Intel Announces Laser Breakthrough

AdmiralWeirdbeard writes "Intel has just announced a breakthrough in laser technology allowing a continuous laser wave on a silicon chip. Apparently they devised a method to sap the interfering field of electrons previously generated in silicon by the lasers. Intel says that hardware exploiting the advance might begin appearing at the end of the decade."

Comments

Correct Units?

[FalconZero]

The (first) article states the waveguide is 1.5x1.55micrometers and 48millimeters in length, Has it got the units right on that one?
That 48mm seems awfully big (~38,000 times bigger than the other dimensions). IANAEE, so maybe its correct, but their going to refine it, or maybe its not linear.
If it is 48mm though, thats one hell of a long die, unless Intel are going to start making REALLY BIG chips.

Re:Correct Units?

[Anonymous Coward]

The (first) article states the waveguide is 1.5x1.55micrometers and 48millimeters in length, Has it got the units right on that one?

No, those units look right. If you really read the first article, then you would have seen the picture of the die.

Re:Correct Units?

[k98sven]

The (first) article states the waveguide is 1.5x1.55micrometers and 48millimeters in length, Has it got the units right on that one?

Yes. The Nature article the guys published (20 Jan, vol 433, p292) on this says "4.8 cm".

IANAEE, so maybe its correct, but their going to refine it, or maybe its not linear.

Yes, of course they're going to develop this further. This is the first time they've achived continous-wave laser gain in silicon, obviously the next step is to increase it.
(A smaller cavity requires larger gain)

No it's not linear, the cavity is S-shaped.

Re:Correct Units?

[CaptTailor]

They had another bit wrong too. Today's long haul transport lasers go up to 40Gig. Not too cheap either. A 40G transponder from Ciena will run you $75,000

Re:Correct Units?

[pclminion]

That 48mm seems awfully big

It has to be, for efficiency purposes.

The reason laser light is coherent is because it travels an enormous distance before being emitted. This gives the individuals waves time to become coherent. Normally, this "enormous distance" is implemented by having the light bounce back and forth between two mirrors a large number of times. However, every time the light hits a mirror you lose a bit of energy. So, if the cavity is short, you must have a higher gain in order to get the required energy, because the laser has to make more reflections in order to travel the required distance to become coherent.

Re:Correct Units?

[Anonymous Coward]

The CHIP is 16mmx16mm, the waveguide built into the chip is "folded" to fit 1.5x1.55x48000 micrometers.

Bet it you look at a road map of any city, you will find that the sum of the length of all the lines on the page is greater then the any of lengths of the edges of the map, too.

But I have a more fundamental question, one which I have not been able to determine in spite of having read the cited articles (Yes, we A.C.s CAN read the fine articles on occasion):

WHAT IS THE WAVELENGTH OF THE OUTPUT???????????

IANASLS (I am not a silicon laser scientist), but if I was would I be able to calculate the wavelength from all the values tossed about in the articles? Continuous red lasers are no big deal, a continuous violet laser would be reasonably impressive (at least to me, but I like purple), a continous deep UV or better laser on a chip this size would make for lousy light shows at the planetarium but could bring the cost down on communications central offices by several orders of magnitude, even more so if the output can be tuned. Or something like that.

It took reading the Intel glossary to the Intel press release to find the following:

Wavelength conversion - The process of taking light of one wavelength (color) and changing it to another wavelength (color). In communications, more data can be transmitted by sending multiple wavelengths of light down the same optical fiber. Wavelength conversion allows the switching of data from one wavelength to another. The Raman effect in silicon can produce such a wavelength conversion.

Which still doesn't tell me the wavelength of the laser (or the range of wavelengths), but only that the effect Intel is exploiting COULD probably produce multiple wavelengths across some undefined range.

P.S. To all the news sites that took Intel's press release and just moved sentences around to make it look like some thought or maybe even research went into the writing instead of merely repeating the Intel press release, most universities (at least my alma mater) consider that a crime more heinous then 2nd degree murder. If you wanted to be a writer, WRITE!

Re:Correct Units?

[utahjazz]

Has it got the units right on that one? ... IANAEE, so maybe its correct, but their going to refine it,

Does it have gotten the grammer right on this one? One did has gotten the right and was well goodlyness that was be well.

Re:Correct Units?

[DustMagnet]

I have to give him some credit. I ignored the picture as a stock photo until I read that ~50mm part, and I thought, "Ok, that's why the stock photo looks so strange, tt's a light waveguide! Still, it's a great advance. You'd really only need one laser for a huge range of really cool computer chips.

Re:Correct Units?

[Lawrence_Bird]

The reason laser light is coherent is because it travels an enormous distance before being emitted. This gives the individuals waves time to become coherent.

The laser is coherent because the emitted photons are in phase.

Re:Correct Units?

[pclminion]

The laser is coherent because the emitted photons are in phase.

Wrong. Here is a good explanation in lay terms. You can find much more detailed explanations with a bit of digging.

Re:Correct Units?

[pclminion]

That would mean the color of the light should shift towards red every time it bounces off a mirror. I'm sure you are refering to intensity though.

No, you are neglecting the other way that energy can be lost -- some of the photons are absorbed when they strike the mirror. By "light" I meant the entire assemblage of photons, not individual ones.

Re:Correct Units?

[Hal-9001]

The reason laser light is coherent is because it travels an enormous distance before being emitted. This gives the individuals waves time to become coherent.

This explanation for why laser light is coherent is WRONG. The coherence properties of laser light are due to the properties of the stimulated emission process, and therefore localized in time and space to the emission event.

The best explanation I've seen for the coherence of stimulated emission is "Rereading Einstein on Radiation" by Daniel Kleppner in this month's issue of Physics Today. The explanation is that light-matter interaction can be modeled as a driving force applied to an oscillator (like a pendulum or spring). In the presence of a driving force, an oscillator absorbs or emits energy depending on its current phase with respect to the phase of the driving force. A simple example is pushing someone on a swing (which is a pendulum, and therefore an oscillator). If you push them at the right times, they swing higher and higher--the oscillator absorbs energy. If you pull on the swing at those times, they swing less and less--the oscillator loses energy.

In light-matter interaction, the electromagnetic attraction between an electron and an atomic nucleus can be modeled as a spring, and the driving force is an incident electromagnetic wave, i.e. incident light. In a stimulated emission process, an atom (oscillator) loses energy in the presence of an incident photon (driving force). If the energy is emitted as a photon exactly out-of-phase with the incident photon (fully anti-coherent), the two photons would destructively interefere, reducing the net energy of the system and therefore violating conservation of energy. In fact, if the emitted photon is anything other than exactly in-phase with the incident photon, conservation of energy is violated. Thus the emitted photon must be exactly in-phase with the incident photon, and is therefore fully coherent with the incident photon.

Re:Correct Units?

[pclminion]

Thus the emitted photon must be exactly in-phase with the incident photon, and is therefore fully coherent with the incident photon.

This is true, but does not explain the mass coherence of laser light. It cannot explain why only a single phase becomes prevalent. Remember the principle of superposition -- if laser action depended solely on the in-phase emission of radiation, that would not preclude the simultaneous existence of a great number of different phases. The number of phases would only be limited by the number of radiators available in the lasing medium.

It is, in fact, the mirrors which cause the light to become coherent en masse as opposed to being a mixture of phases. This is for the same reason that starlight is coherent, even though it was not so when it was emitted -- it has travelled a very large distance.

As I've already posted below, this is a fairly good explanation in simple terms.

The idea that laser light is coherent because of the in-phase emission of radiation is a misconception which has unfortunately been so widely disseminated that even some physicists believe it. It is a symptom of an education system based on rote memorization instead of critical thinking.

Re:Correct Units?

[Hal-9001]

Wrong. Here is a good explanation in lay terms. You can find much more detailed explanations with a bit of digging.

That site is totally wrong about the origin of coherence in laser light. I sent the following to the site maintainer:

RE: LASERS EMIT COHERENT LIGHT, BUT NOT BECAUSE THE ATOMS EMIT IN-PHASE LIGHT WAVES

I ran across your site, and I would like to point out that your explanation for the coherence of laser light is incorrect. Coherence and phase are intrinsically-related. Measurements of the temporal or spatial coherence of light are in fact measurements of the relative phase of two different samples of a light wave. The fact that stimulated-emission results in an emitted photon that is exactly in-phase with the incident photon does explain spatial coherence. This is because the laser beam originates as a single (or relatively few) spontaneously-emitted photon(s). That photon is amplified by the stimulated-emission process to form the laser beam. Because the path of the initial photon is generally not along the optical axis of the laser cavity, and because it can be coherently scattered as it propagates through the gain medium, it traverses the gain medium along many paths. Thus the entire laser beam inherits its phase from the initial spontaneously-emitted photon, and is therefore fully spatially-coherent. Even if we consider the laser beam to originate from several spontaneously-emitted photons, the result is that beam is the superposition of several fully spatially-coherent beams, which can be shown to be a fully spatially-coherent beam.

You are correct that starlight becomes more spatially-coherent by propagating long distances, but that cannot the mechanism for the spatial-coherence of a laser, as I will explain with a fairly simple counter-example. With Q-switching, it is trivial to switch a laser on and off within 10 nanoseconds, in which time light travels about 3 meters in vacuum. Yet the laser pulse can be measured to be as or more coherent than starlight, even though its propagation distance is on the order of meters rather than light years.

You are correct that the pure color (monochromaticity) of laser light is due to the mirrors (which form a Fabry-Perot or some other resonant cavity), but I would argue that the explanation for the pure color for laser light is at a less advanced level (third-year physics undergraduate) than the explation for its coherence. Coherence is an advanced-undergraduate to graduate-level topic, as a proper analysis of coherence requires Fourier transforms, and the coherence of stimulated emission is a topic in quantum electrodynamics. The most readable but rigorous treatment of optical coherence that I am aware of is _Statistical Optics_ by Joseph Goodman, but even that is written at the advanced-undergraduate to graduate level.

Re:Correct Units?

[Hal-9001]

I rebut that link in this reply to one of your other comments. The feedback due to the mirrors does contribute to the spatial coherence of the beam, but ultimately it depends on the fact that the stimulated emission process is temporally-coherent (in-phase). A Q-switched laser is a simple counterexample (at least to an optical physicist). Another simple counterexample that I neglected to mention in that other post is this. According to your theory, if I remove the laser medium from the laser and shine light into the former laser from one end, the output from the other end should be spatially-coherent light. This non-laser laser is actually a device called a Fabry-Perot interferometer, and it does not cause spatially-incoherent light to become spatially-coherent (also a simple experiment to do in an optics lab). Thus feedback is insufficient to explain the spatial coherence of a laser.

For a proper treatment of coherence, I recommend Statistical Optics by Joseph Goodman, or if you're a masochist you can attempt to tackle Optical Coherence and Quantum Optics by Leonard Mandel and Emil Wolf. :-p

Re:Correct Units?

[pclminion]

Hey, did you ever hear back from that guy? He makes such a big deal out of bad science it would be ridiculous if he failed to even respond to you.

Thanks for correcting both him and me. I guess I shouldn't believe everything I read online, but I thought at least this site would be safe since a lot of his other explanations are right on...

Dr. Grove, I presume?

[Tackhead]

> Intel has just announced a breakthrough in laser technology
> allowing a continuous laser wave on a silicon chip. Apparently
> they devised a method to sap the interfering field of electrons
> previously generated in silicon by the lasers.

You know, I have one simple request, and that is to have silicon chips with frickin' laser beams on 'em. Now, evidently, my electronically sapped colleague informs me that that can't be done. Can you remind me what I pay you people for? Honestly, throw me a frickin' bone here!

Re:Dr. Grove, I presume?

[AlexMax2742]

This was the first thing I thought when I read the article. I'm glad to see someone beat me to it that probably put it better than I did.

The soy of electronics

[LukaFox]

Silicon: is there anything it can't do? Seriously, it'll be interesting to see how this impacts optical storage, not to mention all the other places lasers are used.

Re:The soy of electronics

[pintpusher]

Not to mention the potential implications for breast implants!

Re:The soy of electronics

[pclminion]

Soy... Raman lasers...

Hmmm, I'm getting hungry.

Re:The soy of electronics

[Some_Llama]

"Not to mention the potential implications for breast implants!"

Is that supposed to be another Austin Powers referrence? (fembots, anyone? just me? ok nvm :))

Raman

[stoolpigeon]

I knew early on in college Raman would be the ultimate solution to many problems. I wasn't thinking about lasers at the time but I'm not surprised. Those scrumptious noodles. So cheap, so easy to prepare.

Re:Raman

[operagost]

It nearly destroyed my kidneys.

I'll bet you were pissed.

Here's to hoping

[Admiral Ackbar 8]

That this will lead to optical computing, but after reading the BBC article its clear that they have it in mind to use this for optical switches in the telecomunications industry. If someone smart could come up with a silicon based optical NAND gate, we would all be happy campers.

Re:Here's to hoping

[Anztac]

So, you're saying if someone completely ignorant came up with a workable solution, what, we'd have to discard it or something?

Re:Here's to hoping

[Admiral Ackbar 8]

So, you're saying if someone completely ignorant came up with a workable solution, what, we'd have to discard it or something?

yes

Re:...Shark breakthrough still to come.

[Deekin_Scalesinger]

Crap - I raced to the comments page, visions of altered sharks dancing in my head, only to be thwarted...curse you Caspian!

Am I the only one that doesn't get it?

[PartyBoy!911]

Ok it sounds cool... but what is the intended purpose of this breakthrough?

Re:Am I the only one that doesn't get it?

[thpr]

There are probably two major uses. The first is in an optical switch. Traditionally, switches were OEO (optical-electrical-optical) until the all-optical craze hit in 2000. OOO (all optical) are (in theory) able to switch the light faster, which reduces latency, power usage, and lots of other things in the optical core of the network. However, if you eliminate the separate optics devices and can run the optics directly onto the semiconductor, OEO may be a lot more competitive (meaning cheaper). Go search LightReading for "OEO" or "OOO" to follow that debate (of whether there is benefit to all-optical and the current state of the art. [Infinera is a rather interesting startup driving OEO into the future to compete with OOO]

The second major use would be chip-to-chip interconnect. However, this becomes a challenge, as you try to keep a ribbon of fiber-optics (think 200-2000 strands) perfectly lined up with the lasers on the die. I'm not saying it can't be done, but it is one of the hurdles to face before it could be used that way in mass-produced systems like a PC. The theory goes that at about 1 foot per second, electrical propagation between chips is causing us lots of headaches. HyperTransport and other technologies make some advances to get around the plain limits, but there are still major problems with sending high-speed signals on circuit boards. Even if this can't help speed up absolute memory access time, it could help to improve throughput between memory and the processor, helping to avoid some of the single-threaded bottlenecks that led IBM and its partners to develop Cell

Re:Am I the only one that doesn't get it?

[ikkonoishi]

Imagine a time where anyone who tries to violate the DMCA is shot in the eye with a laser beam.

That would stop those pesky pirates.

Re:Am I the only one that doesn't get it?

[DoubleD]

that at about 1 foot per second, electrical propagation between chips

1 foot per nanosecond perhaps? I know I don't see a 20 second delay when I hit the light switch ;).

Re:Am I the only one that doesn't get it?

[thpr]

Doh! Thanks for the catch. Fat fingers today, I guess.

Re:Am I the only one that doesn't get it?

[Dunbal]

That would stop those pesky pirates.

Something like that would certainly explain the eye-patch though, arrr arrr

Re:Am I the only one that doesn't get it?

[ikkonoishi]

Eyepatch manufacturers will be jailed for circumvention of media rights measures.

Expensive?

[BeerCat]

From TFA: The Santa Clara, Calif.-based company has created a chip containing eight continuous Raman lasers by using fairly standard silicon processes rather than the somewhat expensive materials and processes required for making lasers today.

OK, so I'm probably missing some major point here, but, define "expensive" for making lasers, given that there is a laser in every cheap £20 CD player, cheap £30 DVD player, cheap £5 laser pointer... Can't be that expensive, surely?

Re:Expensive?

[ackthpt]

OK, so I'm probably missing some major point here, but, define "expensive" for making lasers, given that there is a laser in every cheap £20 CD player, cheap £30 DVD player, cheap £5 laser pointer... Can't be that expensive, surely?

Keep in mind they say may be in use in about ten years which means you could have some major upheavals in technology in the interim and lots of lasers would be in demand on one board or card.

Re:Expensive?

[NetCow]

If with laser technology A it costs me 4 cents to produce some laser, and with laser technology B it costs me 6 cents, then technology B is expensive since I'm losing 2 cents on each unit.

Re:Expensive?

[thpr]

define "expensive" for making lasers

Keep in mind that the lasers you are working with are not very precise (the CD player, DVD player), or even only have to be coherent (the laser pointer) and not pulsing. Even with the encoding, the DVD is only transmitting a few Mb/s of information as it encounters pits and lands on a CD/DVD. (4.7GB/2 hours = ~6Mb/s)

The long-haul optical systems and optical switches are transmitting over multi-kilometer fiber optic cable that is transmitting at Gb/s rates. That requires a MUCH better laser, in terms of power, coherency and switching speed. I actually don't know what the lasers cost, but some of the receivers can be in the hundreds for a single receiver at the very high end. The optical systems themselves are rather expensive, being thousands of dollars for a single mid-range board that has a pair of optical receiver/transmitters (2 ports).

Re:Expensive?

[oliverthered]

Don't think, know.
google anyone...?

ECL1525-PM
MicroECL, Wide Tunable Laser Module
Price: $14,000.00
TL1300-B
Intun Tunable Laser, 1300nm
Price: $20,000.00
HGR020
HeNe Laser, 543nm, 2.0mW, Random
Price: $1,900.00
HRP005S
HeNe Laser, 633nm, 0.5mW, Polarized (Self-Contained)
Price: $370.00
HRP008
HeNe Laser, 633nm, 0.8mW, Polarized
Price: $780.00
HRP350-EC
HeNe Laser, 633nm, 35mW, Polarized, 230V
Price: $6,300.00
DL5147-042
655nm, 35mW Sanyo Laser Diode
Price: $44.38
HL6335G
635nm, 5mW Hitachi Laser Diode
Price: $57.14
HL6344G
635nm, 10mW Hitachi Laser Diode
Price: $97.62
GH06510B2A
654nm, 10mW Sharp Laser Diode
Price: $20.10
GH0781JA2C
784nm, 120mW, Sharp Laser Diode
Price: $33.64

Re:Expensive?

[Plaid Phantom]

Actually being allowed to play with $50,000 of lasers and optical equipment: priceless.

Re:Expensive?

[oliverthered]

you get my intersting, well if telling someone to use google can be interesing, so can a joke.

Re:Expensive?

[Jeff DeMaagd]

I don't think DVD reading lasers even need to pulse. The optical reciever needs to be able to see pulses based on how the light reflects back, but the laser itself just needs to be on, with a lens properly focused.

I'm not sure what long haul optical systems cost, but fiber optic 1000bFX cards seem to cost at least twice that of the 1000bTX version.

Re:Expensive?

[mehitabel]

in the laser lab where I work:

solid state diode laser, 5W at 532nm: $40,000
YLF laser, 20W at 532nm: $40,000
Titanium doped sapphire crystal: $1000
optics to make 400mW ultrafast laser: $10,000+

cost of buying comparable kit from KML: priceless!
no, actually $100-300k

not that these lasers are exactly general use.
I'm just pointing out that lasers and materials can be very expensive.

Re:Expensive?

[Anonymous Coward]

The long-haul optical systems and optical switches are transmitting over multi-kilometer fiber optic cable that is transmitting at Gb/s rates. That requires a MUCH better laser, in terms of power, coherency and switching speed. I actually don't know what the lasers cost, but some of the receivers can be in the hundreds for a single receiver at the very high end.

Hundreds? Try thousands of dollars for the high end, high speed, long-haul laser transmitters and receivers. Hell, a plain LED (not laser) based short-haul (SX) gigabit ethernet transceiver will cost you $150 to $400. The gigabit LX/LH transceivers can cost you upwards of $1000, and that's just for run of the mill gigabit ethernet stuff. 10 Gigabit is about $4000 per transceiver.

End of the Decade?

[Bingo Foo]

Intel says that hardware exploiting the advance might begin appearing at the end of the decade.

Which one?

Re:Correct Units? [OT]

[NeuralAbyss]

Windows in 6 Bytes (IA-32) : 90 90 90 90 CD 19

Nice sig.. I'm kinda worried that I glanced at it and laughed though.. too much IA32 assembly in my early days.

What in the...

[d474]

From TFA:

1. Rong's chip produces laser light when it is 'pumped' with another laser.

I'm sorry, but that is just Rong...

Re:What in the...

[d474]

Wait a minute, wait a minute...

1. Rong's chip produces laser light when it is 'pumped' with another laser.
   

So, two lights make a Rong?

Re:What in the...

[Some_Llama]

"Wait a minute, wait a minute...

Rong's chip produces laser light when it is 'pumped' with another laser.

So, two lights make a Rong?"

No it means it will Lase you rong time...

Re:What in the...

[Anonymous Coward]

Sorry, maybe it's just me being a thick american and all, but i sure don't get it...

Re:What in the...

[narsiman]

Sorry you are already maxed at funny. That is the funniest thing I have heard in a while.

Re:What in the...

[d474]

I didn't think my joke could be topped but you proved me rong.

cheers!

Catch 22

[karvind]

From the nature article: Rong's chip produces laser light when it is 'pumped' with another laser.

This is old stuff (see bottom note on the article, result was published in Oct 2004). Intel showed they can lase silicon with another laser. So how am I going to find another laser to pump this one ?

Silicon is indirect bandgap semiconductor. There is no easy way to make lasers out of it unless you introduce some traps to facilitate optical transistions. Can anyone explain how does it work ? -a

Re:Catch 22

[Anztac]

Yeah, they mention in the news.com article that silicon is a poor producer of light, what it is good at though is amplifying it via the Ramen effect.

A Raman laser, in some ways, is ideally suited for silicon. The Raman Effect, discovered in 1928 by Nobel laureate Chandrasekhara Venkata Raman, roughly works as follows: Light hits a substance, causing the atoms in the substance to vibrate. The collision causes some of the photons to gain or lose energy, resulting in a secondary light of a different wavelength. A Raman laser essentially involves taking this secondary light and then amplifying it (by reflecting it and pumping energy into the system) to emit a functional beam. Because of its crystalline structure, silicon atoms readily vibrate when hit with light. The Raman Effect, in fact, is 10,000 times stronger in silicon than standard glass, which should make it far easier to amplify.

Re:Catch 22

[Bender_]

..what it is good at though is amplifying it via the Ramen effect.

Guess what you had for lunch?

Re:Catch 22

[wildsurf]

what it is good at though is amplifying it via the Ramen effect.

This was presumably discovered after much noodling.

Do you smell that?

[eomnimedia]

"...continuous laser wave..."

Aw, nuts. And I just bought my new Continuous Bacon Wave . <sigh>There's always an upgrade.</sigh>

Re:Do you smell that?

[wildsurf]

Aw, nuts. And I just bought my new Continuous Bacon Wave.

That sounds like it would be useful for Ham Radio.

Re:Do you smell that?

[Sabalon]

Well, you can still get some good use out of it.

Go to baconwhores.com (nothing obscene)

Power supply...

[jim_v2000]

The article didn't mention this, or I didn't see it, but wouldn't using lasers instead of wires really use a lot of power? Epecially when you start using a lot of them. But then again, maybe these are really low powered lasers and don't take much power at all. Anyone have any ideas or know anything about wires vs lasers?

Re:Power supply...

[Spy der Mann]

Maybe they do right now, but with today's nanotrends, expect nanoscopic lasers being used to transfer information in a chip.

I give it about 20 years. Maybe in 25 we'll start seeing fully-functional optical microprocessors. But by that time there will be already cold microprocessors using nanotube-based transistors, and running with perhaps an AA battery or something.

Re:Power supply...

[the_2nd_coming]

it takes less power to send a photonic signal than an electronic signal. so the answer to your question is... NO!!!

Re:Power supply...

[laughingcoyote]

I imagine the initial ENIAC-style transistor computers were power monsters too. So yes, they likely do, but technology only gets better with time. And in fact, depending how it's implemented, it may actually take a little LESS power once it reaches a production-quality level.

Re:Power supply...

[ErikZ]

I'm wondering if the new chips will be radiation proof.

Re:Power supply...

[Inthewire]

If you've got a second, could you pull something solid out of your ass?

Re:Power supply...

[ajlitt]

That's nano-ass to you, bub.

Re:Power supply...

[Bio Steel]

> using lasers instead of wires really use a lot of power.

As electrons flow through a metal wire they collide with the atoms in the wire - causing heat and the need for higher energy needs. Photon transmission is done in a vacuum which would cause neligible collisions.

No...

[maynard]

"[..]the potential implications for breast implants!"

...that's Silicone, not Silicon. BIG difference. Not the lease of which is feel. Imagine your wife with a hard and lumpy P4 in there, instead of a Silicone Gel breast implant, and you'll get the idea. Oh wait, yeah... some weirdos around here would dig that. Nevermind! *ahem!*--M

Re:No...

[pintpusher]

that's Silicone,

why you would put caulk in a breast beyond me... ;-)

Re:No...

[ikkonoishi]

My imaginary wife uses AMD you insensitive clod.

Re:No...

[jacksonj04]

P4 breast implants? Women get warm enough during sex as it is without bloody intel radiators in there as well.

Re:No...

[maynard]

P4 breast implants? Women get warm enough during sex as it is without bloody intel radiators in there as well.

They do?!?!? *Sigh*, I've wondered about that. It seems mine's defective... --M

Re:No...

[Mr_Icon]

My imaginary wife uses AMD you insensitive clod.

Well, at least she didn't StrongARM you into marrying her.

Re:No...

[teknomage1]

Who clicked insightful? Funny, yes, but insightful?!?

Re:No...

[Dizzle]

Insightful is sometimes used to give a person a karma bonus due to the fact that /. doesn't award karma for "Funny". Thus, sometimes funny posts will have insightful or informative, rewarding the poster.

Fix this /.!

Re:No...

[ikkonoishi]

Fix underrated overrated first.

They should be for posts that should be seen, but you don't think it should affect the user's karma.

Right now they drop karma and are immposible to metamod so people use them as -1 I disagree or +1 I agree without considering the actual merit of the posts.

Re:No...

[Angstroem]

Well, at least she didn't StrongARM you into marrying her.

No, after all, nerds can't be too PICky :)

Re:No...

[TVC15]

>Not the lease[t] of which is feel. Imagine your wife with a hard and lumpy P4 in there, instead of a Silicone Gel breast implant, and you'll get the idea. Oh wait, yeah... some weirdos around here would dig that. Nevermind!

What?! The perfect setup for the Beowulf Cluster joke and nobody took advantage of it?

implement

[Anonymous Coward]

just curious, how would you implement this technology on an x86 board?

Artistic turn...

[RM6f9]

Open up gaps between the secondary light source and receptors such that they criss-cross the inside of your desktop's case... web of light, home-brewed koyanisqatsi (sp?) sequel - I wouldn't mind having a larger box if it would work the way I'm seeing/imagining it...
Whaddaya know? Per the article, lasers really *are* cool! (cooler than wires anyway).

Optoelectronics

[zymano]

Hybrid optical-electronic chips are ussed mainly in highspeed net hardware. $$$ is the reason you haven't seen them in your desktop. I am fascinated by it more than quantum because it seems far off.

optoelectronics defined by Intel article.

More info. Just google Optoelectronics.

Sweet!

[teamhasnoi]

This and Plastics clear the way for the Superconductor advance! I'll have those pesky French beaten in no time!

Now I just need to steal Conscription from the Aztecs...

Re:Purpose?

[ScruffyScrode]

Fiber optics:

IIRC fiber optics networks still have to use electronic switches, hubs, routers, etc, that means that the data has to be converted from photonic to electronic and back at every switch/router/anything that actually processes it. This causes a huge slow down in comparison to what a pure light switch/router/etc. could perform.

But it's not a laser

[Biff Stu]

It's based on Raman shifting. It's a nice way of getting longer wavelength light from shorter wavelength light, but you still need a pricey(non-silicon) laser to make it work. Furthermore, because the Raman process has limited efficiency, you end up loosing much of the efficiency of a conventional (non-silicon) diode laser.

It's only interesting because it can be electronically swiched on and off, so it represents a nice way of getting modulated light into a silicon waveguide. On the other hand, there are modulators with much better efficiency. So it's a cheap but inefficient modulator, which is also a wavelength converter.

Re:But it's not a laser

[the_2nd_coming]

but it is a laser. so try reading!!!!

you think nature would publish something about a laser that is not really a laser?

Re:But it's not a laser

[Biff Stu]

Try learning physics.

Laser: Light Amplification by Stimulated Emission of Radiation.

The stimulated Raman effect is fundamentally different from stimulated emission. You can't get stimulated emission from Si because it is an indirect bandgap semiconductor. However, it is true that both processes can generate coherent beams of light, and people typically refer to devices that generate coherent light as laser sources, hence the term "Raman Laser".

However, my point is that this device can't convert non-optical energy into optical energy. Furthermore, since it's a non-linear optical process, you can only get the necessary intinsity to drive this process from a coherent source. Therefore you must have an actual laser to start this process. This is something that they state in the articles. However, in the c/net article, the marketing hype starts to take over. They state, "The Santa Clara, Calif.-based company has created a chip containing eight continuous Raman lasers by using fairly standard silicon processes rather than the somewhat expensive materials and processes required for making lasers today." Implying that this gets us away needing old-fashoned expensive lasers. It doesn't.

Yes, they are nice, small coherent light sources that can be easily modulated and integrated into Si, but they aren't lasers, and the efficiency is a problem.

Let's say you want to start making integrated optical circuits. If you want a chip with 100 switches, you must pump each switch with 300 mW. (Well maybe you could cut back to 100 mW, but the efficiency of these things is non-linear, and there will be a threshold power at which they don't work.) Therefore, a device with just 100 switches would require 10 to 30 watts of coherent optical power to drive it. Then you need to worry about the wall-plug efficiency of your pump laser (or lasers) and the bulk of the pump laser.

It's interesting, and it did deserve an article in Nature. However, there's a lot of corporate marketing hype behind all the buzz in the linked articles, and when marketing hype and science mix I get annoyed.

Re:But it's not a laser

[Dunbal]

Sillicon laser...

So, like, there's no chance of me gettin one of these by overclocking my CPU then?

Practical applications:

1) MPAA software has detected that you are trying to play an unauthorized DVD. You have 10 seconds to cancel the stream, 9, 8, 7...

2) I'm afraid I can't do that, Dave.

Re:But it's not a laser

[Hal-9001]

However, my point is that this device can't convert non-optical energy into optical energy. Furthermore, since it's a non-linear optical process, you can only get the necessary intinsity to drive this process from a coherent source. Therefore you must have an actual laser to start this process.

So I guess all those argon-pumped Ti:sapphire oscillators and diode-pumped Nd:YAG oscillators aren't real lasers either. The radiative mechanism for this device is different than for a direct-bandgap semiconductor material, but the terminal behavior isn't much different than most modern optically-pumped solid-state lasers. You illuminate the gain medium with pump light at some wavelength, and you get coherent light at some longer wavelength out. I suppose you could define the term "laser" to exclude such devices if you wanted (there is some precedent, as optical parametric oscillators are traditionally distinguished from lasers), but be careful not to make the definition so narrow as to exclude devices based on stimulated emission!

Re:But it's not a laser

[Biff Stu]

I never said that all devices that require a coherent pump are not lasers. However, there are significant differences between oscillators based on non-linear phenomena and the oscillators that you list that are based on stimulated emission.

The other point is that if any laser pumped oscillator is the basis of an integrated optical device, there are some potential efficiency problems unless the device is damn efficient. Furthermore, there is always the expense and bulk of a separate pump laser.

i read all three articles and...

[distantbody]

what the big deal is about is basically that intels raman laser represents another step towards having cheap electron to photon interconnects (and cheap fiber optic amps, although funnily the said the efficiency was only around 5%, but i can still see its significance). i drool at the thought of having my CPU connected to my RAM via an optical bus!(and cheaply too i must add, as this is currently possible, but would be very costly)...or maybe even optical SATA, sweeet!

Re:i read all three articles and...

[the_2nd_coming]

or all optical everything except the PSU!!!

Geordi Will Be Happy

[Anonymous Coward]

"method to sap the interfering field of electrons previously generated in silicon by the lasers"

Yes, but will the warp-core injector stay online until the tachyon pulse is finished retuning the bullshittean field modulation?

Re:Purpose?

[mapmaker]

Does it have a purpose?

Yes, the purpose is to distract you from how poorly Intel's processor business has been doing lately.

Exploitation

[bytesmythe]

Intel says that hardware exploiting the advance might begin appearing at the end of the decade.

And software exploiting said hardware will appear about 15 minutes later...

Re:This story is a dupe

[AdmiralWeirdbeard]

The advance in technology being announced here is Intel's solution to the Two Photon Absorption problem. This allowed the team of scientists referenced in the story you cite to take the pulsing silicon laser they announced then, and make it a continuous wave laser, which is being announced now.

But I should have linked the previous story as well... my bad.

1 foot per second propagation headaches?

[Eternal Vigilance]

"The theory goes that at about 1 foot per second, electrical propagation between chips is causing us lots of headaches."

"Note to self: next time, upgrade from '2nd Day' to 'Next Day' for chip interconnects."

Rimshot?

[Col. Bloodnok]

What does that actually mean?

Re:Rimshot?

[Anonymous Coward]

it's like a rimjob but with a drum stick

Re:Rimshot?

[Lally Singh]

I think it's a reference to the part of the drum you hit to make that traditional sound after someone says a one-liner like that.

Re:Rimshot?

[giantsfan89]

is the sound someone makes on a trap set (drums) after a punchline. sounds something like:

bah-DUM-stch!!!

You should stay in college :)

[djohnsto]

Intel is INTC - according to yahoo finance they were down $0.33 (1.35%) today. With a market cap of ~$150B, this puts them down over $2 billion. If you compare Intel's stock price history with the S&P 500, or IBM, or MS, or ... you will see that they all (mostly) move in the same direction at the same time. Welcome to the notion of mutual funds. Intel moving 2.5 points (10%!) in one day isn't going to happen any time soon.

Re:You should stay in college :)

[Lawrence_Bird]

you will see that they all (mostly) move in the same direction at the same time. Welcome to the notion of mutual funds.

Actually, its called Beta and is used to measure risk. A beta of 1.0 would mean a stock is just as volatile as the S&P 500, though you could chose any other index as a base if you wanted to and recompute beta against that.

As for the original parent, the post was clearly a troll aimed at private social security accounts.

Re:You should stay in college :)

[The-Perl-CD-Bookshel]

Your correct, the stock I looked up was INTL. I should have known that 700million was a very small market cap for Intel. Sorry for the confusion.

Re:ZIM!!

[throughthewire]

"It's always lasers with you! I'm tellin' ya, smoke machines are what the people really want OW! My eye!"

used with GaAs lasers?

[bodrell]

Furthermore, since it's a non-linear optical process, you can only get the necessary intinsity to drive this process from a coherent source. Therefore you must have an actual laser to start this process. This is something that they state in the articles.

What do you mean by "actual laser?" Are semiconductor lasers not coherent sources? Or are they not bright enough? It did say you need another laser . . . I think maybe I'm not fully understanding what they're talking about:

Using the Raman effect, the chip firm has produced an optically pumped laser, with outputs up to 9mW.

"We have proved that silicon can be considered as a gain material," said Mario Paniccia, director of Intel's photonics technology lab.

. . .

At 300mW pump input, the laser outputs around 6mW. The slope efficiency, with a 25V bias on the PIN diode, is 4.3 per cent. Half power linewidth is claimed to be better than 80MHz.

So what exactly does it mean that silicon is a "gain" material if the laser output is one 30th the energy of the pump input?

Also, they mentioned something about optical modulation in the article; do you know if this proof-of-concept chip can actually modulate the light? I wonder if just reversing the bias would do it . . .

Oh well. I guess I'll have to read the Nature article when I get to work. We have pretty nifty online access to a lot of scientific journals.

Re:...Shark breakthrough still to come.

[operagost]

AMD has beaten them to market with mutated, ill-tempered sea bass.

Re:This story is a dupe

[gus2000]

It is not a duplicate. Intel published a Nature not long ago using the same structure but in pulsed mode. This time it is operating in CW. Of course, one could argue that Intel is being academically dishonest by publishing very similar results on an identical structure twice (in the same journal!), but that's another story.

Re:Pretty much

[Inthewire]

Do you say "myself" instead of "I" in converastions?

Basketball?

[Luthair]

I always thought it was a basketball reference, a close but no cigar type deal.

AMD?

[WinterpegCanuck]

So you are saying she isn't as hot at the same speed? Sounds like a lot of extra work.

Re:AMD?

[ikkonoishi]

Nah dude.

Its all about the RISC.

Let's corrupt the meme

[talaphid]

I bought them from Johnny No Hands, who swore they were just baby sharks whose fins hadn't grown in, but when they started squeaking and doing tricks I should've realized...

Re:Radiation Proof

[Bio Steel]

> I'm wondering if the new chips will be radiation proof.

Well the optics of course would not be susceptible to EMR but the rest of the computer would still be plain old aluminum wiring. Thus there it is still susceptible to EMR.

Demands!

[Bio Steel]

If you wish to survive with this superconductor technology, we the Zulus require delivery of these secrets immediately. If you refuse, prepare for our invasion.

Si vis pacem, para bellum

Re:Radiation Proof

[ErikZ]

If you can make the chip fully optical, why wouldn't you want the rest of the computer to be optical?

I was thinking that these chips and a "all optical" design would be a required for any kind of spacescraft.

Re:Radiation Proof

[Bio Steel]

Yes I understand that but the laser emitters still have to be fed with electricity. The holographic storage system still needs aluminum or copper leeds feeding it. EMR builds in those wires, transfering to - and thus frying - the laser optical emitters or whatever. there will still be a danger of EMR until there is not metal components transferring electricity in a computer.

Re:Radiation Proof

[ErikZ]

Ok, I see where you're coming from. But it seems to me that all of that is an engineering problem. Off the top of my head...

Create an optical source that the rest of the system draws light from. That source is powered using electricity, but is so large and strong and hardened against EMF, that it would take a nearby nuke to disrupt.

The heart of the system, so to speak.