Index  | Recent Threads  | Unanswered Threads  | Who's Active  | Guidelines  | Search
 

Quick Go »
No member browsing this thread
Thread Status: Active
Total posts in this thread: 14
Posts: 14   Pages: 2   [ 1 2 | Next Page ]
[ Jump to Last Post ]
Post new Thread
Author
Previous Thread This topic has been viewed 18160 times and has 13 replies Next Thread
Former Member
Cruncher
Joined: May 22, 2018
Post Count: 0
Status: Offline
Reply to this Post  Reply with Quote 
C4CW May 2013 Project Status Update

Getting to the bottom of things

"There's plenty of room at the bottom" was the famous quip by Richard Feynman, a brilliant American physicist, describing the technological possibilities that he foresaw, already in 1959, for the field we today call nanotechnology. But once you get to the bottom, the nanoworld is often a strange and mysterious place.

Here at the Computing for Clean Water project, researchers in China, Australia and the UK have been struggling for several months to make sense of all the amazing data that you volunteers have simulated for us over the last couple of years. As we've alluded to in our last post, there's definitely something exciting that we're seeing in the data, concerning an unexpected oscillation in the flow of the water through the nanotube.

Getting to the bottom of what this is, though, has involved quite a lot of detective work. Shuai Wu, a Ph.D. student at Tsinghua University and Ming Ma – previously with Tsinghua and now doing a postdoc at the London Centre for Nanotechnology, have been the chief detectives. The rest of us, spread over three continents, have been chiming in with comments and suggestions during regular teleconferences.

We're not quite done analyzing everything, but we're at a stage now where we feel we have a pretty good idea of what is going on. And if we're right, it's an effect that has been overlooked in previous research, simply because researchers have had nowhere near enough computing power to do the sort of detailed high-resolution studies of the flow that we have done thanks to C4CW.

What does this mean for water filtration? Well if the effect we've observed can be tuned properly to the liquid flow, it may be possible to reduce the resistance of the tube to water flowing through it. This would mean less energy needed to filter water, which is a good thing. Exactly how we could exploit this effect is something we are discussing and debating a lot about these days. And if we come up with a good plan for how to do this, we may again ask for your help to simulate whether this will work in practice.

However, our first priority is to finalize the analysis and publish the results, so that our colleagues in labs around the world can also start thinking about how this surprising effect might be used for practical purposes. As soon as we're further along with that process, we'll be sure to get back to you and share more about our analysis. Once a manuscript we are working on gets through the usual process of peer review, we'll share that with you, too. Even before then, we hope to be able to share some animations that capture the main idea of this effect, which we're working on.

In the meantime, on behalf of the whole team, we extend our grateful thanks to all you volunteers who contributed to Computing for Clean Water. Your combined computing power was like turning on a giant microscope. Suddenly we saw right to the bottom. There's plenty of room there. And also plenty of surprises!

The C4CW Team
[May 21, 2013 9:02:04 PM]   Link   Report threatening or abusive post: please login first  Go to top 
Falconet
Master Cruncher
Portugal
Joined: Mar 9, 2009
Post Count: 3265
Status: Offline
Project Badges:
Reply to this Post  Reply with Quote 
Re: C4CW May 2013 Project Status Update

Thanks for the update!
Glad to hear about these exciting results!
I guess this means no more work units(for now).

In case anyone is interested:

Following the HPF2 logic - approximately 37535 CPU years * 365 days/year * 24 hours/day * $0.035/hour = $11,508,231
----------------------------------------


AMD Ryzen 5 1600AF 4C/8T 3.2 GHz - 85W
AMD Ryzen 5 2500U 4C/8T 2.0 GHz - 28W
Intel Z3740 4C/4T 1.8 GHz - 6W
----------------------------------------
[Edit 2 times, last edit by Falconet at May 21, 2013 9:34:17 PM]
[May 21, 2013 9:08:51 PM]   Link   Report threatening or abusive post: please login first  Go to top 
cjslman
Master Cruncher
Mexico
Joined: Nov 23, 2004
Post Count: 2082
Status: Offline
Project Badges:
Reply to this Post  Reply with Quote 
Re: C4CW May 2013 Project Status Update

Thanks for such a great update (it was very upbeat !!!). If you have any need to process work items, remember: Have machine, will crunch biggrin

CJSL

Crunching for a better future...
----------------------------------------
I follow the Gimli philosophy: "Keep breathing. That's the key. Breathe."
Join The Cahuamos Team


[May 21, 2013 11:38:34 PM]   Link   Report threatening or abusive post: please login first  Go to top 
Former Member
Cruncher
Joined: May 22, 2018
Post Count: 0
Status: Offline
Reply to this Post  Reply with Quote 
Re: C4CW May 2013 Project Status Update

tongue
Thanks for continuing the project progress reports after our part is over.

Lawrence
[May 22, 2013 3:15:35 AM]   Link   Report threatening or abusive post: please login first  Go to top 
gb009761
Master Cruncher
Scotland
Joined: Apr 6, 2005
Post Count: 2955
Status: Offline
Project Badges:
Reply to this Post  Reply with Quote 
Re: C4CW May 2013 Project Status Update

Yes, thanks for the very positive and upbeat feedback. Hopefully things will continue progressing nicely for you and that, if you ever do need any further processing power, we're all here, waiting and willing biggrin
----------------------------------------

[May 22, 2013 4:08:16 AM]   Link   Report threatening or abusive post: please login first  Go to top 
l_mckeon
Senior Cruncher
Joined: Oct 20, 2007
Post Count: 439
Status: Offline
Project Badges:
Reply to this Post  Reply with Quote 
Re: C4CW May 2013 Project Status Update

Good news.

But if no one has seen this before, how sure are you that it's a real physical effect and not just an artifact of the calculations?
[May 22, 2013 4:53:55 AM]   Link   Report threatening or abusive post: please login first  Go to top 
Former Member
Cruncher
Joined: May 22, 2018
Post Count: 0
Status: Offline
Reply to this Post  Reply with Quote 
applause Congratulations

I am very keen on your paper because it sounds like "superconduction" for water. Please let us know when and where it will be published (e.g. hyperlink).

I will be with you for the next GO!

Warm regards from Germany. smile
----------------------------------------
[Edit 2 times, last edit by Former Member at May 22, 2013 9:13:11 AM]
[May 22, 2013 9:10:45 AM]   Link   Report threatening or abusive post: please login first  Go to top 
Former Member
Cruncher
Joined: May 22, 2018
Post Count: 0
Status: Offline
Reply to this Post  Reply with Quote 
shock Good point l_mckeon

Calculations (see global warming) need to get verified in reality!
But... if you know, what to look for, it is much easier to proof it.

The same holds for astrophysics. "Dark Energy" and "Dark Matter" are hypothesises still waiting for proof of authenticity....

Nevertheless you are right. Calculations can become a kind of self-fullfilling prophecy wink
----------------------------------------
[Edit 2 times, last edit by Former Member at May 22, 2013 9:24:50 AM]
[May 22, 2013 9:23:13 AM]   Link   Report threatening or abusive post: please login first  Go to top 
Former Member
Cruncher
Joined: May 22, 2018
Post Count: 0
Status: Offline
Reply to this Post  Reply with Quote 
Energy costs?

Thanks for the update!
Glad to hear about these exciting results!
I guess this means no more work units(for now).

In case anyone is interested:

Following the HPF2 logic - approximately 37535 CPU years * 365 days/year * 24 hours/day * $0.035/hour = $11,508,231


---------
I am always missing the costs for energy in these kind of calculations.
If I follow the logics above under the assumption a CPU with PC would need at least 0.1 kW per h, this would roughly sum up to approx.
38,800,000,000 Wh or 22 892 tons of CO2 !

or $ 10 mill. * on top of the $11.5 mill. !!!

(* electricity in Germany costs about $ 0.3 / kWh !!)

Bearing this in mind, everybody needs to make clear for himself, if a project is worth one's salt (or CO2). It's a footprint and it's a bigfoot one.

In this case I decided the project is worth it. But I may be wrong as with other projects as well. We will know later and meanwhile me using my bike to partly compensate for my CPU time ( with 1 PC I would need 1400 miles per year of biking instead of driving a car - if somebody is interested to follow wink )
----------------------------------------
[Edit 3 times, last edit by Former Member at May 22, 2013 10:15:02 AM]
[May 22, 2013 9:37:47 AM]   Link   Report threatening or abusive post: please login first  Go to top 
branjo
Master Cruncher
Slovakia
Joined: Jun 29, 2012
Post Count: 1892
Status: Offline
Project Badges:
Reply to this Post  Reply with Quote 
Re: Energy costs?

Thanks for the update!
Glad to hear about these exciting results!
I guess this means no more work units(for now).

In case anyone is interested:

Following the HPF2 logic - approximately 37535 CPU years * 365 days/year * 24 hours/day * $0.035/hour = $11,508,231


---------
I am always missing the costs for energy in these kind of calculations.
If I follow the logics above under the assumption a CPU with PC would need at least 0.1 kW per h, this would roughly sum up to approx. $ 9 mill. on top of the $11.5 mill. !!!

(Germany electricity costs about $ 0.3 / kWh !!)


This is the calculation of potential cost if such amount of work will be proceeded on Cloud (Amazon, IBM,...) based on current prices (see HPF2 website for explanation), so the energy cost is already included wink

Cheers peace
----------------------------------------

Crunching@Home since January 13 2000. Shrubbing@Home since January 5 2006

[May 22, 2013 9:45:50 AM]   Link   Report threatening or abusive post: please login first  Go to top 
Posts: 14   Pages: 2   [ 1 2 | Next Page ]
[ Jump to Last Post ]
Post new Thread