Slashdot Mirror


Researchers Create 4nm Transistor With Seven Atoms

EmagGeek writes "University researchers have created a transistor by replacing just seven atoms of silicon with phosphorous. The seven-atom transistor has hopeful implications for the future of quantum cryptography, nuclear and weather modeling, and other applications. 'The significance of this achievement is that we are not just moving atoms around or looking at them through a microscope,' says Professor Michelle Simmons, a co-author of a paper on the subject that is being published by Nature Nanotechnology. The paper is entitled 'Spectroscopy of Few-Electron Single-Crystal Silicon Quantum Dots'."

13 of 120 comments (clear)

  1. 7 Atoms? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Should've used a VIA C7 instead.

  2. New hardware error? by Errol+backfiring · · Score: 4, Funny

    Just wait until you get an error message that says:

    * * * ATOM NOT PRESENT ERROR * * *

    --
    Nae king! Nae laird! Nae yurrupiean pressedent! We willna be fooled again!
    1. Re:New hardware error? by Yvan256 · · Score: 3, Funny

      Better than the Wolfcastle error:
      At them not present error.

    2. Re:New hardware error? by roman_mir · · Score: 4, Funny

      Atom decay detected, insert proton. (Insert, Abort, Cancel)

    3. Re:New hardware error? by jo_ham · · Score: 3, Funny

      "Are you sure you want to insert a proton?"

      (Positive, Cancel)

    4. Re:New hardware error? by binarylarry · · Score: 4, Funny

      * ATOMIC ERROR: ATOM IS EITHER PRESENT OR NOT PRESENT (I CAN'T TELL, CAN YOU LOOK)

      cat cat cat cat cat cat cat cat cat cat cat cat cat cat cat cat cat cat cat cat cat cat cat cat cat cat cat cat cat cat cat cat cat cat cat cat cat cat cat cat cat cat cat cat cat cat cat cat cat cat cat cat cat cat cat cat cat cat cat cat cat cat cat cat cat cat cat cat cat cat cat cat cat cat cat cat cat vv

      --
      Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
    5. Re:New hardware error? by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 2, Funny

      "PC LOAD PHOSPHORUS"?

      What the fuck does that mean?

  3. Eat my transistor by flahwho · · Score: 5, Funny

    I once created a transistor with seven raisins. It didn't last long and I think Kelloggs stole the patent!

    --I forgot my sig.

  4. Re:By This Logic... by soilheart · · Score: 2, Funny

    This is not the article you are looking for.

  5. Re:Interesting by irreverant · · Score: 4, Funny

    We move forward while we move back, if it needs to be in a vacuum then it would use a vacuum tube, while it's good for music it's bad for computers since we moved forward from these to transistors. I'm thoroughly confused now.

    --
    Of all the things I've lost; I miss my mind the most. - Mark Twain
  6. Re:Gonna be tough to solder! by Linker3000 · · Score: 3, Funny

    One atom has a tab

    --
    AT&ROFLMAO
  7. Re:6 Atom transistor by LHorstman · · Score: 2, Funny

    Would someone tell me how this happened? We were the fucking vanguard of quantum transistors in this country. The University of New South Wales' Centre for Quantum Computer Technology (CQCT) Mach7 was the quantum transistor to own. Then the other guy came out with a seven-atom transistor. Were we scared? Hell, no. Because we hit back with a little thing called the Mach7Turbo. That's seven atoms and an aloe strip. For moisture. But you know what happened next? Shut up, I'm telling you what happened--the bastards went to six atoms. Now we're standing around with our cocks in our hands, selling seven atoms and a strip. Moisture or no, suddenly we're the chumps. Well, fuck it. We're doing 5 atoms!

  8. Re:Not Holding My Breath by ground.zero.612 · · Score: 2, Funny

    In macroscopic terms the world is simple. The finer the resolution the more complex the world gets. In nanoscopic terms the world is complicated.

    Making chips is considerably harder than making bricks; and yet we do make both.

    Our current technology allows us to automate macroscopic processes with high precision. Nanotechnology however is one leading edge technology, and as such the precision certainly isn't there to make a fair comparison to automated macroscopic processes.

    Making chips was once leading edge technology, not comparable to making bricks; and yet we made both.

    Think of a doctor performing surgery: a large benign tumor in section of fat could be easily removed, while a miniscule brain tumor would probably be one of the most difficult to remove.

    Removing a minuscule brain tumor is much harder than amputating a leg; and yet we do both.

    That's precisely the point of science and technology. Some guy spends years doing something that was previously impossible. Some other guys try little variants on the same action. And then a guy develops a process of doing the exact same thing but better, faster and cheaper.

    Once the action passes through the imposibility barrier, the steps from "breakthough" to "mundane" are well known. We've spent several thousand years walking those steps on each new discovery.

    So then, just so I'm clear, leg amputation is just as difficult as brain surgery; bricks are just as hard to make as silicon wafers.

    Thanks for clearing all that up. Now that you've enlightened me on now the world works I will fly home after work this evening using nothing but my arms. Because I can walk with my legs.

    --
    "Be prepared, son. That's my motto. Be prepared." --Joe Hallenbeck