Bibek Paudel points out a story about the latest step forward in the development of nano-scale circuits. Researchers from the University of Manchester have created some of the smallest transistors ever, measuring only one atom by 10 atoms. The transistors are made out of graphene, which has the potential to replace silicon in the never-ending hunt for smaller computer technology. From NewScientist:
"There are other kinds of prototype transistors in this size range. But they usually need supercooling using liquid gas, says Novoselov. The new graphene devices work at room temperature. Such prototypes are typically made by building one atom at a time, or wiring up individual molecules. Those approaches are complex and impractical, Novoselov says. By contrast, the graphene transistors were made in the same way that silicon devices are, by etching them out of larger pieces of material. 'That's their big advantage,' he says."
'Liquid Gas' is sometimes used to describe a substance that is under pressure and a liquid, but is typically a gas under normal atmospheric conditions (1 atm, 25C or something similar)
You will often see it in reference to Natural Gas, as 'Liquid Natural Gas' Since the term 'Natural Gas' is more of a formal name, than any descriptor of a chemical and its state.
I know you've been modded funny, but some people are probably wondering - when talking about transistors, "length" is how far electrons have to travel through the transistor, and "width" is the other dimension (effectively how many electrons can travel through the transistor at the same time). Resistance is proportional to length and inversely proportional to width.
I submitted this in story form [slashdot.org] yesterday but also in recent news, Glasgow scientists have made a tiny switch that would make huge leaps in memory storage:
Scientists at the University of Galsgow have claimed a breakthrough that enables them to store 500,000 gigabytes squeezed onto one square inch [nanowerk.com] making way for some hilarious storage for things like cell phones and iPods. The scientists working on it divulged, "We have been able to assemble a functional nanocluster that incorporates two electron donating groups, and position them precisely 0.32 nm apart so that they can form a totally new type of molecular switching device. This is unprecedented and provides a route to produce new a molecule-based switch that can be easily manipulated using an electric field. By taking these nano-scale clusters, just a nanometer in size, and placing them onto a gold or carbon, we can control the switching ability. Not only is this a new type of switchable molecule, but by grafting the molecule on to metal (gold) or carbon means that we can potentially bridge the gap between traditional semiconductor devices and components for nanoscale plastic electronics. The key advantage of the molecule sized switch is information / transistor density in traditional semi-conductors. Molecule sized switches would lead to increasing data storage to say 4 Petabits per square inch. This breakthrough shows conceptually that this is possible (showing the bulk effect) but we are yet to solve the fabrication and addressing problems. The fact these switches work on carbon means that they could be embedded in plastic chips so silicon is not needed and the system becomes much more flexible both physically and technologically. Since these switches are little balls of metal oxide they are made of similar stuff to normal semi-conductors but are much easier to manipulate as discrete molecular units." You can read more about it in Nature's Nanotechnology publication [nature.com]. In related news, researchers have claimed to harness terahertz radiation using circuits [telegraph.co.uk].
Another advancement in nanotechnology, thought I would post it here since it's probably not going to be used.
we are yet to solve the fabrication and addressing problems
So, unfortunately, this breakthrough does not enable them to store 500 terabytes in one square inch.
Making things ridiculously small is a good first step, but without the ability to fabricate huge numbers of them side by side in an organized and connected fashion, it remains just that.
I'm encouraged that lots is being done with carbon; it seems this area is receiving more and more focus, which will hopefully lead to solving some of the fabrication i
Seriously, sometimes I feel the line between science and magic gets fuzzy. A transistor one atom by 10 atoms? That's on such a small scale that is so hard to comprehend that it'd almost be easier to hand-wave it and just say "it's magic."
Worst. Graphene being 1 atom wide? Graphene [wikipedia.org] is a planar sheet with a honeycomb lattice. I fail to see how you can make a 1 atom wide honeycomb lattice. Unless what they mean is 1 atom thick, but then this is a 1 atom X 10 atoms X 10^6 atoms transistor. This isn't quite the same thing.
This is just in: "Future Computers Powered By Magic" According to Mark Erlin of the University of Oxford future computers will be powered by magic. He thinks that we are now close on the threshold to what they call in technical terms "transphysical barrier to a multi-folded dimension" which is a complicated way to say "magic". "This is an amazing dicovery! This is probably the best thing since sliced bread!" says Erlin. "We have discovered this magic by studying very small transistors, no more than a few ato
That's on such a small scale that is so hard to comprehend that it'd almost be easier to hand-wave it and just say "it's magic."
Yeah, I probably created 150 of these before breakfast, but I just don't have the equipment to observe it.
A quick search said nothing about power consumption. If these transistors are really small, but leaky as hell with subthreshold [wikipedia.org] leakage then what's the point? The chip might have to manage heat/power in such a way that there's a large portion of the die dedicated to it.
This technology (and other similar developments using graphene/carbon) seems very promising. And I'm glad they could solve one part of the fabrication process using steps that are already in use (etching).
However, there remains another issue when using these devices to construct circuits: patterning. Right now, that's generally done with lithography, and though several ideas are being worked on, we simply cannot yet use lithography to pattern devices anywhere near this small.
Don't get me wrong: it's good that such technology is out there waiting for us once the patterning tech catches up. But until that happens, this stuff will likely remain in the lab.
At this scale, the transistor could very easily be destroyed by a cosmic ray. Interesting experiment, but I have a hard time believing that this development can find many practical applications.
In Eric Drexler's [wikipedia.org] book "Nanosystems [amazon.com], he carefully analyzes questions like this regarding the possible failure modes of atomically-precise devices. The book goes through the math in detail. The short answer is that even with fairly pessimistic assumptions (e.g. that a single-atom defect created during manufacture or afterwards by cosmic rays or other radiation will completely destroy a particular functional sub-unit), you can still design highly robust devices.
The most obvious way is to build in some level of redundancy. Naively you can have dozens of redundant sub-units, and use things like "majority voting" to pull out the signal from the noise. In practice there are more elegant ways to do this (e.g. error correction). Many modern chips do indeed have some redundancies so that even with manufacturing defects, the chip still runs (perhaps with some reduction in functionality). Organizing the chip so that failsafe-checks occur during operation is certainly possible.
Again, check out the book for more details. The point is that these questions have been thought about and they are not insurmountable. The rate of defects generated from spurious environmental damage (e.g. cosmic rays) is low enough that it can be overcome with fairly straightforward engineering.
I applaud the attempt at a car analogy, but the hurdles to a practical electric car extend way beyond technology and even economics - it's almost all politics.
Uh, no, the challenges to a *feasible* electric car are mostly technological. And no, boil-the-ocean schemes along the lines of "if only the government will mandate electric refill stations along the freeway" are not a political barrier, except in the minds of some activists. Any solution that requires massive up-front investments is a poor engineering solution.
The real problem with an electric car is that *storing* electricity is a hard problem. And unless your electric car runs on rails, you will need to store electricity.
Incidentally, cars aren't the only ones with this problems -- laptops and mobile phones have exactly the same problem.
Now, recent advances in nanotech will help batteries improve, and we may even see practical capacitor-type storage devices. And when we get to that point, the electric car will be a reality.
I suppose it all depends on what your definition of "feasible" is. How far do you drive in a single day? Depending on who you talk to, the average American commutes to and from work for an average distance of about 35 miles. An electric car with a 100 mile range between charges is far from infeasible. In fact, it was done [wikipedia.org] but the project was scrapped under somewhat suspicious circumstances.
Something that gets you to and from the store and wherever you work is my definition of practical, and that level of pe
DC Transformers can't exist because transformers rely on the principle of electromagnetic induction, which requires a constantly changing magnetic field, which is a property DC does not exhibit by virtue of being constant.
Step-up DC transformers would require an inverter (to convert to AC), followed by an AC transformer, followed a full-wave rectifier (to convert back to DC). Want to calculate the minimum efficiency lost on each step? Yeah, me neither.
A little extra time taken writing the program isn't much of a price to pay for the hours and hours of processor time and RAM/HD space saved by people using the application either..
The ones paying the developers ten times more than a better CPU, an extra GB of memory, and an extra hundred GB of disk space would cost might disagree with that.
well, for the cases where performance matters (games, 3D rendering, CAD, simulation, etc), all it would take in that case is for one company to spend the extra money, and they will reap the benefits in better sales. Then the others would have no choice but to follow suit. Hopefully those type of companies actually do put some thought into performance of their code anyway.
Having said that, I do agree that it's good to try and keep the purpose of code as clear as possible through sensible variable names an
Orientation? (Score:4, Funny)
How do you know it's one atom long and ten wide? maybe it's ten atoms long and one wide?
Re:Orientation? (Score:5, Informative)
"The smallest dots that worked as transistors contained as few as five carbon rings - around 10 atoms or 1nm wide."
Somehow that became 10 atoms wide and 1 atom long in the summary.
I know, I know - this sort of thing would never happen on Slashdot...
Parent
Wait... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Wait... (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Wait... (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Further, what exactly is a "liquid gas"?
Re:Wait... (Score:5, Informative)
You will often see it in reference to Natural Gas, as 'Liquid Natural Gas' Since the term 'Natural Gas' is more of a formal name, than any descriptor of a chemical and its state.
Parent
Re:Wait... (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
U of Glasgow Made Similar Nano-Switch Progress (Score:5, Insightful)
Scientists at the University of Galsgow have claimed a breakthrough that enables them to store 500,000 gigabytes squeezed onto one square inch [nanowerk.com] making way for some hilarious storage for things like cell phones and iPods. The scientists working on it divulged, "We have been able to assemble a functional nanocluster that incorporates two electron donating groups, and position them precisely 0.32 nm apart so that they can form a totally new type of molecular switching device. This is unprecedented and provides a route to produce new a molecule-based switch that can be easily manipulated using an electric field. By taking these nano-scale clusters, just a nanometer in size, and placing them onto a gold or carbon, we can control the switching ability. Not only is this a new type of switchable molecule, but by grafting the molecule on to metal (gold) or carbon means that we can potentially bridge the gap between traditional semiconductor devices and components for nanoscale plastic electronics. The key advantage of the molecule sized switch is information / transistor density in traditional semi-conductors. Molecule sized switches would lead to increasing data storage to say 4 Petabits per square inch. This breakthrough shows conceptually that this is possible (showing the bulk effect) but we are yet to solve the fabrication and addressing problems. The fact these switches work on carbon means that they could be embedded in plastic chips so silicon is not needed and the system becomes much more flexible both physically and technologically. Since these switches are little balls of metal oxide they are made of similar stuff to normal semi-conductors but are much easier to manipulate as discrete molecular units." You can read more about it in Nature's Nanotechnology publication [nature.com]. In related news, researchers have claimed to harness terahertz radiation using circuits [telegraph.co.uk].
Another advancement in nanotechnology, thought I would post it here since it's probably not going to be used.
Re: (Score:2)
So, unfortunately, this breakthrough does not enable them to store 500 terabytes in one square inch.
Making things ridiculously small is a good first step, but without the ability to fabricate huge numbers of them side by side in an organized and connected fashion, it remains just that.
I'm encouraged that lots is being done with carbon; it seems this area is receiving more and more focus, which will hopefully lead to solving some of the fabrication i
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Obligatory Isaac Asimov quote:
"which has the potential to replace silicon" (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Science or Magic (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Science or Magic (Score:4, Funny)
Parent
Re:Science or Magic (Score:4, Interesting)
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
According to Mark Erlin of the University of Oxford future computers will be powered by magic. He thinks that we are now close on the threshold to what they call in technical terms "transphysical barrier to a multi-folded dimension" which is a complicated way to say "magic". "This is an amazing dicovery! This is probably the best thing since sliced bread!" says Erlin. "We have discovered this magic by studying very small transistors, no more than a few ato
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, I probably created 150 of these before breakfast, but I just don't have the equipment to observe it.
Re: (Score:2)
The recently-deceased Arthur C. Clarke.
Old news (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Old news (Score:5, Funny)
You reject our generous offer? Very well, we will mobilize our armies for WAR. You will pay for your foolish pride!
Parent
Power consumption? (Score:2)
A quick search said nothing about power consumption. If these transistors are really small, but leaky as hell with subthreshold [wikipedia.org] leakage then what's the point? The chip might have to manage heat/power in such a way that there's a large portion of the die dedicated to it.
Also, what "atom" size are we talking about here?
Re:Power consumption? (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Liquid gas? (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
alas (Score:3, Insightful)
Etching is good, but it's only one part (Score:3, Insightful)
However, there remains another issue when using these devices to construct circuits: patterning. Right now, that's generally done with lithography, and though several ideas are being worked on, we simply cannot yet use lithography to pattern devices anywhere near this small.
Don't get me wrong: it's good that such technology is out there waiting for us once the patterning tech catches up. But until that happens, this stuff will likely remain in the lab.
The really impressive thing (Score:2)
Of course, someday they'll find a material where a single atom is, like, an inch wide, and then we won't be impressed by atoms anymore...
There's such a thing as too small. (Score:5, Insightful)
-jcr
Re: (Score:2)
Re:There's such a thing as too small. (Score:4, Interesting)
The most obvious way is to build in some level of redundancy. Naively you can have dozens of redundant sub-units, and use things like "majority voting" to pull out the signal from the noise. In practice there are more elegant ways to do this (e.g. error correction). Many modern chips do indeed have some redundancies so that even with manufacturing defects, the chip still runs (perhaps with some reduction in functionality). Organizing the chip so that failsafe-checks occur during operation is certainly possible.
Again, check out the book for more details. The point is that these questions have been thought about and they are not insurmountable. The rate of defects generated from spurious environmental damage (e.g. cosmic rays) is low enough that it can be overcome with fairly straightforward engineering.
Parent
Proper terminology (Score:3, Funny)
They're in the UK, so I believe the proper term for them is "boffins".
meh (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
=Smidge=
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Patents, perhaps?
Re:Cool, but call me when it is cheap. (Score:5, Insightful)
The real problem with an electric car is that *storing* electricity is a hard problem. And unless your electric car runs on rails, you will need to store electricity.
Incidentally, cars aren't the only ones with this problems -- laptops and mobile phones have exactly the same problem.
Now, recent advances in nanotech will help batteries improve, and we may even see practical capacitor-type storage devices. And when we get to that point, the electric car will be a reality.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Something that gets you to and from the store and wherever you work is my definition of practical, and that level of pe
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I'm guessing the mobs will only turn to green energy when the government legalises marijuana and electric VW camper vans.
Re:think step up transformers (Score:4, Insightful)
Step-up DC transformers would require an inverter (to convert to AC), followed by an AC transformer, followed a full-wave rectifier (to convert back to DC). Want to calculate the minimum efficiency lost on each step? Yeah, me neither.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Having said that, I do agree that it's good to try and keep the purpose of code as clear as possible through sensible variable names an
Re:1 hidden comment (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
From TFS (Score:2)
If you want something to worry about, worry about power usage and heat dissapation.