Reply by flipper November 18, 20122012-11-18
On Sun, 18 Nov 2012 16:25:30 -0700, Jim Thompson
<To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote:

>On Sun, 18 Nov 2012 15:16:14 -0600, flipper <flipper@fish.net> wrote: > >>On Sat, 17 Nov 2012 20:37:27 -0500, "P E Schoen" <paul@peschoen.com> >>wrote: >> >>>"flipper" wrote in message >>>news:aj7ga8dlgu11odmlcp39efba4662t5ka4a@4ax.com... >>> >>>> The 'elements' fit in the formed quadrants. Going clockwise you >>>> have in the lower left an inductor. Upper left is the resistor and >>>> upper right is the capacitor. The lower right is either 'missing' >>>> or a 'memsistor'. >>> >>>(view fixed font) >>> >>> voltage >>> ^ >>> resistor | capacitor >>> | >>> current <---------+------------> charge >>> | >>> inductor | ????? >>> v >>> flux >>> >>>It&#2013266066;s a "flux capacitor"! >>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DeLorean_time_machine >>> >>>It might also be modeled by a battery or a motor. Instead of *dissipating* >>>power as voltage and current (resistor), it *stores* power in the form of >>>flux and charge, either by chemical reaction or by rotational inertia. >>> >>>Paul >> >>The units for a memristor is said to be Ohms. It dissipates just like >>a resistor. This has been used to argue it's not a new fundamental >>device since, it is claimed, a new fundamental device would require a >>new unit of measure. I'm not saying that's 'true', just that it's an >>argument made. Note, however, that they're both a ratio of (in >>generalized terms) 'quantity vs potential' with the difference being >>one is the differential of the other. e.g. dq-idt. It might be better >>to call the memristor unit Rt, or OhmT, to accommodate the 'memory' >>function. >> >>Or, put another way, it strikes me that saying 'ohms' for a memristor >>is akin to noting the volt and current of an inductor or capacitor at >>a specific moment in time. It's valid for that moment but is different >>at others and the same goes for the memristor's 'Ohms'. It changes >>over time, depending on flux and charge, so Ohms is an insufficient >>measure of it's overall, time variant, characteristic. >> >>A battery is not a passive device and a motor is not fundamental as it >>can be modeled by fundamental devices. >> >>Someone mentioned the diagonal. Yes, the inductor-capacitor diagonal >>are energy storage elements. The resistor-memristor diagonal are >>dissipative elements. > >From considerable searching I conclude that the ReRAM is something >your door-to-door sweeper salesman might be hawking. Lots of claims. >Little do. Those who _were_ going to do non-volatile RAM with it are >"delaying" entry into the market for several years.
Well, we're mixing apples and oranges here. Whether you can make devices reliably, economically and in quantity with the desired density is another whole matter from whether you can make one at all and plenty of people have demonstrated working devices of one form or the other. What I heard is that HP's delay isn't for manufacturing reasons, per see, but because their partner doesn't want to encroach on flash sales at this time.
>Even ran across a thesis and several papers where the "demonstrated" >Spice model had dangling nodes ;-)
It's the angle of the dangle that matters, right? ;)
> ...Jim Thompson
Reply by Jim Thompson November 18, 20122012-11-18
On Sun, 18 Nov 2012 15:16:14 -0600, flipper <flipper@fish.net> wrote:

>On Sat, 17 Nov 2012 20:37:27 -0500, "P E Schoen" <paul@peschoen.com> >wrote: > >>"flipper" wrote in message >>news:aj7ga8dlgu11odmlcp39efba4662t5ka4a@4ax.com... >> >>> The 'elements' fit in the formed quadrants. Going clockwise you >>> have in the lower left an inductor. Upper left is the resistor and >>> upper right is the capacitor. The lower right is either 'missing' >>> or a 'memsistor'. >> >>(view fixed font) >> >> voltage >> ^ >> resistor | capacitor >> | >> current <---------+------------> charge >> | >> inductor | ????? >> v >> flux >> >>It&#2013266066;s a "flux capacitor"! >>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DeLorean_time_machine >> >>It might also be modeled by a battery or a motor. Instead of *dissipating* >>power as voltage and current (resistor), it *stores* power in the form of >>flux and charge, either by chemical reaction or by rotational inertia. >> >>Paul > >The units for a memristor is said to be Ohms. It dissipates just like >a resistor. This has been used to argue it's not a new fundamental >device since, it is claimed, a new fundamental device would require a >new unit of measure. I'm not saying that's 'true', just that it's an >argument made. Note, however, that they're both a ratio of (in >generalized terms) 'quantity vs potential' with the difference being >one is the differential of the other. e.g. dq-idt. It might be better >to call the memristor unit Rt, or OhmT, to accommodate the 'memory' >function. > >Or, put another way, it strikes me that saying 'ohms' for a memristor >is akin to noting the volt and current of an inductor or capacitor at >a specific moment in time. It's valid for that moment but is different >at others and the same goes for the memristor's 'Ohms'. It changes >over time, depending on flux and charge, so Ohms is an insufficient >measure of it's overall, time variant, characteristic. > >A battery is not a passive device and a motor is not fundamental as it >can be modeled by fundamental devices. > >Someone mentioned the diagonal. Yes, the inductor-capacitor diagonal >are energy storage elements. The resistor-memristor diagonal are >dissipative elements.
From considerable searching I conclude that the ReRAM is something your door-to-door sweeper salesman might be hawking. Lots of claims. Little do. Those who _were_ going to do non-volatile RAM with it are "delaying" entry into the market for several years. Even ran across a thesis and several papers where the "demonstrated" Spice model had dangling nodes ;-) ...Jim Thompson -- | James E.Thompson, CTO | mens | | Analog Innovations, Inc. | et | | Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus | | Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | | | Voice:(480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat | | E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 | I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.
Reply by flipper November 18, 20122012-11-18
On Sat, 17 Nov 2012 20:37:27 -0500, "P E Schoen" <paul@peschoen.com>
wrote:

>"flipper" wrote in message >news:aj7ga8dlgu11odmlcp39efba4662t5ka4a@4ax.com... > >> The 'elements' fit in the formed quadrants. Going clockwise you >> have in the lower left an inductor. Upper left is the resistor and >> upper right is the capacitor. The lower right is either 'missing' >> or a 'memsistor'. > >(view fixed font) > > voltage > ^ > resistor | capacitor > | > current <---------+------------> charge > | > inductor | ????? > v > flux > >It&#2013266066;s a "flux capacitor"! >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DeLorean_time_machine > >It might also be modeled by a battery or a motor. Instead of *dissipating* >power as voltage and current (resistor), it *stores* power in the form of >flux and charge, either by chemical reaction or by rotational inertia. > >Paul
The units for a memristor is said to be Ohms. It dissipates just like a resistor. This has been used to argue it's not a new fundamental device since, it is claimed, a new fundamental device would require a new unit of measure. I'm not saying that's 'true', just that it's an argument made. Note, however, that they're both a ratio of (in generalized terms) 'quantity vs potential' with the difference being one is the differential of the other. e.g. dq-idt. It might be better to call the memristor unit Rt, or OhmT, to accommodate the 'memory' function. Or, put another way, it strikes me that saying 'ohms' for a memristor is akin to noting the volt and current of an inductor or capacitor at a specific moment in time. It's valid for that moment but is different at others and the same goes for the memristor's 'Ohms'. It changes over time, depending on flux and charge, so Ohms is an insufficient measure of it's overall, time variant, characteristic. A battery is not a passive device and a motor is not fundamental as it can be modeled by fundamental devices. Someone mentioned the diagonal. Yes, the inductor-capacitor diagonal are energy storage elements. The resistor-memristor diagonal are dissipative elements.
Reply by Tim Williams November 18, 20122012-11-18
"P E Schoen" <paul@peschoen.com> wrote in message 
news:k89e58$s6l$1@dont-email.me...
> It might also be modeled by a battery or a motor. Instead of > *dissipating* > power as voltage and current (resistor), it *stores* power in the form > of flux and charge, either by chemical reaction or by rotational > inertia.
Not necessarily. The antidiagonal entries on the plot of four quantities store energy, while the upper-left, at least, dissipates power. Perhaps the entire main diagonal dissipates. - Resistance is the ratio of voltage to current; the product is power (real dissipation, nonconservative). - Capacitance is the ratio of charge to voltage; the product is energy (stored, conservative). - Inductance is the ratio of flux to current; the product is energy (stored, conservative). - Memristance is the ratio of charge to flux (or the inverse, whichever); the product is technically energy * time, or momentum * length. Doesn't really make sense. Tim -- Deep Friar: a very philosophical monk. Website: http://seventransistorlabs.com
Reply by P E Schoen November 17, 20122012-11-17
"flipper"  wrote in message=20
news:aj7ga8dlgu11odmlcp39efba4662t5ka4a@4ax.com...

> The 'elements' fit in the formed quadrants. Going clockwise you > have in the lower left an inductor. Upper left is the resistor and > upper right is the capacitor. The lower right is either 'missing' > or a 'memsistor'.
(view fixed font) voltage ^ resistor | capacitor | current <---------+------------> charge | inductor | ????? v flux It=E2=80=99s a "flux capacitor"! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DeLorean_time_machine It might also be modeled by a battery or a motor. Instead of = *dissipating*=20 power as voltage and current (resistor), it *stores* power in the form = of=20 flux and charge, either by chemical reaction or by rotational inertia. Paul=20
Reply by flipper November 17, 20122012-11-17
On Fri, 16 Nov 2012 00:39:32 -0500, rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote:

>On 11/15/2012 7:24 PM, flipper wrote: >> On Thu, 15 Nov 2012 18:40:09 -0500, rickman<gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> On 11/15/2012 5:00 PM, Cydrome Leader wrote: >>>> In sci.electronics.basics Jim Thompson<To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@on-my-web-site.com> wrote: >>>>> An interesting question came up on the LTspice List this morning >>>>> concerning Spice modeling a ReRAM, a resistive element something like >>>>> a Memristor, but "different" ;-) >>>>> >>>>> The OP seemed over his head and couldn't quite vocalize how the ReRAM >>>>> device behaves. >>>>> >>>>> I tried surfing and ran into the hurdles that any real information is >>>>> locked behind the IEEE fiasco. >>>>> >>>>> All other links seemed more like Popular Science reviews than facts. >>>>> >>>>> Anyone know the V-I behavior of these device? >>>> >>>> speaking of, can anybody clearly explain a memristor in about 3 sentences >>>> or less? >>> >>> If you can't get them, does it matter? I'll wait for the spec sheet. >> >> Next year. >> >>> >>> What I want to know on the theory level, is how it is a "fourth" element >>> of basic electronics that was predicted by theory? I've heard that >>> claim, but it was never explained in any detail at all. >> >> It's an 'element' because it cannot be constructed from the other >> 'elements'. > >I don't care about the label "element". I care about the idea that it >fills a gap in the general electronics theory as a "fourth element". >I've never found exactly what that is supposed to mean. > >Rick
There are 4 fundamental circuit variables: voltage, current, charge and flux. Current is defined as the time derivative of charge and (Farday's Law) voltage defined as the time derivative of flux. The fundamental 'elements' are defined by a relationship between two of the above 4 variables. A resistor is the relationship between---------- voltage and current. A capacitor is the relationship between--------- charge and voltage. An inductor is the relationship between--------- flux and current. However, if one assumes symmetry, there is a 'missing' 4'th between--------------- charge and flux. That is the theorized 'memsistor'. Draw an XY graph. X axis current <-----> charge Y axis voltage ^ flux v The 'elements' fit in the formed quadrants. Going clockwise you have in the lower left an inductor. Upper left is the resistor and upper right is the capacitor. The lower right is either 'missing' or a 'memsistor'. (view fixed font) voltage ^ resistor | capacitor | current <---------+------------> charge | inductor | ????? v flux I'll stick my neck out and say I'm not convinced because all the supposed 'memsistors' I've heard of depend on altering the physical structure of the device. In HP's, for example, ion migration is what alters the device's resistance. But in the commonly known 3 'elements' there is (ideally) no alteration of the device's physical structure and, indeed, such alteration would be a 'defect' or 'real world' deviation from the 'ideal' element. Examples would be heat altering the 'fundamental' resistance of a resistor (we don't call a thermistor a new 'element') or capacitor plates 'bending' from the attractive forces. I don't doubt that useful devices could be constructed nor do I doubt this 'phenomena' could be a significant 'real world' issue in the nanoscale (just as leakage is) but it strikes me as a transition from the 'electric' to 'physical' realm rather than a new 'element'. A transducer, for example, interacts with the 'physical' realm but we don't call a speaker a new 'element'. On the other hand, things get a bit fuzzy at the atomic level, so maybe, but, at any rate, that's the theory.
Reply by flipper November 16, 20122012-11-16
On Fri, 16 Nov 2012 15:47:49 -0800, John Larkin
<jlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:

>On Fri, 16 Nov 2012 22:46:20 +0000 (UTC), Cydrome Leader ><presence@MUNGEpanix.com> wrote: > >>In sci.electronics.basics John Larkin <jlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote: >>> On Fri, 16 Nov 2012 18:56:57 +0000 (UTC), Cydrome Leader >>> <presence@MUNGEpanix.com> wrote: >>> >>>>In sci.electronics.basics John Larkin <jlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote: >>>>> On Fri, 16 Nov 2012 00:23:18 +0000 (UTC), Cydrome Leader >>>>> <presence@MUNGEpanix.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>In sci.electronics.basics John Larkin <jlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote: >>>>>>> On Thu, 15 Nov 2012 18:40:09 -0500, rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>On 11/15/2012 5:00 PM, Cydrome Leader wrote: >>>>>>>>> In sci.electronics.basics Jim Thompson<To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@on-my-web-site.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> An interesting question came up on the LTspice List this morning >>>>>>>>>> concerning Spice modeling a ReRAM, a resistive element something like >>>>>>>>>> a Memristor, but "different" ;-) >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> The OP seemed over his head and couldn't quite vocalize how the ReRAM >>>>>>>>>> device behaves. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I tried surfing and ran into the hurdles that any real information is >>>>>>>>>> locked behind the IEEE fiasco. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> All other links seemed more like Popular Science reviews than facts. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Anyone know the V-I behavior of these device? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> speaking of, can anybody clearly explain a memristor in about 3 sentences >>>>>>>>> or less? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>If you can't get them, does it matter? I'll wait for the spec sheet. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>What I want to know on the theory level, is how it is a "fourth" element >>>>>>>>of basic electronics that was predicted by theory? I've heard that >>>>>>>>claim, but it was never explained in any detail at all. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Rick >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Google memristor Leon Chua >>>>>> >>>>>>doing that or reading any other story about them just makes them think I'm >>>>>>listening to some beggar with a sob story about how they need money to get >>>>>>a train ticket. None of it stacks up or makes any sense. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Chua's latest definition of memristor would include fuses, antifuses, >>>>> and anything that burns out when you run current through it. >>>> >>>>anybody interested in my room temperature superconducting cold fusion >>>>memristor technology? >>> >>> Only if it includes a global warming component, and some stem cells. >> >>It has that too, it uses fuzzy logic. > >Powered by a fuel cell.
Running on only water.
Reply by John Larkin November 16, 20122012-11-16
On Fri, 16 Nov 2012 22:46:20 +0000 (UTC), Cydrome Leader
<presence@MUNGEpanix.com> wrote:

>In sci.electronics.basics John Larkin <jlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote: >> On Fri, 16 Nov 2012 18:56:57 +0000 (UTC), Cydrome Leader >> <presence@MUNGEpanix.com> wrote: >> >>>In sci.electronics.basics John Larkin <jlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote: >>>> On Fri, 16 Nov 2012 00:23:18 +0000 (UTC), Cydrome Leader >>>> <presence@MUNGEpanix.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>>In sci.electronics.basics John Larkin <jlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote: >>>>>> On Thu, 15 Nov 2012 18:40:09 -0500, rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On 11/15/2012 5:00 PM, Cydrome Leader wrote: >>>>>>>> In sci.electronics.basics Jim Thompson<To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@on-my-web-site.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>> An interesting question came up on the LTspice List this morning >>>>>>>>> concerning Spice modeling a ReRAM, a resistive element something like >>>>>>>>> a Memristor, but "different" ;-) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The OP seemed over his head and couldn't quite vocalize how the ReRAM >>>>>>>>> device behaves. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I tried surfing and ran into the hurdles that any real information is >>>>>>>>> locked behind the IEEE fiasco. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> All other links seemed more like Popular Science reviews than facts. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Anyone know the V-I behavior of these device? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> speaking of, can anybody clearly explain a memristor in about 3 sentences >>>>>>>> or less? >>>>>>> >>>>>>>If you can't get them, does it matter? I'll wait for the spec sheet. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>What I want to know on the theory level, is how it is a "fourth" element >>>>>>>of basic electronics that was predicted by theory? I've heard that >>>>>>>claim, but it was never explained in any detail at all. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Rick >>>>>> >>>>>> Google memristor Leon Chua >>>>> >>>>>doing that or reading any other story about them just makes them think I'm >>>>>listening to some beggar with a sob story about how they need money to get >>>>>a train ticket. None of it stacks up or makes any sense. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Chua's latest definition of memristor would include fuses, antifuses, >>>> and anything that burns out when you run current through it. >>> >>>anybody interested in my room temperature superconducting cold fusion >>>memristor technology? >> >> Only if it includes a global warming component, and some stem cells. > >It has that too, it uses fuzzy logic.
Powered by a fuel cell. -- John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc jlarkin at highlandtechnology dot com http://www.highlandtechnology.com Precision electronic instrumentation Picosecond-resolution Digital Delay and Pulse generators Custom laser drivers and controllers Photonics and fiberoptic TTL data links VME thermocouple, LVDT, synchro acquisition and simulation
Reply by Cydrome Leader November 16, 20122012-11-16
In sci.electronics.basics Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@on-my-web-site.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Nov 2012 14:35:39 -0700, Jim Thompson > <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote: > >>An interesting question came up on the LTspice List this morning >>concerning Spice modeling a ReRAM, a resistive element something like >>a Memristor, but "different" ;-) >> >>The OP seemed over his head and couldn't quite vocalize how the ReRAM >>device behaves. >> >>I tried surfing and ran into the hurdles that any real information is >>locked behind the IEEE fiasco. >> >>All other links seemed more like Popular Science reviews than facts. >> >>Anyone know the V-I behavior of these device? >> >>Thanks! >> >> ...Jim Thompson > > Lots of worthless PhD stuff out there. Weaned to engineering level, I > found people addressing modeling... > > http://krex.k-state.edu/dspace/bitstream/2097/4605/3/KetakiKerur2010.pdf
exciting stuff there, can't wait to see the meminductor and memcapacitor. I call shots on the memsuperconductor.
> http://www.electro-tech-online.com/custompdfs/2009/08/09_02_210_214-4.pdf > http://www.roznovskastredni.cz/biolek/articles/eds10_1.pdf > http://arxiv.org/abs/1002.3210 > http://www.cnr.berkeley.edu/~goster/pdfs/Memristor.pdf > > ...Jim Thompson
Reply by Cydrome Leader November 16, 20122012-11-16
In sci.electronics.basics John Larkin <jlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Nov 2012 18:56:57 +0000 (UTC), Cydrome Leader > <presence@MUNGEpanix.com> wrote: > >>In sci.electronics.basics John Larkin <jlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote: >>> On Fri, 16 Nov 2012 00:23:18 +0000 (UTC), Cydrome Leader >>> <presence@MUNGEpanix.com> wrote: >>> >>>>In sci.electronics.basics John Larkin <jlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote: >>>>> On Thu, 15 Nov 2012 18:40:09 -0500, rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On 11/15/2012 5:00 PM, Cydrome Leader wrote: >>>>>>> In sci.electronics.basics Jim Thompson<To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@on-my-web-site.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> An interesting question came up on the LTspice List this morning >>>>>>>> concerning Spice modeling a ReRAM, a resistive element something like >>>>>>>> a Memristor, but "different" ;-) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The OP seemed over his head and couldn't quite vocalize how the ReRAM >>>>>>>> device behaves. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I tried surfing and ran into the hurdles that any real information is >>>>>>>> locked behind the IEEE fiasco. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> All other links seemed more like Popular Science reviews than facts. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Anyone know the V-I behavior of these device? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> speaking of, can anybody clearly explain a memristor in about 3 sentences >>>>>>> or less? >>>>>> >>>>>>If you can't get them, does it matter? I'll wait for the spec sheet. >>>>>> >>>>>>What I want to know on the theory level, is how it is a "fourth" element >>>>>>of basic electronics that was predicted by theory? I've heard that >>>>>>claim, but it was never explained in any detail at all. >>>>>> >>>>>>Rick >>>>> >>>>> Google memristor Leon Chua >>>> >>>>doing that or reading any other story about them just makes them think I'm >>>>listening to some beggar with a sob story about how they need money to get >>>>a train ticket. None of it stacks up or makes any sense. >>>> >>> >>> Chua's latest definition of memristor would include fuses, antifuses, >>> and anything that burns out when you run current through it. >> >>anybody interested in my room temperature superconducting cold fusion >>memristor technology? > > Only if it includes a global warming component, and some stem cells.
It has that too, it uses fuzzy logic.