This was published right before people started experimentally validating the Landauer limit. I am not sure why it hasn’t been taken down at some point as the evidence has accumulated:

2012 — Bérut et al. (Nature) — They used a single colloidal silica bead (2 μm) trapped in a double-well potential created by a focused laser. By modulating the potential to erase the bit, they showed that mean dissipated heat saturates at the Landauer bound (k_B T ln 2) in the limit of long erasure cycles.

https://www.physics.rutgers.edu/~morozov/677_f2017/Physics_6...

2014 — Jun et al. (PRL) — A higher-precision follow-up using 200 nm fluorescent particles in an electrokinetic feedback trap. Same basic physics, tighter error bars.

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4795654/

2016 — Hong et al. (Science Advances) — First test on actual digital memory hardware. Used arrays of sub-100 nm single-domain Permalloy nanomagnets and measured energy dissipation during adiabatic bit erasure using magneto-optic Kerr effect magnetometry. The measured dissipation was consistent with the Landauer limit within 2 standard deviations using the actual the basis of magnetic storage.

https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.1501492

2018 — Guadenzi et al. (Nature Physics) — Opens with:

The erasure of a bit of information is an irreversible operation whose minimal entropy production of kB ln 2 is set by the Landauer limit1. This limit has been verified in a variety of classical systems, including particles in traps2,3 and nanomagnets4. Here, we extend it to the quantum realm by using a crystal of molecular nanomagnets as a quantum spin memory and showing that its erasure is still governed by the Landauer principle.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41567-018-0070-7

The Landauer limit is not conjecture.

▲

griffzhowl 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Is the focus on the erasure of a bit, rather than writing a bit, just conventional or is there a significant difference between the processes?

▲

ogogmad 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I'm not sure, but isn't 2 standard deviations a bit low? Especially so for something that can be done in a lab. It seems that 2 SD is the minimum threshold for getting published. Can we be sure that these are properly reviewed?

	▲	spocchio 4 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Could it be possible that you confused the number of standard deviations one needs to falsify something? For instance, if two things are different we may want to be as many SD as we can apart. Here, on the other hand, the data agree _within_ 2S D.
	▲	svnt 2 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		That was the limit of just one experimental approach that was peer reviewed and published in a major journal. As you can see there are many experiments validating the limit and none invalidating it. The reality is that the Landauer limit is vanishingly small. I would encourage you to review the experiment methodology and see if you can come up with better, fundable methods.