point and have the first CD recorded with Rydberg atoms," said Holloway—if only as a fun scientific curiosity. But one day, the researcher believes this type of atomic sensing could help improve secure communications. "Atom-based antennas might give us a better way of picking up audio data in the presence of noise, potentially even the very weak signals transmitted in deep space communications," he said.
DOI: AIP Advances, 2019. 10.1063/1.5099036 (About DOIs).
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 22 2019, @09:30PM
It goes to 11
"(with maximum value of 100 kΩ, which is controlled by a knob that ranges from 1 to 11)"
(Score: 3, Funny) by RamiK on Saturday June 22 2019, @09:49PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pjK5d0_Yd8Y [youtube.com]
compiling...
(Score: 4, Funny) by SemperOSS on Saturday June 22 2019, @10:01PM
I am also much more sensitive when in an especially excited state.
I don't need a signature to draw attention to myself.
Maybe I should add a sarcasm warning now and again?
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 22 2019, @10:26PM
We could have radio tuners built into laptops and smartphones.
(Score: 2) by Unixnut on Saturday June 22 2019, @10:41PM
> That means, in principle, that Rydberg atoms could receive and play back radio signals.
As radio is an EM wave, then they are saying that the atoms are capable of absorbing EM radiation. I wonder what the minimum wavelength is. Small enough that we could absorb higher frequency EM waves, like light or X-rays?
An antenna small enough to efficiently convert light or X rays to electricity would be a revolution in our capacity to generate electricity from solar and nuclear. Currently we can't build antennas small enough to absorb the energy, so we are stuck with relatively low efficiencies in the form of solar cells or steam cycles (for nuclear energy).
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 22 2019, @10:59PM (1 child)
Then they received Vanilla Ice's "Ice Ice Baby" and blamed Schrödinger's cat
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 23 2019, @10:59AM
No, if the Indetermikittie gets involved, he'd more likely play them the following..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBGvmEOLLr0 [youtube.com]
(Score: 3, Touché) by Rupert Pupnick on Saturday June 22 2019, @11:00PM (4 children)
Signal to noise ratio has been and will always be a limiting factor in radio communications. An atom sized antenna can’t fix this... unless it’s a “smart” atom that knows the difference between signal and noise.
Oh wait! It’s quantum! Yeah, sure...
(Score: 2) by takyon on Saturday June 22 2019, @11:21PM (3 children)
You could have a grid of a hundred atom (or just small) sized antennae on a SoC, combine the data and clean it up with software.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by Rupert Pupnick on Sunday June 23 2019, @01:13PM (2 children)
Sounds like you’re thinking of something like a phased array, but the array elements need to have a spacing on the order of the wavelength of what you’re trying to receive to get any benefit. A hundred atom array might be about 1 nm across (depends on the atom) which is more than two orders of magnitude below the wavelength of visible light. An antenna is in some sense a spatial integator of EM power, so very small structures end up giving you very small signals.
So (assuming you’ve solved the problem of feedpoint design too) now you’ve got a really small signal that has to pass through a number of gain stages (with non zero noise figures) to give you something usable. If you started with a bigger signal from a properly sized antenna, you wouldn’t have this problem on this scale.
But, some might say, this is Quantum [tm]! Oh, so now you’ve quantized the signal into a finite number of levels. How many? It better be at least 2^16 if you want something as good as digital audio. Oh wait... what’s that about sounding like vinyl?
It’s BS.
(Score: 2) by Muad'Dave on Thursday June 27 2019, @03:59PM (1 child)
The actual radio transmission does not have to be analog - you can have a PWM or other digital signal that changes between as few as 2 quantum levels.
(Score: 2) by Rupert Pupnick on Thursday June 27 2019, @08:04PM
You’re certainly right about that, but TFA gave me the impression that the radio waves were analog, so that the atom had to be playing the role of A/D. Skimming through TFA again, I must concede that given its extremely high level of BS, your interpretation could be seen as equally valid.
(Score: 1) by RandomFactor on Saturday June 22 2019, @11:22PM
Any reason we couldn't receive on several and do a bit of signal processing to challenge digital accuracy? In principle analog should be more accurate at the high end.
Someone will swear they can hear the difference and pay for it.
В «Правде» нет известий, в «Известиях» нет правды
(Score: 3, Touché) by ilPapa on Saturday June 22 2019, @11:31PM (4 children)
Well, so much for believing anything else in this article.
You are still welcome on my lawn.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Sunday June 23 2019, @12:03AM (3 children)
*more akin to a Thomas Edison phonograph recording
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by ilPapa on Monday June 24 2019, @02:08AM (2 children)
Thomas Edison did not record on vinyl.
Vinyl records were not made until the 1940s. Thomas Edison died in 1931.
You are still welcome on my lawn.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Monday June 24 2019, @02:13AM (1 child)
Didn't say that. It was what the article should/could have said/meant.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by ilPapa on Monday June 24 2019, @03:47AM
I figured. That's why I made my original comment about taking the entire article with a grain of salt. Maybe it was just a poorly-written summary.
You are still welcome on my lawn.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 23 2019, @08:29AM
Hackers will like this discovery, I am sure.