Slashdot Mirror


IBM Creates World's Smallest 3-D Map

schliz writes "IBM scientists have created the smallest 3-D map of the earth, so small that 1,000 maps could fit on a grain of salt (YouTube video from IBM). The 500K-pixel map was created in 2 minutes 23 seconds. Using a tiny, heated silicon tip, the technique reached a resolution of 15nm — comparable to the 10nm achievable by the more complex electron beam lithography. The researchers believe that smaller resolutions are feasible. Potential applications range from fast prototyping for CMOS nanoelectronics to fabricating shape-matching templates for self-assembling nano-rods or nano-tubes, IBM says. The researchers also produced a billion-to-one scale model of the Matterhorn." This is very much a laboratory technique at the moment, at least five years from commercial use.

65 of 90 comments (clear)

  1. Obligatory... by ddegirmenci · · Score: 3, Funny

    >> at least 5 years from commercial use.

    http://xkcd.com/678/

    1. Re:Obligatory... by dmmiller2k · · Score: 1

      Ahhh, it's just as well to put off the inevitable for a few more years. I'm already at the point where I have trouble reading the darned things while driving.

      No matter how cynical you get, it is impossible to keep up. - Lily Tomlin

      --

      "No matter how cynical you get, it is impossible to keep up." -- Lily Tomlin

  2. Not really an improvement aye? by santax · · Score: 1

    I mean, back in the seventies, my grandmother bought me a globe that could spin, was big enough to actually read AND had light! Bet it was a lot cheaper too.

  3. Road Trip by mark0 · · Score: 4, Funny

    That's going to be a PITA to fold.

    1. Re:Road Trip by chill · · Score: 2, Funny

      How many times do I have to say it? ROLL the maps!

      --
      Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
  4. Fail by Chelloveck · · Score: 2, Funny

    No Street View == FAIL.

    --
    Chelloveck
    I give up on debugging. From now on, SIGSEGV is a feature.
  5. ah by sentientbeing · · Score: 4, Funny

    Ah miniature maps. The next big thing.

    --

    ------
    beware he who would deny you access to information, for in his mind he dreams himself your master
    1. Re:ah by The_Wilschon · · Score: 1

      Next? The idea for this sort of thing has been around since at least 1959.

      --
      SIGSEGV caught, terminating

      wait... not that kind of sig.
    2. Re:ah by Rogerborg · · Score: 1

      Whoosh! (That's the sound of a joke flying right under your feet)

      --
      If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
    3. Re:ah by Curtman · · Score: 1

      The real question is... How many Libraries of Congress will fit on the grain of salt using this technology?

  6. Microcosm by Ukab+the+Great · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Perhaps the Earth we live on is in actuality someone's really tiny 3D map.

    1. Re:Microcosm by digitalchinky · · Score: 1

      Or it's part of someones star system. : )

    2. Re:Microcosm by KillaBeave · · Score: 2, Funny

      <Keanu> Whoa... </Keanu>

    3. Re:Microcosm by hackerman · · Score: 1

      I see what you did there

    4. Re:Microcosm by Phoghat · · Score: 1

      Redundant. Same discussion we had back in university while smoking herb

      --
      Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
  7. pffft...must be a hoax by neurovish · · Score: 3, Funny

    I'll believe it when I see it.

    1. Re:pffft...must be a hoax by Locke2005 · · Score: 1

      Hey! Stop stealing my sig!

      --
      I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
  8. Is this a map.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    for Ants!?

    it needs to be at least 3 times bigger than this.

  9. what? by Punto · · Score: 3, Insightful

    a 3D map made of pixels created with a physical needle? what the hell does that mean? is this a physical map, or just information? what is a "pixel" in a 3D map? do they mean a voxel? or are pixels a unit of discrete physical space now? (3D physical space?). Somebody got their concepts all mixed up I think.

    --

    --
    Stay tuned for some shock and awe coming right up after this messages!

    1. Re:what? by Splab · · Score: 1

      If you bothered to read and view the video you would understand that 3D in this case is depth, not building blocks, in this context a pixel makes perfect sense since a pixel is the smallest discrete component in a picture.

    2. Re:what? by JustinOpinion · · Score: 4, Informative

      It is 3D in the sense that it is a 2D image with topography (a height map). Basically they are using a very sharp (nano-sized) heated stylus to desorb ("burn") away nano-sized amounts of polymer. (This is basically a variant of "scanning probe" methods like atomic force microscopy.) By carefully positioning the probe in x-y you can draw a pattern, and by controlling the stylus height and burn time, you can control the depth. In this way you can create arbitrary topography at the nano-scale.

      Many of the comments in this thread seem to be fixating on the uselessness of such a small map of the world. Making a world map was just a cute proof of principle (the paper also shows test patterns so that you can judge patterning fidelity). Basically this is a new way to pattern at the nanoscale in an fairly arbitrary way. Of course raster scanning a stylus is going to be very slow compared to optical lithography, but at this stage it's better to compare to something like e-beam lithography which is the raster-scanning of an electron beam. This is also slow, but can make very high-resolution patterns and is thus great for exploratory research and for creating the masters that are then used for optical lithography. This new nano-desorbing technique could be another way to make master patterns. In fact, the papers mention that the resolution and throughput are in fact comparable to e-beam methods. And this new technique has a couple of advantages:
      1. The ability to not just pattern in 2D, but control the topography could reduce the number of patterning steps in microchip construction.
      2. These mechanical 'scanning tips' can in principle be built into massive arrays, allowing parallel (high-throughput) patterning. In fact IBM has been working on a project called millipede for using these arrays of tips as a data storage device. (This most recent patterning work appears to be an offshoot, where instead of melting pits to store data, they are blasting away material to pattern.)

      It's always difficult to predict whether these things will become real products one day, but the proof-of-principle for both tip arrays, and now for nano-scale patterning using heated tips, means that we're actually relatively close. If IBM pursues this, it could become a new nano-patterning method in the toolbox of the microelectronics industry (which is, of course, always looking for techniques that can push patterning to ever smaller scales).

      For anyone interested (and with subscription access), here are the papers:
      "Nanoscale 3D Patterning of Molecular Resists by Scanning Probes" by D. Pires, J. L. Hedrick, A. De Silva, J. Frommer, B. Gotsmann, H. Wolf, M. Despont, U. Duerig and A. W. Knoll was published by Science on the Science Express website on April 22, 2010, DOI: 10.1126/science.1187851
      "Probe-based 3-D Nanolithography Using Self-Amplified Depolymerization Polymers" by A. Knoll, D. Pires, O. Coulembier, P. Dubois, J. L. Hedrick, J. Frommer and U. Duerig was published in Advanced Materials, advanced online publication on April 23, 2010, DOI: 10.1002/adma.200904386

  10. Resolution? by jpyeck · · Score: 2, Informative

    To what scale is this a "map of the Earth"? At some point this will become so small a 3D map of the Earth is going to be indistinguishable from a sphere.

    1. Re:Resolution? by timeOday · · Score: 3, Informative

      Welcome to the Internet, where you can take a look and see for yourself with just a single click.

    2. Re:Resolution? by Mister+Whirly · · Score: 1

      I developed a system for making 1:1 scale maps - the problem was folding and storing them. But damn were they accurate.

      --
      "But this one goes to 11!"
    3. Re:Resolution? by Dishevel · · Score: 1

      I make my maps at 1:1000. Those are Accurate!

      --
      Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
    4. Re:Resolution? by md65536 · · Score: 1

      At a billion-to-one scale, the Earth would be about as big as a thumbnail (12.7562 mm diameter).

      At any scale, the "sphereyness" should be exactly the same. The Earth when viewed from the moon, should look just as much like a sphere as such a model held in your hand somewhere in front of your face. You're wondering, how closely or largely would you have to view such a model, to distinguish its details? For making maps to be viewed with the naked eye, the nanoscopic detail described in TFA is far too dense to be practical.

  11. It's going to be tough by jitterman · · Score: 1

    to hide from your opponents during a deathmatch on this level.

    --
    For conscience is the wound, and there's naught to staunch it
  12. Re:Maybe by Sulphur · · Score: 1

    Ubisoft can use this to print their game manuals.

    Does the globe mount in a tiny Selectric typewriter?

  13. "..a billion-to-one scale model of the Matterhorn" by hivebrain · · Score: 3, Funny

    Professor Slartibartfast is particularly proud of his glacier work with this model.

  14. And the oceans... by NtwoO · · Score: 1

    Are just flat, not in 3D... Work in progress, I'd say. ;)

    --
    ! /* */
  15. Coincidence by thredder · · Score: 1

    Ha, and I was planning to make one of these myself just the other day - small world!

    1. Re:Coincidence by Froboz23 · · Score: 1

      It's a small world after all,
      It's a small world after all,
      It's a small world after all,
      It's a small, small, 25um world.

      But I'm disappointed they didn't include the Continent Bonus values.

      --
      Take off every Sig. For great justice.
  16. I wouldn't call it a map really by ElSupreme · · Score: 2, Insightful

    With a surface area of 511,000,000 km^2 and only 500,000 pixels you are talking a pixel for every 1000 km^2. That is not what I would call a map, more so a spherical blob.

    --
    My addiction: Arguing with idiots. AKA Slashdot!
    1. Re:I wouldn't call it a map really by InsertWittyNameHere · · Score: 1

      It's still a map, doesn't matter what the scale is. In fact, no maps (of cities, the world, etc) are 1:1 because they would have to be the same size as what they are mapping.

    2. Re:I wouldn't call it a map really by Another,+completely · · Score: 3, Funny

      Steven Wright has claimed that he has a 1:1 map of the United States. He keeps it spread out across the country because it's a bitch to fold.

    3. Re:I wouldn't call it a map really by ElSupreme · · Score: 1

      Well scale, and resolution are completely different things.
      I have no problem with the SCALE that IBM is using. I have a problem with the resolution, Personally I don't think it is legitimate to call a half mega-pixel "globe" of the earth a 3D map. with 1000km resolution there is no valuable 3D information in there. This is a picture of the earth in globe form. A really low RESOLUTION one. Calling it a map is a stretch. Calling it a 3D map is not legitimate as there is no usable 3D Information based solely on resolution.

      --
      My addiction: Arguing with idiots. AKA Slashdot!
    4. Re:I wouldn't call it a map really by Bob-taro · · Score: 2, Informative

      I have a problem with the resolution ... Calling it a map is a stretch. Calling it a 3D map is not legitimate as there is no usable 3D Information based solely on resolution.

      Technically, it's a map no matter how little information is there. But aside from that, your math is off. It's one pixel for 1000km^2, not (1000km)^2. Each pixel represents a square with 32km sides.

      --
      Prov 9:8 Do not rebuke mockers or they will hate you; rebuke the wise and they will love you.
    5. Re:I wouldn't call it a map really by ElSupreme · · Score: 1

      Do you know any geographical features that are 32 km in the vertical? So there is NO usable 3D information. So it would not be a 3D map. It is a really low resolution flat globe.

      --
      My addiction: Arguing with idiots. AKA Slashdot!
    6. Re:I wouldn't call it a map really by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Quit being a douche. This isn't to put in your glove-box for navigation. It is an exercise of the technology.

  17. Great news! by CODiNE · · Score: 1

    This is excellent news and will be a real help to very very very very very small blind people.

    --
    Cwm, fjord-bank glyphs vext quiz
    1. Re:Great news! by CODiNE · · Score: 1

      Okay it's lame to reply to myself, but I don't want to detract from the very real work and effort that has gone into making actual 3D maps for the blind.

      http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_for_the_blind
      http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/HaptoRender

      There's a lot of mapping information that can help the blind such as where audio enhanced intersections exist, which roads the sidewalks can be felt, there's even 3D maps printed out with the street names converted to braille so 3D maps really are awesome for blind people.

      --
      Cwm, fjord-bank glyphs vext quiz
  18. Smaller resolutions? by MisterMidi · · Score: 1

    The researchers believe that smaller resolutions are feasible.

    I imagine with a lot of hard work they could eventually bring it back to 1x1 pixel.

  19. Calling Pete Brown... by srussia · · Score: 1

    You wanted higher DPI?

    --
    Set your phasers on "funky"!
  20. Cool by FearKratos · · Score: 1

    This sounds like it could be useful for saving information in data blocks.

    1. Re:Cool by RevWaldo · · Score: 1

      I was thinking the same thing. I imagine this could be used for those long long term data storage needs, say, thousands or millions of years. Beats using gold-plated LPs that's for sure.

  21. Solution in search of a problem by Locke2005 · · Score: 1

    Was this really a problem in the past, that globes were too big?!? And really, doesn't a really tiny "3D map of the earth" look exactly like a ball bearing?

    --
    I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
    1. Re:Solution in search of a problem by timeOday · · Score: 1

      Is your post serious? This is laughable. I can see it now, people jeering at Ben Franklin's experiments with electricity, "why do we need more sparks?"

    2. Re:Solution in search of a problem by f3rret · · Score: 1

      It's called "Proof of Concept", in this case the concept being a new form of nano-machining, the fact they made a map of the earth (And the Matterhorn) was merely to show off.

      --
      Admit nothing. Deny Everything. Make Counter-accusations.
    3. Re:Solution in search of a problem by Locke2005 · · Score: 1

      No, it was a joke. Apparently IBM got tired of writing the letters "I", "B", and "M" really, really small. But they could have been a lot more creative. E.g. they could have made a really, really tiny map of the human brain, and labeled it "Antitrust Lawyer's Brain (actual size)".

      --
      I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
  22. New type of microfilm by Locklin · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This could have some neat applications. You can encode a large amount of information (like a detailed map of the world) in something the size of a marble and read it without power using an optical microscope. If done well, this could have applications for things from a modern rosetta stone to providing reference material for schools in places without electricity.

    --
    "Knowledge is the only instrument of production that is not subject to diminishing returns" -Journal of Political Econom
  23. Re:IBM didn't invent this by ProdigyPuNk · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I'll shoot. It's one thing to move one or two "pixels" in this way. That's what a lot of the people did that you are referring to. It's quite another thing to actually DO something with the technology. Also, IBM will continue to improve this, and sooner or later will find an application worth using it on. So while they might not be kickstarting much in the way of science, science NEEDS bigger companies like this to push new technologies down the pipeline.

  24. They did it 10 years ago? by Shompol · · Score: 1

    They did a similar stunt about 10 years ago: engraved IBM with single molecules. I think there is no practical application -- they just roll the machine out of a closet every 10 years for publicity.
    Oh, wait, here's their patent... from 1971 !?

  25. What kind of salt? by Stele · · Score: 1

    1,000 maps could fit on a grain of salt

    Table, Kosher, or sea?

  26. Re:Matterhorn by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 2, Funny

    Why would you climb a billion-to-one scale model of the Matterhorn?

    Because it's barely there.

    --
    Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
  27. World's smallest... by notjustchalk · · Score: 1

    Stop making these useless world's smallest thingies already and make something someone might actually buy.

    "IBM presents: The World's Smallest Violin."

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rAlTOfl9F2w&feature=related

  28. a map for ants? by nachron+kind · · Score: 1

    what is this? a map for ants? this map needs to be at least... three times bigger!

  29. On a grain of salt? by RNLockwood · · Score: 1

    Give me a break, the proper measurement "is on the head of a pin". I mean, whoever heard of how many angels can dance on a grain of salt.
    Never mind their motivation.

    --
    Nate
    1. Re:On a grain of salt? by kimvette · · Score: 1

      What I want to know is this: how many of these spherical maps will it take to completely fill a volkswagon bug?

      --
      The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
  30. Neat by why not solve a harder problem? by al0ha · · Score: 1

    Pretty nifty for sure, but why a 3-D map? Why not solve a harder problem which is archival data storage? Seems to me being able to minutely etch the strings of 1s and 0s from a HD onto some material that either won't decay over time, or will decay so slowly as to vastly outlive optical and magnetic media, would be supremely useful for archival data storage.

    --
    Did you ever wake up in the morning, with a Zombie Woof behind your eyes? -- FZ
  31. I can't believe you guys... by urusan · · Score: 1

    Everyone is treating this like a joke, but really this is wonderful news.

    Sure, it's been done before...and their tiny 3D map and model of the Matterhorn are not particularly useful, but it was just a demonstration.

    The key here is the relative simplicity of their "nano-milling" machine. This idea could lead to some serious advances in cheap nanoscale fabrication in the next few decades. It could mean that it won't be just labs with hugely expensive equipment that get to play around with nanoscale structures...not to mention the potential industrial applications.

  32. Team up with Google maps by dmcq · · Score: 1

    I'd like to see a Google Maps version, at 1 pixel per meter squared. At 40000 Km for the earths circumference and 15nm resolution I make that as giving a 60cm wide map. Now that's the right size and you could use an electron microscope to inspect any point. I suppose it is too small for colour, I wonder what one could do about that. Next step a 3D world at the resolution of Google streetmap!

    --
    thou discernest my thoughts from afar
  33. So it stands for by ItsJustAPseudonym · · Score: 1

    The researchers also produced a billion-to-one scale model of the Matterhorn.

    Itty Bitty Matterhorn?

  34. Call me when... by jnnnnn · · Score: 1

    they hit 2nm resolution. That's when the quantum happy fun times really start.

  35. Re:Matterhorn by Eudial · · Score: 1

    Why would you climb a billion-to-one scale model of the Matterhorn?

    Because it's barely there.

    Yo mama's so fat she accidentally inhaled the Matterhorn.

    --
    GAAH! MY PRINTER IS ON FIRE!!! PUT IT OUT! PUT IT OUT!
  36. Access to original scientific paper by AdrianMiller · · Score: 1

    If anyone's interested in finding out more on the science behind this story, we've set the original research article free to access for the next few weeks; you can find it here: http://www.materialsviews.com/details/news/687441/Nanocartography__in_3D.html Adrian Miller Advanced Materials