14 replies to this topic

[Tramposch]

You know, I just had an idea the other day, I don't know if it is ridiculous or not. Air storage: storing things in the air wireless.

You know how you have wireless internet, running on a frequency like wireless G runs on a 2.4GHz spectrum, what if you just kind of "Paused" the data in the middle of the air, it would just stay, or is it in constant motion and would it just dissipate.

It would most likely dissipate, but why not keep amplifying it.

Here is my idea:


A computer sends an amplifier, in this case just a router, and the router sends it to another router while the other router sends it back, and it keeps going to a circle. What do you guys think? Crazy, or possible.

[Ash-Bash]

Well if this idea did come true it would be expensive, I am sure it is very possible if we can already send packets for the internet via Wifi, But I really don't see why you would need to store it in the air, What is wrong with an original external Hard drive? O.o

[Tramposch]

uh.. production price maybe?

[jlhaslip]

Maybe if the Routers were far enough apart to make a difference, like, one on the moon, another on mars, where the in-transit time for the wireless signal is large, but to have two routers in the same building, the lag for send/receive is so small that it would not be (concievably) useful.
Interesting concept, though.

[cyber_electrons]

Making data circle like that takes up bandwidth and theres a limit. There's also a high chance of it being lost if you decide to circle a lot of information (within close distances as processor(s) may not be fast enough to handle all).

Also, this method will not be very secure even if it uses strong encryption algorithm. People can intercept it mid air and crack the encryption thus stealing your information.

But as this is a section where you put ideas, it is a very interesting idea, I won't need a hi cpacity hard disk again.


Otherwise I would advice against it...

[princeofvegas]

You could not logically store anything in the "air" because when you transmit something wirelessly it needs to go somewhere, anywhere and if there is nothing to receive it then you will just lose it completely. And if you had to build something to "store" the signal then you would not really be storing the data in the air, you would be storing it in a storage device. I agree with everyone else, the production costs on something like this would be astronomical and impractical. I am not trying to talk down or anything I am really just doing what I do best, playing the devils advocate... lol.

[cyber_electrons]

In this case, I don't think he/she meant store data in the air, it means more similar to idling data in the air like aircraft waiting in line in the air to land.

As I did talk about aircrafts being idle in the air (waiting to land), energy is being used. So same with the data in the air. Energy is always needed as long as you start circling data in the air. Wouldn't that be a waste when having solid drive to store data is convenient?

But again, this is a section where you put ideas, so I won't argue too much.

[networker]

I don't think your idea is feasible at all.
Your routers would be sending massive amounts of data
back and forth between each other.
Because of the size of this data,the routers would no doubt need
at least some kind of temporary data buffers to store this data.

I mean,we're not just talking about 10k worth of an html page are we?
If you needed these temporary buffers then why even bother?
Just store the data on a chip or hard drive.
Besides,if you're routers lost power then
you would lose all data
I'm no Einstein but I think you're idea is far fetched.

Edited by networker, 18 March 2009 - 12:19 AM.

[Tramposch]

Eh, everybody thought the lightbulb was a crazy idea.

[Saint_Michael]

Well here is the problem with this idea and if you watch Star Trek you know the transporter signal degrades over time or rather what is being transported will also degrade over time. On that note, we know storing data in air is next to impossible because it will degrade far to fast because of many factors, such as the suns radiation, pollution, heat, signals getting mix from satellites and so on and so forth. Besides what it would take to keep that data together in a grid doesn't exist and would cost way to much money if it were possible to maintain. Besides, the molecules and atoms alone would destroy that data and lucky for us its the speed of light that keeps the data intact in the first place.

Interesting idea, but too many problems exist for something like this and if possible, talk about the most insecured data on the planet.