Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Diffraction Limit Has Been Beaten

Posted by Hemos on from the moving-to-the-next-challenge dept.

deglr6328 writes "In what is being heralded variously as a "remarkable accomplishment" and a "breakthrough", physicists have reportedly beaten the diffraction limit at optical frequencies. First hypothesized to be possible 30 years ago by Russian physicist Victor Veselago, meta-material "superlenses" with negative refractive indices were first demonstrated around 2001 at microwave frequencies. The use of a thin silver film as an optical superlens in this case, has allowed the team to resolve features less than 40 nanometers wide; 10 times better than any conventional optical microscope. The consequences of the discovery are immediately apparent and include opportunities for extremely fine biomedical imaging in-vivo and greater increases in transistor density for microchips by superlens augmentation of photolithography masks."

7 of 55 comments (clear)

  1. And then... by binaryspiral · · Score: 3, Funny

    Diffraction Limit Has Been Beaten

    And then had its wallet stolen.

  2. What is diffraction limit? by naveenkumar.s · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Can anybody illustrate diffraction limit? The wikipedia definition is too geeky.

    1. Re:What is diffraction limit? by denominateur · · Score: 4, Informative

      http://astrosun2.astro.cornell.edu/academics/cours es/astro201/diff_limit.htm

      The calculation shown there is a rough estimate for round openings (hence the 1.22). In essence the resolution of a lense is limited by the wavelength of the light being used and the size of the opening. When the opening is too small, whatever you want to observe is "smudged" due to diffraction effects (the spreading out of waves going through a small aperture). There are two ways to counter this: decrease the wavelength (eg use higher energy light such as xrays) or increase the size of the opening. Both remedies can be problematic since high-frequency light can induce damage and large apertures are sub-obtimal for many applications (especially in semiconductor imaging).

  3. You insensitive clods by Beautyon · · Score: 4, Insightful

    extremely fine biomedical imaging in-vivo and greater increases in transistor density for microchips by superlens augmentation of photolithography masks

    What about thinnner, lighter spectacle lenses for the 'Coke bottle' lens wearing, brunt of endless jokes myopic geeks?!

    --
    ATH0 Bitcoin: 1DnwFLXczVZV8kLJbMYoheUrpqHesjxrSi
  4. Hmmm. by Shag · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I don't suppose they'll find a way to apply this to mirrors, too?

    Though if it's just lenses, we might still see some very nice next-generation refracting telescopes. :)

    --
    Village idiot in some extremely smart villages.
  5. Re:Satellite telescopes? by deglr6328 · · Score: 3, Funny

    I hear that the other reason is because most people don't usually walk around holding their credit cards face up above their heads. :o)

    --
    - "Hear that?! The percolations are imminent! Cease your ingress!"
  6. Slowly catching up to Roayl Rife..... by shpoffo · · Score: 3, Interesting

    One day, perhaps, scientists will invent new & modernly acceptable language to say the same thing that Royal Raymond Rife was talking about earlier last century. Rife's microscope was a truly unique invention that still lacks rigorous investigation, mainly due to its extraordinary claims giving it a 'quack' status. The curioes can start at places like here. For those who read with a "zero tolerance" filter for anything that doesn't sound like a recent issue of Science or Nature, please step lightly where people are using "volatile" language....

    .
    -shpoffo