1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

News Noise cancellation tech quadruples optical bandwidth

Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by Gareth Halfacree, 28 May 2013.

  1. Gareth Halfacree

    Gareth Halfacree WIIGII! Staff Administrator Super Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    4 Dec 2007
    Posts:
    10,600
    Likes Received:
    807
  2. SchizoFrog

    SchizoFrog New Member

    Joined:
    5 May 2009
    Posts:
    1,574
    Likes Received:
    8
    While I am all for advancements in technology, this is one area I am fed up with. We don't need significantly faster broadband, we need a significantly better network to provide what we already have to more people. The usual argument is that people in rural areas can not get high broadband speeds or even a regular connection but I think the problem is far worse than that. People seem to take it for granted that those that live in built up areas can access the full potential of services and that just is not the truth, there are vast areas of London, the capital city I'll remind you that have no fibre networks laid at all. I live near Victoria Park in the East End which is about 1.5 miles from the City's financial square mile and there is not fibre near me even if I wanted it. I live less than half a mile from a hub and the broadband speed I get is about 6-8Mb and even BT's high speed service is quoted to only give me around 15Mb (while costing an extra £30 a month).

    So while this is good for future main lines to handle the business end of data transfer for the providers only those who already have more than enough speed wil see any benefit and those struggling will be left further behind.
     
  3. Gareth Halfacree

    Gareth Halfacree WIIGII! Staff Administrator Super Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    4 Dec 2007
    Posts:
    10,600
    Likes Received:
    807
    This isn't about faster broadband; this is about faster backbones. If you'd care to re-read the article, you'll see that the team is targeting undersea cables - the links that connect the US to the UK, the UK to mainland Europe, Australia to everywhere else and so forth. They are the absolute heart of the internet, and they're struggling.

    As increasing numbers of consumers get online, these links become saturated. Add in the fact that we're now dealing with quantities of data that would have been unthinkable a decade ago, as everyone with a smartphone suddenly starts streaming 1080p movies, and the problem becomes massive. The team's aim is to create a drop-in solution that you stick at either end of an undersea intercontinental fibre-optic cable and see an immediately quadrupling of available bandwidth - meaning you can fit four times as many people onto the network as you could before.

    In other words: this area is exactly the area you're not fed up with; the team is looking to create a 'significantly better network to provide what we already have to more people.' Without an upgraded backbone, higher deployment of last-mile services will just cripple the 'net. I don't know about you, but I don't particularly want to go back to the dark old days of having to buy a chunk of international data when I want to browse US websites...
     
  4. xrain

    xrain Member

    Joined:
    26 Jan 2004
    Posts:
    403
    Likes Received:
    21
    I wonder if this requires Polarization Maintaining fiber, or if it still works with standard single/multi-mode fiber.
     
  5. liratheal

    liratheal Sharing is Caring

    Joined:
    20 Nov 2005
    Posts:
    9,675
    Likes Received:
    427
    God I love technology.
     
  6. Jerz

    Jerz New Member

    Joined:
    6 Sep 2006
    Posts:
    18
    Likes Received:
    0
    Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this very similar to how noise is cancelled on copper Ethernet connects? The color pairs?
     
  7. Gareth Halfacree

    Gareth Halfacree WIIGII! Staff Administrator Super Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    4 Dec 2007
    Posts:
    10,600
    Likes Received:
    807
    Good question, and one I'm afraid I can't answer. Well, short of blowing £22 on a PDF of the paper itself, of course...
    Not really. That's known as twisted pair, and is used to reduce near-end cross-talk and electromagnetic interference - not really something optical cables have a problem with. They're both methods of reducing noise, of course, but very different in operation - there's no overlaying of inverse waveforms with twisted pair, and there's no EMI concerns with optical fibre.
     
  8. Phil Rhodes

    Phil Rhodes Hypernobber

    Joined:
    27 Jul 2006
    Posts:
    1,415
    Likes Received:
    10
    Strictly speaking, Ethernet (and USB, and firewire, and PCIe, etc, etc) does use differential signalling over its twisted pairs, which appears to be what they're talking about here. Or at least what you're talking about here. Are you sure that's actually what they're talking about here?
     
  9. Gareth Halfacree

    Gareth Halfacree WIIGII! Staff Administrator Super Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    4 Dec 2007
    Posts:
    10,600
    Likes Received:
    807
    I know as much as I have written in the article; if you'd like more details, feel free to buy the paper for £22. Let me know what you find - I'd be interested in the finer points of the team's work.

    EDIT: Actually, it turns out you can rent the paper for $2.99 for 48 hours, which is a better deal. Alternatively, anyone who works or studies at a university with ReadCube access can read it for free.

    FURTHER EDIT: Plus, differential signalling is specifically about reducing EMI and crosstalk in electrical signalling. One thing an optical cable is not is electrical. The team's work - to my understanding - is not differential signalling, but shares similarities (using two signals to detect and cancel out unwanted noise). Differential signalling uses the difference between the wires to communicate information, as the linked Wikipedia article explains; in the team's work on optical transmission, the two waves (analogous, you seem to be suggesting, to the paired wires in electrical differential signalling applications) are identical apart from being the inverse of each other. The data is transmitted as part of the wave, not as the difference between the two waves: if you received a single one of the two waves without interference, you would have all the data - something that is not the case with differential signalling, which requires that you receive (or transmit) on both wires in order for any data to make it intact.
     
    Last edited: 28 May 2013
  10. Phil Rhodes

    Phil Rhodes Hypernobber

    Joined:
    27 Jul 2006
    Posts:
    1,415
    Likes Received:
    10
    From the first page that's available free, what they're proposing is actually nothing to do with differential signalling, but they're using some fairly deep jargon to describe what might actually be reasonably simple quadrature techniques.

    Although you could do differential, I suppose, with multispectral optical signals down a single fibre. I have no idea if that'd be in any way useful.
     
  11. Shirty

    Shirty Time travelling rogue Super Moderator

    Joined:
    18 Apr 1982
    Posts:
    11,841
    Likes Received:
    1,327
    Sexy innit?
     
  12. play_boy_2000

    play_boy_2000 It was funny when I was 12

    Joined:
    25 Mar 2004
    Posts:
    1,393
    Likes Received:
    37
    This doesn't make any sense. It sounds like it is an enhancement to error correction, and may allow longer distances between optical regenerators, but I totally fail to see how it could increase transmission capacity. I imagine that the 400gbit/s link speed was only mentioned to show that it works on a production DWDM network.
     
  13. -Xp-

    -Xp- Member

    Joined:
    23 Jul 2003
    Posts:
    912
    Likes Received:
    20
    This sounds exactly like Common Mode Rejection, which has been used in professional audio equipment for decades. Why has it taken so long to apply this principle?
     
  14. Jerz

    Jerz New Member

    Joined:
    6 Sep 2006
    Posts:
    18
    Likes Received:
    0
    You're right, I overlooked that fundamental difference of the two mediums, electrical and optical. What I failed to get from the article snip-it link is what this optical "interference" is actually from? My, albeit limited, understanding of fiber optics is that the limiting factor in transmissions over distance is attenuation and optical dispersion/refraction along the cable. Wouldn't two slightly different frequencies or wave lengths travel slightly different paths in the cable and therefor get affected slightly differently?
     
  15. ch424

    ch424 Design Warrior

    Joined:
    26 May 2004
    Posts:
    3,112
    Likes Received:
    41
    In high-speed serial stuff (SATA, PCIe, USB, DVI...), inverse waveforms is exactly what you're doing. The two signals are 180 degrees out of phase.

    Yup, this is the difference - but I'll explain why further down...

    Not quite. Differential pairs are just there to increase your signal-to-noise ratio. If you just had one of the wires it would still work a lot of the time, as long as you had a way of maintaining DC balance. Adding the second, inverted, signal just helps reduce crosstalk (net field emitted is smaller) and gives you common-mode EMI rejection, allowing you to turn the data rate up.

    If you reduce signal losses, your SNR increases, so your channel capacity increases. Shannon-Hartley_theorem

    It is basically common-mode rejection. You can get common-mode rejection pretty much for free in differential signalling, but only because differential signals are all transmitted as baseband. USB, SATA, PCIe and DVI are just serialised versions of the data, with a bit of scrambling (either to increase the number of edges to help clock recovery or reduce the number of edges to save bandwidth) and sometimes some error detection/correction, but the transmitted bit rate is still about the same as the signal frequency. In optical stuff, you're not transmitting at baseband. The symbol rate is Mbit or Gbit/sec, but the frequency of the light is in THz. You therefore can't do a simple inversion to get rid of common-mode noise.

    So, because you can't easily control the phase of your optical carrier, these people have found the next-best equivalent, which is to use the phase conjugate of the optical waves. They then found that it does work just the same as common-mode rejection once it gets to the far end. The reason that it's not been done before is presumably because it's much higher frequency and therefore quite hard to produce phase-conjugate signals, then re-combine them accurately.
     
  16. Bonedoctor

    Bonedoctor Have you turned it off & on again?

    Joined:
    9 Jan 2011
    Posts:
    24
    Likes Received:
    0
    What he said... lol.
     
  17. Gareth Halfacree

    Gareth Halfacree WIIGII! Staff Administrator Super Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    4 Dec 2007
    Posts:
    10,600
    Likes Received:
    807
    I wasn't aware of that - thanks for the clarification!
     
  18. SchizoFrog

    SchizoFrog New Member

    Joined:
    5 May 2009
    Posts:
    1,574
    Likes Received:
    8
    Gareth, my final paragraph did say that it was better for the main lines... I still find it a joke that you can get up to 100MB from cable providers while others struggle to get bandwidth fast enough to stream the BBC iPlayer or YouTube properly. As for Smartphones, even many 3G services out perform many household connections. So my point was while this may help with the ever overloaded mainlines, when it comes to home users those who have will get more and those who don't, won't.
     

Share This Page