Slashdot Mirror


New Nano-Laser Created

Many sources are reporting that researchers have created the world's smallest laser since the inception of lasers almost a half-century ago. Dubbed "spasers," as an acronym for "surface plasmon amplification by stimulated emission of radiation," their incredibly tiny size could become a critical component for future technologies like "nanophotonic" circuitry. "Such circuits will require a laser-light source, but current lasers can't be made small enough to integrate them into electronic chips. Now researchers have overcome this obstacle, harnessing clouds of electrons called 'surface plasmons,' instead of the photons that make up light, to create the tiny spasers."

84 comments

  1. And in other news by NotBornYesterday · · Score: 5, Funny

    ... geneticists are now working feverishly to develop the world's first nano-shark.

    --
    I prefer rogues to imbeciles because they sometimes take a rest.
    1. Re:And in other news by tonyreadsnews · · Score: 4, Funny

      Actually, I was thinking more like, frickin plankton with frickin lasers...
      Once heralded as the solution to world hunger, now could be the solution for population control.

    2. Re:And in other news by Beriaru · · Score: 1

      Imagine a beowulf cluster of these. On sharks!

      I for one welcome etc, etc...

      By the way, does it run linux?

    3. Re:And in other news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Would this be classed as Biological Warfare now? Or is it still as "biological" as a human shooting a gun?

    4. Re:And in other news by masshuu · · Score: 0

      O.o you welcome our Geat Overloads with Lasers on there massive, demon killing biceps?

      --
      O.o
    5. Re:And in other news by NotOverHere · · Score: 1

      An there an app for this. Later scientists are looking to scale it up to the Shuffle and the Touch.

    6. Re:And in other news by SteelWing · · Score: 1

      Spazer Beam Aquired.

  2. Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    I tried to find a driver for my new nano laser, for Ubuntu, but no luck. Help!

    1. Re:Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      Enter the following in the console:

      apt-get sharkswithfreakinglasers
      make laser
      sudo intalllaser

      At this point you will get a number of incomprehensible error messages.

      Spend 18 hours of time searching google discovering that though there are many different instructions out there, nothing works.

    2. Re:Linux by oldspewey · · Score: 4, Funny

      Drivers are only available for minix

      --
      If libertarians are so opposed to effective government, why don't they all move to Somalia?
    3. Re:Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      All while Windows continues to BSOD trying to run lasercontrol.exe, OS X doesn't even have anything close to a working solution, and there's an iPhone app floating around that does all the lasering for you for $.99

    4. Re:Linux by lorenlal · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Mods? Troll? Seriously? It went quite well with the parent humor. I do not believe there was trollage intended here, nor did it have the teeth to feed with.

      Boo mods.

      Note: If the parent post is no longer marked Troll, then I commend the mods for correcting an otherwise totally unfair marking.

    5. Re:Linux by Inschato · · Score: 0, Troll

      Someone seems to have just taken all their mod points and rated several posts in a row troll for no apparent reason.

    6. Re:Linux by tenco · · Score: 2, Funny

      and there's an iPhone app floating around that does all the lasering for you for $.99

      Unfortunately it was deleted from Apple Store

    7. Re:Linux by tenco · · Score: 1

      Now I understand why everyone of a sudden became concerned about the optics of Linux.

    8. Re:Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When masturbation loses its charm, there's always forum abuse ...

  3. Nano-photonic circuitry!!?!?! by AtomicDevice · · Score: 5, Funny

    Awesome! I can finally get this mobile emitter working again so I can get the hell out of sick bay.

    --
    Ze Atomic Device! It iz Ztolen!
    1. Re:Nano-photonic circuitry!!?!?! by jameskojiro · · Score: 1

      Once you do that make sure you keep it away from the babe in the metallic catsuit.

      --
      Tsukasa: All I really want, is to be left alone...
    2. Re:Nano-photonic circuitry!!?!?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wake me up when it emits hard light.

      -Rimmer

  4. Optical Hard drives by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    Optical Writeable Readable Hard drives that are Giga-giga-bakillion-kazakcipaloo-bytes and are random access/seeking - they're coming.

    All this technology and Slashdot's scripts still suck.

    1. Re:Optical Hard drives by bpgslashdotaccount · · Score: 1

      Optical Writeable Readable Hard drives that are Giga-giga-bakillion-kazakcipaloo-bytes and are random access/seeking - they're coming.

      Yes, but there will still be only 10 kinds of people in the world, us and the marketing drones.

  5. Slashcode aspires to suck by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    "Suck" implies stable enough functionality to maintain a vacuum.

  6. Spaser, huh? by Millennium · · Score: 4, Funny

    So do they split into three parallel beams, thus covering a wider area than a single beam could along? And do they do the whole sinusoidal-oscillation thing if combined with a Wave Beam?

    1. Re:Spaser, huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I applaud your use Super Metroid references. Well met, kinsman.

    2. Re:Spaser, huh? by Ironchew · · Score: 4, Funny

      Bah, this existed back in 1994. Problem is, it was mostly useless because you couldn't combine it with a Plasma Beam.
      Useless, I say!

    3. Re:Spaser, huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      but plasma beam + wave beam made spaser totally obsolete

    4. Re:Spaser, huh? by Jesus_666 · · Score: 3, Funny

      Actually, that's a safety measure as the combination of the Spazer and the Plasma Beam can corrupt the entire universe if used in a room of improper size.

      --
      USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
    5. Re:Spaser, huh? by operator_error · · Score: 1

      You're thinking of the widely publicized photon technique, but this is really cool because they've now miniaturized the process.

      Previously the process was cumbersome because you need at least three people wearing photon packs on their back, to cross the photon beam OVER the containment trap. Timing is The Key. But this could be error-prone at times, and bad things happened.

      For more technical details:
      http://www.gbfans.com/equipment/plans/stefan-otto/

  7. Well, that's nice by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 5, Funny

    But I think I'll wait for the Laser Shuffle.

  8. insead of cirtuit trace? by FudRucker · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I bet fiber optic would make good connections between multiple chips and/or other similarly capable hardware

    --
    Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
    1. Re:insead of cirtuit trace? by mapsjanhere · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Naturally, to get to the dimensions of current electronics, you'd have to come up with a way to put down an optical fiber using some form of deposition effect, and then figure out how to couple your wave efficiently into the fiber, and convert it back at the destination. Followed by the problem of still being limited by light speed which lets your signal propagate about 6 cm per cycle on a 5 GHz chip. What quickly brings you back to a high speed fiber optical network to transmit large amounts of data, but not to a faster chip which has to rapidly exchange small strings of data preferable in a symmetric fashion.

      --
      I'm aging rapidly, I bought a new game and had no idea if my machine was good for it.
    2. Re:insead of cirtuit trace? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I bet fiber optic would make good connections between multiple chips and/or other similarly capable hardware

      Imagine that one day, we can have on-chip optics that do not need light guides. Instead, they cast laser beams from place to place in vacuum. Routing would be so much simpler, because you can cross the beams without shorting the signals.

    3. Re:insead of cirtuit trace? by tenco · · Score: 3, Informative

      Couldn't read the articles because i don't have an account there. But the abstracts look interesting: http://www.opticsinfobase.org/ol/abstract.cfm?uri=ol-30-13-1710 http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/440892722-27397378/content~content=a911227137~db=all~jumptype=rss http://www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/EUM0000000004246 and there seem to be already patents on manufacturing these integrated optic curcuits: http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/4400052/claims.html

  9. Wake me when they have something in production. by BlueKitties · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I see about three revolutionary breakthroughs per day, three of which never go anywhere because of cost or something. This reminds me of those "water on mars," articles -- we've been "getting new compelling evidence for water on mars" for decades. So, really, I've started to lose interest. I'll be excited when it finally goes somewhere. Really, what gets my blood pumping is what I can see coming down the pipe -- 128gb flash drives, C++0xA, etc.

    --
    "Sorrow is better than laughter, for by sadness of face the heart is made glad." [Ecclesiastes 7:3]
    1. Re:Wake me when they have something in production. by Finallyjoined!!! · · Score: 1
      So you see

      three revolutionary breakthroughs per day

      However

      three of which never go anywhere

      That'd be none then, zero, zilch, nowt, nothing.

      Wonder how anything progresses these days...

      --
      If I had an Ass, I'd call it Fanny Bottom, then I could slap my Ass; Fanny Bottom, on the Arse.
    2. Re:Wake me when they have something in production. by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 1

      Well, believe it or not, there are some people who are interested in the "R" part of R&D as well as the "D" part.

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    3. Re:Wake me when they have something in production. by hitmark · · Score: 1

      refinement of existing tech...

      and i think the problem of cost has more to do with not finding a process that can be applied to a henry ford style mass production, then something that can be made for profit (anything can be sold for profit, if the customer is willing to pay the price).

      that, and refinements of existing mass production processes outstrip the potential benefit of the new products, before things can be scaled up...

      --
      comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
    4. Re:Wake me when they have something in production. by Mister+Whirly · · Score: 1

      Yes but without the "D" the "R" isn't very valuable - it is just a nice thought.

      --
      "But this one goes to 11!"
    5. Re:Wake me when they have something in production. by BlueKitties · · Score: 1

      That'd be none then, zero, zilch, nowt, nothing.

      I know, that was the point. "Three out of three never go anywhere..." Of course, there are those rare breakthroughs that actually do something. Sure, it's nice to see Scientific tinkering, but I'm really most interested in stuff that is practical.

      --
      "Sorrow is better than laughter, for by sadness of face the heart is made glad." [Ecclesiastes 7:3]
    6. Re:Wake me when they have something in production. by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And without the "R," the "D" has nothing to do.

      The kind of thing TFA is talking about is a lot more than "just a nice thought." The researchers have done some very difficult, impressive work. Will it ultimately become a usable product? We have no way of knowing. But they've contributed to the sum of human knowledge in a meaningful way. This is pretty much how the relationship between science and technology works.

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    7. Re:Wake me when they have something in production. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Nicely said, although it's sad that you have to explain that on Slashdot, of all places.

    8. Re:Wake me when they have something in production. by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Thanks. And yeah, I was thinking that when I made the original post.

      There does seem to be a contingent on Slashdot that sees science as kind of irrelevant. Scientists are ivory-tower eggheads with their heads in the clouds who waste their time on airy-fairy ideas, engineers are tough gritty workin' men with dirt under their fingernails who really make things happen ... that kind of thing. It's bullshit, of course, but it's very appealing bullshit to people who don't actually know that much about how science or engineering actually works, but think they do.

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    9. Re:Wake me when they have something in production. by Mister+Whirly · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And without the "D" producing a product that sells, there is rarely money for "R". Unfortunately it is not the academic minded handing out the research grants, it is the bean counters. (Otherwise all of our world problems would be likely solved by now.) This is pretty much how the relationship between science and reality works.

      --
      "But this one goes to 11!"
    10. Re:Wake me when they have something in production. by hansraj · · Score: 3, Informative

      damn it! I mistakenly modded you redundant (I was going for insightful). Replying to undo the mod and to earn some off-topic mods probably :(

    11. Re:Wake me when they have something in production. by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Except here we have researchers at Purdue, a university with a history of a particularly strong and fruitful connection between science and engineering, doing solid scientific research which may well (or may not, of course) lead to useful commercial development. Believe me, I agree with you entirely about the "bean counters," and I would very much like to see more money directed toward pure research. (Part of this is pure self-interest, since I'm an academic scientist, but I felt this way back when I was doing corporate DBA work too.) The point is that while it may not happen enough, it does happen ... and "who cares" attitudes, like the one displayed in the OP which I replied to, are a major obstacle to it happening more.

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    12. Re:Wake me when they have something in production. by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 1

      Thank you! That was a very nice thing to do, and I hope you don't get modded down for it.

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    13. Re:Wake me when they have something in production. by Tenebrousedge · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The rest of us see what does not exist, and think, why not?

      --
      Those who advocate genocide deserve every protection afforded by law, and none afforded by common human decency.
    14. Re:Wake me when they have something in production. by JustinOpinion · · Score: 1

      I see about three revolutionary breakthroughs per day, three of which never go anywhere because of cost or something.

      You're saying that no fundamental breakthroughs ever "go anywhere", which is patently false. The amazing array of technology around us (from computers to MRIs to satellites to medical drugs) can be traced back to fundamental research breakthroughs.

      I will grant you that the majority of breakthroughs do not directly translate into a particular product. But that's the nature of research: we have to study a wide-variety of things to find those that are really significant for technology. Moreover just by pushing the boundaries of what we know and what can be done, we inevitably improve technology (e.g. particle physicists built better magnets for accelerators, which wound up making MRI possible/better...).

      This reminds me of those "water on mars," articles -- we've been "getting new compelling evidence for water on mars" for decades.

      Yes, science is mostly incremental. It requires repeated testing, the accumulation of evidence from different sources, and so on. What's wrong with that?

      I've started to lose interest. I'll be excited when it finally goes somewhere. Really, what gets my blood pumping is what I can see coming down the pipe

      Ok. So you like new products but don't care so much about the details of the research that goes into making all that happen. That's cool. But your implication (by posting a "Wake me up..." comment in a discussion about fundamental research) is that such things are just not interesting or relevant. There are many of us who disagree: we like fundamental science, we find the interim steps in research quite interesting, we like being aware of cool technologies years before they are commercialized, and so on.

      If all you care about are the final specs of the latest tech, then you can certainly ignore all those boring science articles.

    15. Re:Wake me when they have something in production. by The+End+Of+Days · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately it is not the academic minded handing out the research grants, it is the bean counters. (Otherwise all of our world problems would be likely solved by now.)

      Thanks for the best laugh I've had in my entire life. I love you, man.

    16. Re:Wake me when they have something in production. by tenco · · Score: 1

      You will never get practical stuff without "Scientific tinkering" (others call it "Research"). So if you're not interested in tinkering, simply skip articles like this one.

    17. Re:Wake me when they have something in production. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Quite so. In fact as far as I'm concerned once a working lab model has been made it's a solved problem and there's nothing interesting left to do :) All the extra work to produce into a commercial product is pretty tedious stuff.

      What's so interesting about a 128 GB flash drive anyway? It's just a normal flash drive, but bigger. Useful, maybe. Interesting, no.

    18. Re:Wake me when they have something in production. by GodfatherofSoul · · Score: 1

      That's a hell of a long pipe for production Mars water.

      --
      I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
  10. Words by AnonGCB · · Score: 1

    "surface plasmons"

    Really? Plasmons? Are they just making words up now?

    --
    http://CryoLANparty.com/ A lan I'm staff on!
    1. Re:Words by MadAnalyst · · Score: 3, Informative

      It is a widely accepted term in the field, well known to certain physicists/chemists. But Google might help you learn something new.

    2. Re:Words by FrankSchwab · · Score: 4, Funny

      Yes, they are; and writing bogus http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plasmon Wikipedia entries about them. /frank

      --
      And the worms ate into his brain.
    3. Re:Words by blincoln · · Score: 1

      Really? Plasmons? Are they just making words up now?

      It's a quasi-particle, like an electron hole.

      --
      "...always new atoms but always doing the same dance, remembering what the dance was yesterday." -Richard Feynman
    4. Re:Words by johannesg · · Score: 2, Funny

      "surface plasmons"

      Really? Plasmons? Are they just making words up now?

      Yeah. It's stupid: we already had the perfectly functional phrase "plasmid" to describe those.

      Personally I'm holding out for them perfecting the electricity plasmid.

    5. Re:Words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, because that's their job. Scientists are *supposed* to make things up...then prove they were right. If scientists didn't do things that needed new words to be invented then they wouldn't be doing anything interesting. And who else would invent the words? It's not like they'd hire an english major to do that.

    6. Re:Words by MadUndergrad · · Score: 4, Funny

      From the Wikipedia article:

      "For plasmon-based electronics to be useful, an analog to the transistor, called a plasmonster, must be invented."

      It is dark. You are likely to be eaten by a plasmonster.

    7. Re:Words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So... THAT's what the fuck a "grue" is!

  11. perhaps by OrangeMonkey11 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    someone can use this to further the idea/technologies of creating an artificial brain; use the spaser as an artificial receptors.

  12. Keep up the good work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is starting to be more than what I've dreamed to be. Is our nature going to evolve fast enough to keep up with the the technology, or are we escalating individual power enough to a point that the possibility of mass destruction by single individuals is going to be common, and therefore inevitable sooner or later.
    I sincerely hope humans can keep up.

  13. how will we be able to hear by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    The tiny "pew pew pew" sounds? Hardly sounds fun to me.

  14. VCSELs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    "but current lasers can't be made small enough to integrate them into electronic chips."

    Yeah, except VCSELs have been around since the 80s. They are definitely small enough to integrate into an electronic chip, and they have been for quite some time.

  15. USELESS TECHNOLOGY!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    We have NO nano cats to use it with!

  16. Mork from Ork should be proud... by EsJay · · Score: 1

    ...of his peoples' accomplishment!

  17. USELESS TECHNOLOGY!!! by oo_HAWK_oo · · Score: 1, Redundant

    We have no nano cats to chase them!

  18. Too bad for you . . . by Tanman · · Score: 2, Funny

    Horton Hears the Pew!

  19. Nanoo Nanoo! by sycodon · · Score: 1

    Never mind. Like anyone here knows/remembers Mork and Mindy.

    --
    When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
  20. Whoever tagged this 'backronym' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    needs to learn the definition of 'backronym'

  21. Really? by Spykk · · Score: 1

    Many sources are reporting that researchers have created the world's smallest laser since the inception of lasers almost a half-century ago.

    How necessary is the end of that statement? Were they worried someone might assume a smaller laser had been created before the inception of lasers?

    1. Re:Really? by cowscows · · Score: 1

      Depending on how you read it, it almost sounds like they were saying that the first laser ever made was the smallest one that had been created, until now. Which seems rather unlikely. But yeah, it was a silly choice of words.

      --

      One time I threw a brick at a duck.

    2. Re:Really? by suomynonAyletamitlU · · Score: 1

      Clearly they didn't want to count the lasers I will have created 500 years ago after I go back in time next week.

  22. Something missing. by Arimus · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Just where do I get a nano shark to mount one of these ere lasers on?

    --
    --- Users are like bacteria -> Each one causing a thousand tiny crises until the host finally gives up and dies.
  23. Parses and functions fine for me. by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 2, Informative

    Many sources are reporting that researchers have created the world's smallest laser since the inception of lasers almost a half-century ago.

    How necessary is the end of that statement? Were they worried someone might assume a smaller laser had been created before the inception of lasers?

    That formulation parses and functions for me.

    It's a compact way of saying:
      - Lasers were invented almost a century ago.
      - Since then there has been a continuing series of inventions of progressively smaller lasers.
      - And with each of these inventions the inventor and/or the media went into a hype frenzy about the latest "world's smallest laser"
      - But there's something special about this one ...

    And there is: It's the first one where the resonator (a size-limiting component) is MUCH smaller than a quarter-wavelength of the resonant frequency light.

    And, as somebody who worked in a laser lab back in the late '60s and with cutting-edge semiconductors these days, I can attest that this little device is a BIG DEAL (TM).

    I expect the next step - an electrically-pumped version - in a year or less. Followed by one that can be grown epitaxially on a wafer and hooked to a waveguide that's also built by stock chip manufacturing techniques. And that's the point where you switch to optics - first for getting signals on and off the chip (a BIG power eater), eventually maybe for getting signals around the chip.

    Unless something BETTER comes along before then. (Which is the REAL reason most of these breakthroughs never make production.)

    --
    Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
    1. Re:Parses and functions fine for me. by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 1

      - Lasers were invented almost a half century ago.

      Shoulda previewed. B-(

      --
      Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
  24. One of the more interesting talks this week by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

    One of the more interesting talks this week at the UW is the one on nano-ethics.

    At first I thought this was going to be about the ethics of using nanotech to observe or interact, but now I'm starting to wonder if it has to do with the ethics of giving nanobots some frickin nano-lasers to rebel against us with.

    Remind me to get some ablative undershorts.

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  25. Another Nano-Laser by tenco · · Score: 1

    ...was featured on the arxiv blog not long ago: First Free-Electron Light Source on a Chip . Well, it isn't a Laser, yet. I know. But this also looks very promising for integrated optics and the team that's working on it want to get it lasing.

  26. Could this mean.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    a PCI-X card using actual rays for ray tracing? I'd like that very much!

  27. It would be bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You may not short the signals, but you'd have to imagine all life as you know it stopping instantaneously and every molecule in your body exploding at the speed of light.