Slashdot Mirror
Circuits Better with Purer Nanotubes
Mark_Uplanguage writes "PhysicsWeb has an article on improving techniques for the use of carbon nanotubes in electronic circuits. From the article, 'Physicists in the US have developed a new method for making electronic circuits with carbon nanotubes. The technique involves dipping semiconductor chips into a purified solution of nanotubes, rather than the conventional method of growing the nanotubes directly onto the chips. The resulting devices are much better than those produced by other approaches.'"
Nano computing here we come!
what the hell does it mean though ?
p g
http://physicsweb.org/objects/news/9/8/2/050802.j
...the Chipsicle!
The technique involves dipping semiconductor chips into a purified solution of nanotubes, rather than the conventional method of growing the nanotubes directly onto the chips. The resulting devices are much better than those produced by other approaches.
It is like dunking your doughnut in coffee instead of waiting for the doughnut to naturally produce its own coffee flavour.
The more you know.
Unfortunately, I am not Wil Wheaton
That there are quantum mechanical problems with having the tubes alligned and getting a good signal through them.
does any one have a link to an article that's more than just a blurb? What are the applications? How long before we can built Logic out of these chips? According to TFA, all they've managed to create so far is an FET...
and if you see me strut, remind me of what left this outlaw torn...
computing is just around the corner ... of course, it'll take 30 or mroe years to get to us mere mortals, but you can bet the US military / industrial complex will have this soon, if they do not already possess them ...
Question Authority before IT questions You
And if the nanotubes were in solution, they wouldn't be nanotubes any more.
that are actually on the market right now ?
all i ever see are "may" or "might" or "could"
lots of hype/vapour but i havent heard or seen any applications of this technology that have made it to market
perhaps they will be released with Duke Nukem Forever as an addon
So, are you a dipper or do you cover them with sauce first? Science have proved that the dippers are using a superior technique...
chips: n. [British] Fried potatoes cut into thick rectangular strips. see fries [American].
Conversion Rate Optimisation French / English consultant
OK, they used the wrong word. They should have said "a suspension containing nanotubes".
No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Winston Churchill
So, lemme get this straight... a piece of computer equipment works better when the components of higher quality; this is news? Didn't we all learn this lesson when we ran across our first piece of budget hardware?
Post-rock/Ambient/Drone and other noise.
Just a word of warning for those not familiar with this advance - there are still a lot of issues to be worked out to being this technology into the field.
My group estimates that it will be 10 or more years before we see this technology impacting consumers around the world.
We all want much more powerful CPUs in a smaller package disapating little heat. But so far built only a few transistors using said technology - far from the density and complexity of a next generation CPU. The reliability of the process needs to be made very very high, orders of magnitude high, in order to make a next generation CPU using this technology... and those techniques are far, far away from being available today at any high volume chip fab facility.
Don't get me wrong - its an important scientific advance, but the manufacturing process still needs a lot of new science to make it happen in a way we'd like to see it.
So you have nanotechnology in use, but for a production application you will use the technology by just dipping the, in this case computerchips, into the liquid, instead of carefully placing everything on the chip how it should be.
Suppose this works because there are hooks on the chip on which the nanotubes get stuck. How do you know that two opposing hooks attach to the correct same nanotube, and not to the wrong nanotube, or to two nanotubes with no connection at the other end at all.
I think this works nice in a lab where you only measure certain performance parameters from the use of nanotubes, but that a real chip will not work with this method.
Pure nanotubes work better: That is to be expected based on the properties of a nanotube (guessing here). I think an assembling method to place the nanotubes so you are sure they are at the correct place, is a better direction for this research than a huge chip dipping facility. If they want to do the last they will have to get a license from Pringles anyway, they have the best dipping shape for chips.
My wife's sketchblog Blob[p]: Gastrono-me
But how does this help with getting porn to us faster?
dunking your doughnut in coffee instead of injecting the coffee to the doughnut
... press releases about breakthroughs in nanotech especially in the carbon nanotube/semiconductor field. One should know that the US, EU, Korea and Japan throw an unprecendented amount of money into research in this field right now. And as the yanks have set the success metrics, it means all the researchers have to do is churn out press releases and file patents :-)
So, don't hold your breath re dipping, licking and roasting electronic circuits with CNT's.
These are not "purer nanotubes". They are more nanotubes and less other junk. Nanotubes grown on a surface will tend to also create other carbon molecules like ash, diamond crystalites, and even buckyballs. The purified stuff is simple this same mix of materials, but filtered to only have the tubes. They're still the same quality of tubes, just not dilluted w/ other crud.
"I must not fear. Fear is the mind killer." -Bene Gesserit Litany Against Fear
>Circuits Better with Purer Nanotubes
Sex is also better with a longer nanotube and a stiffer one.
Use generic V1@qra and cis@-LISP to boost your nanotubes!
Not so. You can have macromolecules is solution without destroying them. For example, fullerene dissolves in toluene. The molecules don't break up, but they acquire a coating of toluene molecules on the surface which means that they act as part of the liquid instead of a solid. When the toluene is evaporated, the buckys are fine.
In fact, there's a good chance these nanotubes are bucky-derived so they might even be in a toluene solution in TFA (which I haven't read cos I don't care about chip manufacture, I was just reading for the '+5 Funny's).
J.
You're only jealous cos the little penguins are talking to me.
I disagree.
What about Packard Bell computers?
They were made with poor, used, and substandard parts with bad drivers, and yet the computers were still...
Maybe I agree after all.
I think that the demise of Packard Bell in North America is totally justified.
Exam 4/C again. Maybe I'll do better this time.
Electronics have now evolved through the semiconductor portion of the periodic table of the elements. The early crystal radios used element 82,lead sulfide (galena from wikipedia), then during the early 1900, the so-called foxhole radio used razor blades and pins made from element 50,tin, to make a crystal. Early transistors used element 32,germanium, and integrated circuits moved onto element 14, silicon. The nanotube technology is now moving us to the last of the series which is element 6,carbon. This progression from lead to carbon is also a progression from larger molecules to smaller molecules and fewer elecrons. It took about 50 years to get to silicon and another 50 years to get to carbon. Where will we be in another 50 years?? (Don't be funny and say dead!)
(a) No, these transistors are no better. If you check the nature article, the contacts to the transistors are still lousy (technically, they are still schottky and not ohmic). And contact resistance is too high.
(b) No, they don't really get the nanotubes where they want as claimed in the article. The alignment using this technique is still worse (will require substantial effort to make it better).
(c) One of the bigger drawbacks which was conveniently ignored was the fact that they still cannnot control the number of tubes between the two contacts. So it can be 1 or 2 or 5 and so your current or other properties will vary that much. This technique doesn't make this problem any better.
(d) Last but not the least, no comment about the role of oxygen. All other researchers struggle due to hysteresis behavior, these devices look similar to them.
G5 PowerBooks NEXT TUESDAY!!! Oops, wrong forum.
Carbon isn't a semiconductor and isn't functioning as a semiconductor here.
Carbon is either a good conductor (nanotubes, fullerenes, graphite) or a good insulator (diamond).
Shouldn't it say "more pure nanotubes" intstead or "purer nanotubes"?
Hello? Engrish?
I have been trying the two step frying method, but haven't achieved satisfactory results. Could you share more detail about the first frying session, such as how long for what mass of fries in what volume of oil, what do you do with the fries immediately after? Also, do you have a second pot of oil kept at the higher temperature, or do you work with one pot?
;)
I tend to cook around 3 pounds of potatoes at a time in small batches, using a kitchenaid french fry slicer (sorry- can't find it on kitchenaid.com) to keep the fries uniform. Since I have been using one pot-- actually have moved to using a wok with a bit over 2 liters of oil, I fry at about 300F until the fries float, put them on a cooling rack to drain, and continue until all fries have been fried at 300F and drained. I then fry them at about 360F again in small batches until they float/look done, drain, and season. Unfortunately they are greasy. Could you perhaps give me some pointers?
ps-- for reference, I use good russet potatoes, scrubbed and cut with skins on, and soak in water overnight, and drained with salad spinner before frying. Yes, I am willing to take extra steps to achieve extraordinary results. I haven't had homemade fries as good as those made at restuarants, county fairs, etc, but I know I can do as well or better. And steak fries make my wife happy, which is better for all of us, I think
Thanks!
Bob
Speaking of better/faster/cooler chips ...
... in order to improve performance and handle heat more efficiently?
... did the DeBeers just off all those guys?
Whatever happened to all the hype a few years back (a WIRED cover-story comes to mind) about how we would be seeing chips formed from synthetic diamond rather than using silicon
Haven't heard much of anything on the 'diamond age' since
See you space cowboy
I'm not pretending to have a very good grasp on how this all works, but it seems like these guys have developed some pretty precise control over where the nanotubes get placed by using DNA. Kinda takes 'organic computing' to a whole different level, doesn't it.
Technically, isn't that just a suspension, not a solution? I think that's the point the other guy was trying to make. The fullerene isn't chemically reacting with the toluene, as opposed to adding salt to water which ends up giving you free floating Na+ and Cl-.
"22 astronauts were born in Ohio. What is it about your state that makes people want to flee the Earth?" Stephen Colbert
used for drug delivery, as announced today by the National Academy of the Sciences (NAS).
But, hey, nanotubes are good - provided they don't fall apart and clog your bloodstream, right?
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
You're talking specifically about an ionic solution - you can have anionic solutions too. In a suspension you should be able to get the stuff out by, say, centrifuging, but in an anionic solution (or, obviously, an ionic one) you won't.
J.
You're only jealous cos the little penguins are talking to me.