In fact, the example of the computers in the lunar landers isn't a very good one to illustrate the point I am trying to make. While the computing power available is very small compared to devices today, it was actually quite advanced for the time. So why would I mention an example that doesn't fit with the norm? There are a couple reasons why technology in the early days of space exploration was more up-to-date than it is today. The first is easy: We were engaged in the "space race" with the Soviet Union. NASA had an enormous budget compared to today, and was given the directive to take whatever steps (and often, risks) were necessary to win the race.
![]() |
Core rope memory |
![]() |
A Solar Flare |
Newer components are a different story. As you may have noticed above, the current generation of computer parts have die features on the scale of a few atoms. This means that it doesn't take very much energy to flip a digital bit from 1 to 0 or back. That's good when you need to power a CPU with over a billion transistors but very bad when you're being bombarded by high-energy radiation. Then again, I'm not sure that's ever a good situation to find yourself in... When a bit flips in a memory chip (usually causing a crash or data corruption), that's called a soft error.
Clearly, electronics on spacecraft must be different than personal computers to function in their environment. Any component that leaves Earth's protective magnetic bubble must be radiation hardened. There are many techniques for accomplishing this, but they fall into 2 general categories.
