26 terabits per second

http://www.smh.com.au/technology/tec...524-1f1b5.html

Computer users who despair over slow internet connections should take heart - German scientists have broken a speed record, sending data contained on 700 DVDs over a single laser beam, in one second.

The scientists at the Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT) said they had broken the world record by sending data at a speed of 26 terabits per second.

The data, sent over 50 kilometres on a single laser beam, was coded thanks to a system known as orthogonal frequency-division multiplexing (OFDM) in which the laser beam is divided into separate colour streams.

"With 26 terabits per second, you can simultaneously transmit up to 400 million telephone calls per second," said Professor Juerg Leuthold of the institute in a statement.

And Australia will get that technology in.... The year 7211

Fking quick though

That's amazing.

Live super HD pron!!!!

That is all!!! :)

Sent from somewhere on planet Earth (maybe)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gman

Live super HD pron!!!!

That is all!!! :)

---

my thoughts exactly. hopefully in 4D as well. :lol:

fukin wow!!

we will still be waiting for the NBN here when the rest of the world has this :lol:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by poita

fukin wow!!

we will still be waiting for the NBN here when the rest of the world has this :lol:

---

The NBN will be a failure... we should be looking into the future, not getting the best we can get now.

NBN would work if done correctly. It wont right now due to the tards who are running the show who have a serious case of NFI of what the internet actually is.

Best example by ConJOB*cough*i mean Conroy = “There’s a staggering number of Australians being in having their computers infected at the moment, up to 20,000 — uh — can regularly be getting infected by these spams or scams, that come through the portal.”

nuff said

That is scary fast wow :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dahlia

The NBN will be a failure... we should be looking into the future, not getting the best we can get now.

---

The NBN will not be a failure because of the technology - it's fibre throughout, so can be upgraded to very high speeds later by merely changing the hardware at each end.

The NBN will fail because of the politics that surrounds it. It will be kept prohibitively expensive for city and suburban areas in order to get those subscribers to subsidise rollout and subscriptions in rural areas. This will prevent significant scale uptake, which will mean critical mass will not be reached. The vast majority of current residential customers aren't asking for higher speeds - they judge the value of their plan by it's usage cap, not it's line speed.

Even if wired competition is prohibited (which has been discussed), all that will do is hand the average city internet user's custom to the mobile networks - they will delight in undercutting regulated NBN pricing at the lower end of the scale, removing all the light and medium grade users.

What really needs to be done is the upgrade / replacement of all the RIM devices that infest Australia's more recently developed suburbs. They currently prevent people in suburban areas from getting ADSL at all (or restricting people to 1.5mbit or lower speeds, where ADSL is possible). People connected to these devices want the kind of service level of those who get a direct connection to the same exchange. And that doesn't just mean speed - it means getting a connection to non-telstra equipment so that they can get on the non-telstra pricing scales of the ISPs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hazrd

And Australia will get that technology in.... The year 7211

---

So about 10 years before NZ then

We should be improving wireless technology. Hard wire is stupid. What about rural australia? we need to put money towards fast high quality wireless.. THAT is the way of the future!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by willhouse

So about 10 years before NZ then

---

:rofl1: so true

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dahlia

We should be improving wireless technology. Hard wire is stupid. What about rural australia? we need to put money towards fast high quality wireless.. THAT is the way of the future!

---

should use the CDMA network like they do in the US

or put the money into the 4G network

Problem is the spectrum is getting crowed and they are having issues with reflection/compression/dopper of moving transmitters as the spectrums get closer and more crowded.

I now people working on this and wireless speeds will never meet real world requirements as well as being subject to interference and a major security risk.

That's something Conroy in his infinite wisdom has never mentioned (any transmitted signal can be decrypted given a large enough sample to test. Larger the sample the quicker the crack. Basic cryptography)...Conroy is such a T.O.O.L!!!!!

I'm not talking about our current wireless technology. I'm looking into the future, when they say "this new wireless is quicker, bigger range, better security"... I'm talking about improving wireless. Sure hardwire is quicker and has better security... but surly wires are a shit technology... look at tv remote controls... wireless networking in your house. It is great, it just needs to be better.

Wireless remotes are either IR or bluetooth usually. Look at the transfer rates and they just just too slow.

USB 3.0 is now reaching (SuperSpeed bus), 5.0 Gbit/s. Raw speed is around 4 Gbit/s with approx. 3.2 Gbit/s expected transfer rate. Bluetooth maybe 3 Mbit/s if your close range (4.0 is rumoured to be 20 to 25Mbit/s...Yeah good luck!!!). 3G and 4G rates are getting up there, but have the same issues as in previous post.

You will never be able to achieve the transfer rates of direct medium (currently fibre optics) with radio frequency transmission, the physics at current understanding just doesn't allow it. Unless we discover a dimensional / sub-space transmission system that uses psy-power transmitters direct from brain to brain, your stuck with the speed of light and best "loss-less" medium which is again currently fibre optics...

28,587,302,322,176 .......... bits
3,573,412,790,272 .......... bytes
3,489,660,928 .......... kilobytes
3,407,872 .......... megabytes
3,328 .......... gigabytes
3.25 ....... terabytes
0.0031738281 petabytes
0.0000030994 exabytes
0.000000003 zettabytes

That's Fast!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dahlia

We should be improving wireless technology. Hard wire is stupid.

---

Wireless has inherent problems that wired connections do not. The more users in a specific location, the less bandwidth is available to each of them.

Also, as a general rule, the higher the speed wireless, the shorter the distance between receiver and transmitter, so as speed goes up, more grids of wired base stations need to be installed.

To provide wireless over large areas, you've either got to have a grid of many many wired base stations, or accept very low speeds. For densely populated regions, small cells and high speeds make sense. For sparsely populated areas, low speeds and long ranges are required.

Quote:

---

What about rural australia?

---

At the most rural end of the spectrum ("I have a cattle station the size of a typical european country" or "My local town is three hours away and has only one building - the pub") you want satellite. There is no other sensible solution. There already exist decent government subsidies for satellite in this case, so the answer is to leave current provisions alone.

For mid size properties, I'd expect to see some point-to-point microwave and wireless links as well as still some usage of satellite connections.

For lifestyle blocks and small properties reasonably close to towns, I'd expect to see the beginnings of standard wireless coverage, as well as a few point-to-point installations where standard wireless just can't reach.

Once you start hitting reasonable size towns, you've got enough commercial benefit to install a fibre connection to the town itself, and resell that bandwidth for FTTH, xDSL or 4G LTE "last mile" delivery, as well as playing host to the other end of a few of those PtP links for mid sized surrounding properties. All of these could be provided off the same fibre connection for the town, and which to use will very much be a per-user choice.

IMHO the installation of an NBN style network should concentrate on three areas:

* Buying bandwidth between towns. It costs about the same to lay a bundle of dark fibre as laying a single cable when you are talking cross country runs. There are regional and rural towns where the limits on bandwidth aren't local to the consumer, but are between the entire town and the outside world. Put a full bundle in wherever bandwidth is needed, and hop from town to town rather than laying parallel connections back to a major city. This bandwidth will be a valuable commodity wholesale, even if this is as far as the entire project goes...

* Providing FTTP to businesses. There is a hole in the market here for a better service than commercial rate xDSL without the full expense of a leased line. Filling that hole would bottomslice the established leased line market and topslice the established commercial xDSL market, and with a widespread deployment in central business districts, there is decent money to be made here.

* Providing FTTH in RIM affected suburbs that don't have cable. A market just waiting to be exploited - people who want decent internet connections, and cannot get them at present, due to the Telstra-in-the-way problem. Provide them a sensibly priced alternative and they'll be signing up in droves. I've stayed in rural areas with better internet than outer suburbs, which should be ripe for high bandwidth deployments...

After that, there will be a market based on high speed for inner-city apartments (people who want faster connections than ADSL2+ can provide) and also in inner suburbs with elderly above-ground phone cabling which restricts ADSL speed. Both of these locations would offer plenty of customers for sensibly priced FTTH plans. There are also new developments which will need service too - seems eminently sensible to wire them all up for FTTH from day one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dahlia

"this new wireless is quicker, bigger range, better security"

---

just because they're saying it doesn't mean its going to be possible/implemented. End of the day its always going to be possible to crack wireless security with ease given the scope of use that you're talking about. Using an infrared tv remote is a bad example too because it is transmitting infrared light, not radio waves and requires line of sight

transmitting 'wiresless' over say 100sq/m is a dick load easier than 7.69 million square kilometres

I wonder how much wireless transmitters would cost in terms of power consumption as well... it would far be greater than a wired network

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by btm

http://www.smh.com.au/technology/tec...524-1f1b5.html

Computer users who despair over slow internet connections should take heart - German scientists have broken a speed record, sending data contained on 700 DVDs over a single laser beam, in one second.

The scientists at the Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT) said they had broken the world record by sending data at a speed of 26 terabits per second.

The data, sent over 50 kilometres on a single laser beam, was coded thanks to a system known as orthogonal frequency-division multiplexing (OFDM) in which the laser beam is divided into separate colour streams.

"With 26 terabits per second, you can simultaneously transmit up to 400 million telephone calls per second," said Professor Juerg Leuthold of the institute in a statement.

---

Thats where I was born :D

I think you will find Dhalia was referring to the "Wireless nature" of the tv remote and not its implementation in internet or telecommunications.

i.e - can you imagine using your tv remote with a wire attached between it and the tv? ( I know a few of us remember owning one that did )

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MAD-16V

I think you will find Dhalia was referring to the "Wireless nature" of the tv remote and not its implementation in internet or telecommunications.

i.e - can you imagine using your tv remote with a wire attached between it and the tv? ( I know a few of us remember owning one that did )

---

Exactly what I was talking about.
Everyone keeps saying wireless technology isn't good enough. And I agree. I'm talking about better wireless technology. Something that doesn't exist yet.

Sorry Dalia, no matter what is invented with regard to wireless connections unless we re-write the laws of physics using a hard line connection that sends data through broad spectrum light transmission it will always be quicker than wireless over any distance that matters...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dahlia

Exactly what I was talking about.
Everyone keeps saying wireless technology isn't good enough. And I agree. I'm talking about better wireless technology. Something that doesn't exist yet.

---

That's all well and good but what do we do in the mean time? It's like saying Flying cars are far better than normal cars and we need to use them... So what do we do in the meantime? Stop investing in normal cars and put up with what we have for 10-15 years (maybe more). It would be silly to halt all tried and tested methods (overseas fiber has been around for a while) and bank on something that does not exist and has no estimated timeframe for development

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by glider

That's all well and good but what do we do in the mean time? It's like saying Flying cars are far better than normal cars and we need to use them... So what do we do in the meantime? Stop investing in normal cars and put up with what we have for 10-15 years (maybe more). It would be silly to halt all tried and tested methods (overseas fiber has been around for a while) and bank on something that does not exist and has no estimated timeframe for development

---

People would of thought 26 terabits per second would be impossible.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dahlia

People would of thought 26 terabits per second would be impossible.

---

... and where do you think that laser is pointed? This 26 terabit technology could run in two ways. One is over optical fibre, or be fixed position point to point links - between two transmission towers / masts which are sited such that it is impossible to introduce a view block between them. Getting approval for that kind of thing requires much planning considerations - e.g. preventing people building tall buildings in the path between the masts, making sure trees can't grow up to block it, and so on. This is not the kind of wireless that people associate with freedom and mobility...

(And no, I couldn't have guessed the capacity was precisely 26 terabit, but I knew there was an enormous amount of headroom in optical fibre / laser transmission technology before we hit a physics problem).