The article describing the device is here:
http://www.physics.berkeley.edu/research/zettl/projects/nanoradio/2007_Nanoletters_Nanotube_radio.pdf

The audio samples can be found here:
http://www.lbl.gov/Science-Articles/Archive/MSD-nanoradio.html

and here:
http://www.physics.berkeley.edu/research/zettl/projects/nanoradio/radio.html

However, the vibration of nanotubes or using the nanotubes for
electronic microscopy (which is a quite similar application) is an
already known tehnique. I'm wandering which procent is the phenomena
and which procent  is the experimenter error in this device.

Vasile



On 11/2/07, Sean Breheny <shb7@cornell.edu> wrote:
> It sounds possible to me, but they are forgetting about a lot of stuff
> which would need to be added to make it a practical stand-alone
> device. Of course you need some kind of output stage to produce
> audible or otherwise sensible output. To make use of the tuning
> abilities, you need some type of interface that a person can
> manipulate.
>
> This sounds to me to be very similar to MEMS RF filters. One of the
> hot research areas in microelectromechanical systems is making
> ultra-high-Q mechanical filters in silicon using standard IC fab
> technology. The idea here is that one could eliminate many of the
> discrete components which are still needed with RF ICs (inductors,
> high Q capacitors, etc.) and make the system MUCH smaller. What they
> have made here is essentially a tiny filter which has some nonlinear
> properties which can be exploited for demodulation and which is
> directly coupled to the ambient EM field.
>
> I wonder how strong the signal has to be for it to be detectable?
>
> As much of a stretch as this would be for a practical receiver, I CAN
> see this being useful in biology, though. One of the things which
> biologists presently lack is a good way to measure what is going on
> inside living cells. If these devices could be made to transmit, they
> could perhaps be implanted in living cells and give simple telemetry
> such as temperature, electric potential, mechanical displacement, and
> chemical concentrations depending on how you construct it. Of course,
> a very sensitive external receiver would be needed to hear the output
> of these tiny telemetry transmitters, but it would still be amazing to
> have such data.
>
> Sean
>
>
> On Nov 2, 2007 1:58 PM, Vasile Surducan <piclist9@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I don't know why but I'm very skeptical about this storry:
> >
> > http://www.semiconductor.net/articleXML/LN694224100.html?industryid=47573&nid=3572
> >
> > Vasile
> > --
> > http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
> > View/change your membership options at
> > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
> >
> --
> http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
> View/change your membership options at
> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
>
-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist