Idle Diffractions

Who Needs a Fireplace?

As is often the case, I get a few minutes as the weekend starts to look at all those neat articles I didn’t delete during the week, hoping I would get to all of them on the weekend.  Here is this week’s favorite because it not only nicely summarizes a looming impediment to my ability to optimize lenses (after all, what else could be important?), but it also gives some of those really great high-level numbers that give you a perspective on how real the described problem is. The title of this blog entry is inspired by the fire that I lit to enjoy the contrast between the lake effect snow falling 4 feet away to the left and cozy fire 4 feet in front of me (is glass a wonderful thing or what?).

 

The article, “Future of computers – Part 2: The Power Wall,” is from one of the more reliable places for articles of this type, EDN. It describes what has been creeping into the news more often: that computers are coming to a place where you simply cannot gang any more together for the time being, as the power and heat really does become overwhelming. 

Now, I do want you to go to the link, but to help encourage this behavior (it will only extend this experience by 3 minutes) I will give a summary of the some of the highlights. In the opening, the author, Russell Fish, compares the current state of computing speed on the big super computers with steam boat racing in the 1800s – nice touch. Digression: in 1846, Bates (of Bates and Wallace, where Wallace is the nemesis of Darwin by all accounts) is in Manaus, Brazil, many hundreds of miles up the Amazon, when he decides he needs to go to the grocery store. He states this in his book (which is GREAT if you can find a copy). What’s sad is this entry is made in December 1846 (I may be off a bit on the date, too lazy to go look), and the next entry, since he does not write about his trip to the grocery store, is in April 1848. It takes him 15 months to get down the river and back up (the second leg being the tricky one). As he pulls in from his trek, the first steam ship appears in Manaus, accomplishing the same trip in 3 weeks. 

Back to super computers. The example in the article is almost as stunning as Bates’ story: “The Swiss National Computer Center pumps water from Lake Lugano at 45 meters depth at a temperature of 6 degrees Celsius.⁶ The pump is connected by an 80 cm pipe to two 13 ton, six meter high suction baskets. Three pumps push nearly 7,000 gallons per minute to the computer center.”  The electric bill for 1 year at $0.10/KwHr is $3.7 million. 

I think we have a challenge here, which points to a dramatic change in high-end computing in the next decade. If you have a chance, read some of the comments at the end of the article. There are a couple of good ones, including the person who points out the steamship caption slightly misnames the boat in question (which apparently blew up in its attempt to win).

Now, click the link below. It is worthwhile reading.

http://www.edn.com/article/520499-Future_of_computers_Part_2_The_Power_Wall.php

Faster than a Speeding Bullet

This is worth pausing on – yet another event on the timeline to smaller and faster. The folks at MIT, who appear to be the US answer to the Fraunhofer Institute, report in the New York Times today yet another step in making things faster.

We all know that the eye responds at a rate such that 30 frames per second (fps) or, better yet, 60 fps is indistinguishable from continuous to us. Electronic cameras of course do not have the limits of the eye (I once developed a system to operate at 3,000 fps). MIT operates in a different space than mere mortals and they have recently completed a somewhat faster camera at -- wait for it (but not too long) --

500 fpns = 500,000,000,000 fps

Now, why that number? A useful unit to carry around these days might be the speed of light, something that is difficult to make relevant, but here is an attempt. Light does not travel at 3x10^8 m/sec (it does, but who can relate), it travels at 1 foot/nanosecond. Those feet and inches just don’t go away. We can relate to the foot, but what about the nanosecond?  Can we relate? Let’s try. When we’re in our car, we often go 60 mph, or, as you often learn in physics, 88 fps (as in feet per second). OK, now let’s think about the smallest unit of length we can visualize. Clearly we can see 1 mm on a ruler, so let’s make 0.1mm as the smallest thing we can see. Also, most of us get on a plane every now and then and go not 60 mph, but 600 mph.

So what can we almost relate to? 600 mph is 880 feet per second (about a football field’s length), about 10,000 inches per second (12X) or 250,000 mm per second (25X), or 2,500,000 of the smallest unit you can visualize (100 microns) in a second. Perhaps the main point of this little exercise is that we aren’t even close; we are only halfway there in log space and who can think in log space? If you can, you’re halfway there! We have no way to relate to the speed of a camera that is framing faster enough to “see” light travel through a scene.  So you’ll just have to watch MIT’s video and not relate.

Check out the New York Times article with link to MIT video before it goes away (sent to me by Doug Nutter):

 

SCIENCE   | December 13, 2011
Speed of Light Lingers in Face of New Camera
By JOHN MARKOFF
M.I.T. researchers have built a camera that can take images at intervals of a trillionth of a second.

 

 

This new camera is yet another pillar in the roadmap of science making light relevant. The article opens with a reference to Edgerton, whom I assume all readers know. If not, you may want to look at his images from the 1950s (or 1930s, can’t remember – there are some neat flip books at museums of his photos and you can get some of his images from the used book list).  Edgerton was the master of scientific strobe photography. Also, you must be aware of the epic perspective book, “Powers of Ten” (if not, Google “Powers of Ten” and act accordingly). This is one of the absolute best books for appreciating the spatial scale of things. Clearly we now need, and can produce, the Powers of Ten in the fourth dimension – can’t wait.

In Case You Are Consuming this Holiday Season

The latest issue of Information Display from the Society for Information Display (SID) has a couple of articles that are somewhat of a high-end Consumer Reports coverage of TVs, particularly plasma. I, for one, had formed the opinion that plasma TVs were off the map as a personal consumer. Apparently, even if that may have been right the last time I bought a TV (I don’t do this very often), it is clearly not a given now.

The takeaway from the articles (should you not be a member) is that plasmas are now less expensive than competing LCD units. The key selection criterion is whether you watch TV in an environment with high-ambient lighting – that is, a room with floor-to-ceiling windows where you are watching when the sun is not down (who has time). If that is the case, then the clear consensus is LCD. However, if you are more of an after-the-kids-go-to-bed TV watcher, then plasma is the clear winner. Also, if you happen to be one of the few that have gone 3D, plasma is a faster technology that is intrinsically better for 3D.

Another valuable item from this issue is they point to a particularly educated purveyor of TVs in Scarborough NY, with an Internet presence: Value Electronics.

There are additional articles on the status of the higher-tech stuff you may be interested in. I am not in the market this year (or am I?) but I thought this was a valuable issue that you might otherwise miss.

 

Is this a revolution, or, clutter?

Three items crossed through the ether on the weekend, one is somewhat long awaited (if you consider 5 years long), one that continues the march to making everything look inspiring, and one that even itself is not sure what it is.  The one in the middle is not even a thing, it is software.

Starting with what could either be revolutionizing digital photography (again) or go into the laser disc category (I actually acquired a laser disc player with my most recent house, although I don’t have a laser disc) – the gadget being name the Lytro.  Since these guys are probably copyright sensitive at this point, simply typing the code name, “Lytro” into Google will give you an onslaught of sites.  For those who have not been following this, this is the first implementation of what has come to be called “Lightfield Imaging”, discover, invented, or recognized by Prof. McVoy at Stanford and his student Ng.  It was first presented to the science audience at IODC in 2006, of all places.  Even then, the answers to questions were, “you’ll have to talk to my lawyer”.  This technology records not just a projected spatial intensity maps (what we call a photograph) but this device also records the intensity as a function of direction.  Conceptually, the net results being you’ve stored all the data in 3D so that you can decide what is in focus in your photo whenever you want.  Now, one might say – then why bother me, just put everything in focus.  But, the developers seem to think there are photographers out there that feel fuzzy is artistic and therefore have allowed you to make whatever you want fuzzy, or sharp.  On the Google list, it was noted that until Oct. 12, you couldn’t buy one without a “reservation code”. 

Also, on the list, was something I started to hear about earlier in the week, but, it showed up as a specific link from John Tamkin.  The new thing is, in my mind, Super Photoshop.  Apparently there are many who want to add things to their photos, that aren’t there (I don’t get it, but, I’m becoming old school I can see).  In any case, the site below guides you through how you can now add furniture to rooms that are lacking (actually in my house it would be to add floor where there are currently piles of books). 

http://kevinkarsch.com/publications/sa11.html

And, to complete the weekend there is the somewhat older news of Looxcie.  This is a tri focal length web cam you can wear on your ear – something I always wanted to do?  Available today through SkyMall (I’ve been on a lot of airplanes this month). 

 

 The catch phrases are “see what you see”, hmmm, and “catch those unexpected moments” – that can go few places.  So, now you’re caught up.  I’m not sure, yet, if you missed anything, we’ll see.

PS:  Even before we could launch this out the door, yet another “photo toy” appeared on the web that many have enjoyed.  Spotted by our web-watcher, Mark Kahan, this is the “ball camera” Quite fun too.  1 minute and 41 seconds – you can do it J

http://freshome.com/2011/10/21/ball-camera-that-captures-panoramic-views-by-jonas-pfeil-video/

The missing dinosaurs puzzle

This note was brought to my attention by Mark Kahan, as are many things.  I must admit, after Jurassic Park one does occasionally consider what would the world be like if the dinosaurs had not decided to exit.  It’s one thing to occasionally encounter a grizzly, or a whale, but a tyrannosaurus?  Instead of Tornado reports, we could have dino-reports, seems like the outcomes might be similar. 

Fortunately, we digress.  But, apparently someone has way too much time on their hands and they have been trying to work back in time to find which asteroid careened out of orbit after an interaction with another object.  They succeeded; in finding one asteroid that did not do that.  Enough said.  Considering they just launched this thing, I guess this is a pressing question.  Read on.

Spacecraft casts doubt on alleged culprit for dinosaur extinction

Posted In: R&D Daily

Tuesday, September 20, 2011

http://www.rdmag.com/News/2011/09/Information-Tech-Test-Measurement-Spacecraft-casts-doubt-on-alleged-culprit-for-dinosaur-extinction/

Observations from NASA's Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer (WISE) mission indicate the family of asteroids some believed was responsible for the demise of the dinosaurs is not likely the culprit, keeping the case open on one of Earth's greatest mysteries.

While scientists are confident a large asteroid crashed into Earth approximately 65 million years ago, leading to the extinction of dinosaurs and some other lifeforms on our planet, they do not know exactly where the asteroid came from or how it made its way to Earth. A 2007 study using visible-light data from ground-based telescopes first suggested the remnant of a huge asteroid, known as Baptistina, as a possible suspect.

According to that theory, Baptistina crashed into another asteroid in the main belt between Mars and Jupiter about 160 million years ago. The collision sent shattered pieces as big as mountains flying. One of those pieces was believed to have impacted Earth, causing the dinosaurs' extinction.

Since this scenario was first proposed, evidence developed that the so-called Baptistina family of asteroids was not the responsible party. With the new infrared observations from WISE, astronomers say Baptistina may finally be ruled out.

"As a result of the WISE science team's investigation, the demise of the dinosaurs remains in the cold case files," said Lindley Johnson, program executive for the Near Earth Object (NEO) Observation Program at NASA Headquarters in Washington. "The original calculations with visible light estimated the size and reflectivity of the Baptistina family members, leading to estimates of their age, but we now know those estimates were off. With infrared light, WISE was able to get a more accurate estimate, which throws the timing of the Baptistina theory into question."

WISE surveyed the entire celestial sky twice in infrared light from January 2010 to February 2011. The asteroid-hunting portion of the mission, called NEOWISE, used the data to catalogue more than 157,000 asteroids in the main belt and discovered more than 33,000 new ones.

Visible light reflects off an asteroid. Without knowing how reflective the surface of the asteroid is, it's hard to accurately establish size. Infrared observations allow a more accurate size estimate. They detect infrared light coming from the asteroid itself, which is related to the body's temperature and size. Once the size is known, the object's reflectivity can be re-calculated by combining infrared with visible-light data.

The NEOWISE team measured the reflectivity and the size of about 120,000 asteroids in the main belt, including 1,056 members of the Baptistina family. The scientists calculated the original parent Baptistina asteroid actually broke up closer to 80 million years ago, half as long as originally proposed.

This calculation was possible because the size and reflectivity of the asteroid family members indicate how much time would have been required to reach their current locations -- larger asteroids would not disperse in their orbits as fast as smaller ones. The results revealed a chunk of the original Baptistina asteroid needed to hit Earth in less time than previously believed, in just about 15 million years, to cause the extinction of the dinosaurs.

"This doesn't give the remnants from the collision very much time to move into a resonance spot, and get flung down to Earth 65 million years ago," said Amy Mainzer, a study co-author and the principal investigator of NEOWISE at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) in Pasadena. Calif. "This process is thought to normally take many tens of millions of years." Resonances are areas in the main belt where gravity nudges from Jupiter and Saturn can act like a pinball machine to fling asteroids out of the main belt and into the region near Earth.

The asteroid family that produced the dinosaur-killing asteroid remains at large. Evidence that a 10-kilometer asteroid impacted Earth 65 million years ago includes a huge, crater-shaped structure in the Gulf of Mexico and rare minerals in the fossil record, which are common in meteorites but seldom found in Earth's crust. In addition to the Baptistina results, the NEOWISE study shows various main belt asteroid families have similar reflective properties. The team hopes to use NEOWISE data to disentangle families that overlap and trace their histories.

"We are working on creating an asteroid family tree of sorts," said Joseph Masiero, the lead author of the study. "We are starting to refine our picture of how the asteroids in the main belt smashed together and mixed up."

JPL manages and operated WISE for NASA's Science Mission Directorate. The spacecraft was put into hibernation mode after it scanned the entire sky twice, completing its main objectives. The principal investigator, astronomer Edward Wright, is at UCLA.

The mission was selected competitively under NASA's Explorers Program managed by the agency's Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Md. The science instrument was built by the Space Dynamics Laboratory in Logan.

The spacecraft was built by Ball Aerospace & Technologies Corp. in Boulder, Colo. Science operations and data processing take place at the Infrared Processing and Analysis Center at the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena. Caltech manages JPL for NASA.

WISE webpage

SOURCE