University of Illinois Transmits Record 57Gbps Through Fiber Optic Lines (digitaltrends.com) 57
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Digital Trends: Engineers at the University of Illinois have set a new record for fiber-optic data transmission, breaking previous theories that fiber optics have a limit in how much data they can carry. The engineers transmitted 57Gbps of error-free data at room temperature. The group, led by Professor Milton Feng, improved on its previous work in 2014, when it achieved 40Gbps. The keywords here are "error free," which is what makes this research unique from others that claim faster speeds. Fang said, "There is a lot of data out there, but if your data transmission is not fast enough, you cannot use data that's been collected; you cannot use upcoming technologies that use large data streams, like virtual reality. The direction toward fiber-optic communication is going to increase because there's a higher speed data rate, especially over distance."
Engadget writes in an update to a similar report: "Reader Tanj notes that this is specifically a record for VCSEL (vertical cavity surface-emitting laser) fiber, not fiber as a whole."
Re: What was the content (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Even if it was for VR, I suspect it would be very easy to get away with literally streaming your game from scratch with only a 50mbit downstream link. They could always adopt the approach Blizzard uses to allow WoW to be played long before you finish downloading all of the game assets, and with a 50mbit link, it would be totally seamless.
Standard units please (Score:5, Funny)
Please convert to standard units Library Of Congress's transmitted per micro-fortnight
Re: (Score:2)
As long as your meter stick has nanometer markings on it.
If you know what material your meter stick is made from, you can use it to measure distances on the nanometer scale.
But only over short distances. Tiny temperature fluctuations (just touching it) will change the length of the meter stick due to thermal expansion.
Re: (Score:1)
.006897 LoC/GB/mFn
So much slower than 100GBase-RZ...? (Score:5, Informative)
Re: So much slower than 100GBase-RZ...? (Score:1)
Yeah, I thought we were way past the Tbps mark
http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/192929-255tbps-worlds-fastest-network-could-carry-all-the-internet-traffic-single-fiber
Re: (Score:2)
Re: So much slower than 100GBase-RZ...? (Score:4, Informative)
Not quite. Those optics use DP-QPSK, which uses mathematical magic to cram 4 bits worth of information into one symbol. This means the optics only need to operate at 25Gbps to supply a 100Gbps line rate.
DP-QPSK is a whole load of magic I don't understand.
If DP-QPSK can be used with this technology, it seems to imply 200Gbps optics are not too far away.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: So much slower than 100GBase-RZ...? (Score:2)
Yes, QPSK does send 2 symbols, but DP-QPSK doubles that to 4 symbols.
Re: (Score:2)
I love it when you talk dirty. ;-)
No, seriously, I do. I like it when I have to double click to highlight a word, right click, search, and then figure out which result is most meaningful. I learn new and interesting ways to break things.
Re: So much slower than 100GBase-RZ...? (Score:2)
Nope, that is 100Gbase-(L/S/E)R4. ZR uses DP-QSPK.
Re: (Score:3)
Because 100GBase-ZR is useless over a 1000 mile long single mode fiber.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The issue with long-haul transmission is that you only have a limited bandwidth available which works with optical amplifiers and avoids the water "dip". It's common to use DWDM techniques to cram multiple individual streams onto a single fiber. This yields just under 100 usable chann
Error free? Even more remarkable is (wait for it) (Score:2)
that the rooms at either end were at room temperature; just ask renown intellectual Mr Steven Wright.
Re: (Score:2)
Aren't all rooms at "room temperature"? - Jerry Seinfeld*
* this sounds like something he'd say.
Re:Error free?Even more remarkable is (wait for it (Score:1)
close but no cigar. google steven wright
captcha "jammed" as in comedy
Re: (Score:2)
Watched a few videos of him. Thanks.
Re: Record is over a petabit per second (Score:2)
That was using multiple wavelengths on multiple fibres. This appears to be one wavelength on one fibre. Different kettle of fish.
"Researchers from the NEC Labs in Princeton, NJ, USA, and from Corningâ(TM)s Sullivan Park Research Center in Corning, NY, successfully demonstrated ultra-high speed transmission with a capacity of 1.05 petabit/s (1015 bits per second) over novel multi-core fiber that contains 12 single-mode and two few-mode cores by employing the advanced space division multiplexing scheme a
Re: Record is over a petabit per second (Score:2)
Multiple cores, multiple fibres. Effectively the same thing. I believe this test was over 1 core. That's the big difference.
Re: (Score:2)
Its NEVER single fiber. Its always two strand (two fibers) one TX, one RX. DWDM requires one fiber for each lane.
Anyhow, nobody lays optical cables with 2 strands for long range networks.
Its always 12-288 strand cable. And 12 stand is being really cheap. 36 strand is a more common low end.
So a 36 stand cable allows for 18 DWDM systems, 1 Tbps each, or 18Tbps of bandwidth on a low end cable.
This is another case of state of the art (regardless of cost) advancing, which someday will trickle down to real world
BT fiber @ 800Gbit nearly 3 years ago (Score:1)
https://tech.slashdot.org/story/13/05/24/015240/bt-runs-an-800gbps-channel-on-old-fiber [slashdot.org]
Re: (Score:2)
"The superchannel is an advanced dense wave division multiplexing (DWDM) technique, created by combining multiple coherent optical signals into one channel"
Error free? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1, Informative)
Oh, you twat. If a transmitted unit contains an error it is retransmitted, which reduces the overall throughput. This is digital communications, so there is such a thing as error free.
Error Free? (Score:2)
For any reasonable bit error rate, it is entirely possible to build a chip that can do error correction at 57 Gbps.
Local speeds (Score:2)
Researchers achieve 57Gbps through fiber optic lines. In local news, I'm still stuck at 15Mbps because Time Warner Cable is a local monopoly and thus has no incentive to upgrade their speeds.
Re: (Score:2)
At home, I pay for 12 and get about 14. Honestly, that's more than adequate for my needs. :/
I do wish I could actually throttle it back a little and use some of it for upload as upload is only about 1.5 Mb/sec, averaged out. I'd go down to 10 down for 5 up. I'd still be fine. I host all sorts of things off it. I hang stuff off the network like a Christmas tree - though I do have three disparate lines and everything on the network is actually heavily locked down BUT I am, technically, using it right now.
Righ
Fiber optics have a limit (Score:4, Insightful)
Summary says:
breaking previous theories that fiber optics have a limit in how much data they can carry
In other words, fiber optics would have no limit in how much data they can carry, which it utterly bullshit. How someone could write that?
Awesome (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
What idiot would use a hard drive to store and record everything they send? No, this is about processed data.
P.S. Large storage arrays, especially those tied to high end data systems, can easily manage this.
You think Amazon aren't pushing Gbps? Google? You think millions of people transferring stuff to their DropBox isn't collectively more than this?
You really need to think before posting on an IT board.
Program a map to display frequency of data... (Score:1)