

Memristors combine memory, logics set in one device - glymor
http://arstechnica.com/science/news/2010/04/complete-logic-set-performed-using-memristors.ars

======
sketerpot
More exciting than this: they've figure out how to use a separate layer of
memristors grown on top of conventional silicon logic as a reconfigurable
routing layer for FPGAs. This can improve their density, power consumption,
and speed.

[http://nextbigfuture.com/2010/04/memristor-cmos-hybrid-
using...](http://nextbigfuture.com/2010/04/memristor-cmos-hybrid-using-fpga-
like.html)

~~~
Aron
Another decent use, embodying synaptic weights in neuromorphic engineering. A
decent description: <http://www.scidacreview.org/0804/html/hardware.html>

I think eventually, if we want software that performs like a human mind, we'll
want hardware that performs like a brain. That's probably the easiest way to
get to a machine that can match us while consuming 30 Watts.

------
nopassrecover
Pretty cool but it seems this isn't new research (there are many references
online older than April for memristors and NAND gates).

Can anyone who has access to the actual article explain in a little more
layman terms how the ciruit works? I get we have 3 memristors (one of which is
always false) and 1 resistor but I don't know enough electronics to understand
how they come together and produce a NAND gate that also maintains state.

~~~
jonsen
I do not have access to the original article. But as I interpret this a single
memristor acts as a memory device. A memristor has inherent memory. Also
combination of memristors may perform logical operations. Thereby you may in
theory build computational circuitry from memristors alone. One basic device
do it all. That's the point, as I read it.

Usual basic transistor devices are NAND functions

    
    
      L L | H
      L H | H
      H L | H
      H H | L
    

and you need two NANDs for a basic memory cell.

You need only one memristor for a basic memory cell.

Memristors may be combined into IMP functions

    
    
      L L | H
      L H | H
      H L | L
      H H | H
    

IMPs together with NOTs (the 'false' memristor mentioned?) can serve as a
basis for everything just as NANDs can.

As I said, this is just my understanding from the post.

------
TheSOB88
This is a tech that was built a long time ago and still hasn't found a use.
Also, my boss thinks they're the next computer revolution. This is a man who
believes that the asteroid Apophis will probably hit the earth in 2036 and
that the Sun is part of a binary system with another star within the Oort
cloud. So, I'm pretty sure Memristors are not going anywhere.

~~~
glymor
2008 was the first memristor; it was only theoretical before that. It says
this in the first sentence of the article.

I can't tell if bringing up your boss is satire, it does strike me that way.
But if it's not, it's not relevant.

~~~
TheSOB88
OK, I guess I was wrong about the dates. I must have glossed over that
sentence.

The point about my boss is that the things he gets excited about, while they
do sort of make sense, have been proven untrue by further science. A
correlation test, sure. But still a useful test.

Further, memristors can do logic and memory, but we have things that can do
those. They show no advantages over CPU/RAM. I think the only interesting part
is the analogy to neurons, but neurons are able to form connections to other
neurons and have other machinery as well. Memristors are wholly unimpressive
to me.

~~~
ramidarigaz
The _big_ thing about memristors is that they are stable. Think ram that
doesn't go blank when you turn the computer off. The first application that
comes to mind is basically save-states. You could just shut your computer off,
and when you turn it back on, it would resume from where it left off.

Of course, the memristors would have to become much, much faster.

The way I see it, memristors _could_ eventually displace hard-drives, and
unify computer memory.

