Slashdot Mirror


IBM Demos Single-Atom DRAM

An anonymous reader writes "A single-atom DRAM was demonstrated by IBM recently with a slow-mo movie of the atomic process of setting and erasing a bit on a single atom. Videos of atomic processes inside chips were not possible until now, leading to IBM's claim that its pulsed-STM (used to make the movie) will lead to a new atomic-scale semiconductor industry, and not just for memory chips, according to this EETimes story: 'The ultimate memory chips of the future will encode bits on individual atoms, a capability recently demonstrated for iron atoms by IBM's Almaden Research Center in San Jose, Calif., which unveiled a new pulsed technique for scanning tunneling microscopes (STMs). Pulsed-STMs yield nanosecond time-resolution, a requirement for designing the atomic-scale memory chips, solar panels and quantum computers of the future, but also for making super efficient organic solar cells by controlling photovoltaic reactions on the atomic level.'"

38 of 150 comments (clear)

  1. where on the periodic table? by Average_Joe_Sixpack · · Score: 3, Funny

    are we talking H or Uuq sized DRAM? because I don't want to be obsolete within a year.

    1. Re:where on the periodic table? by man_of_mr_e · · Score: 3, Funny

      And we come full circle. IBM started with Iron core memory, and now they're doing it again.

    2. Re:where on the periodic table? by bersl2 · · Score: 2, Funny

      What about the e+ memory? I heard that it's completely incompatible with the e-.

    3. Re:where on the periodic table? by rubycodez · · Score: 4, Informative

      funny, but actually IBM started with punched cards for external storage, gears for internal memory, and later patch panels for ROM.

      http://www.columbia.edu/acis/history/tabulator.html

    4. Re:where on the periodic table? by Lehk228 · · Score: 2, Funny

      both are part of a trinary ECC memory. when an error is detected, it explodes

      --
      Snowden and Manning are heroes.
  2. A video explaining how it works by rminsk · · Score: 5, Informative

    Video explaining the process.

  3. Just one atom? by iceaxe · · Score: 5, Funny

    One atom ought to be enough for anybody.

    (Sorry)

    --
    WALSTIB!
  4. Has not already happend yet... by Meshach · · Score: 4, Interesting
    From TFA:

    The ultimate memory chips of the future will encode bits on individual atoms, a capability recently demonstrated for iron atoms by IBM's Almaden Research Center in San Jose, Calif., which unveiled a new pulsed technique for scanning tunneling microscopes (STMs).

    So this has not already happened (as the article implies) but is an idea for future development.

    --
    "Maybe this world is another planet's hell"
    Aldous Huxley
  5. Even more vulnerable to radiation? by GrumblyStuff · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Don't electronics become more susceptible as they become smaller? How much redundancy would be needed now that you only have a single atom to hold a bit of memory?

    1. Re:Even more vulnerable to radiation? by hedwards · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Yes and no, less likely that it will be hit but significantly more damaging if it is hit. What I'm wanting to know is what their plans are for error correction. A single atom is susceptible to all sorts of things that thousands or even hundreds of atoms aren't.

    2. Re:Even more vulnerable to radiation? by The13thSin · · Score: 2, Insightful

      While I share your concern to a certain extent, the great thing here is we can "perfect" data density... at least to the atomic scale. With more research and/or data we'll know/learn the reliability and plan accordingly. Want data that you can trust to be right for 1000 years with 99.999998% certainty? Use solution X! Want data to be right for 1 year with 99.5% certainty? Use solution Y!

      Can't wait for a 1 PB "harddrive" which looks like a grain of sand!

      --
      "This should be fun, and by fun, I mean a wholly depressing insight into the cognitive ability of some grown adults."
    3. Re:Even more vulnerable to radiation? by hairyfeet · · Score: 3, Funny

      Oh good Lord why? it is already hard enough to find the dang cell phone or where you laid your flash stick now, can you imagine having to hunt for your portadrive like a fricking contact lens? It'll be "OMG! Nobody move, or sneeze, or fart, or disturb the air! I just dropped my flash and it has a paper due today! ZOMG!"

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
  6. Big deal... by skynexus · · Score: 5, Funny

    the processor on my computer runs on a single Atom already. I'm not impressed.

    1. Re:Big deal... by n1hilist · · Score: 4, Funny

      I overclocked mine and it split :(

  7. Atoms by transwarp · · Score: 2, Funny

    This gives new meaning to atomic writes.

  8. Not anywhere near ready for prime time by Required+Snark · · Score: 3, Interesting

    This is a fantastic technical achievement. However, it has no meaningful direct link to ANY deployable technology. It is a measurement technique, and although the article does not say so, I'm sure it requires a temperature of somewhere below 1K, maybe below .001K. That is the only way they could be getting signals of these phenomena without getting swamped by thermal noise. All the stuff about single atom storage is boilerplate marketing hype. I assumes that they have a hot key to paste in how a new technology can be used for memory storage, or solar cells, or green technology or ...

    --
    Why is Snark Required?
    1. Re:Not anywhere near ready for prime time by gmuslera · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Even if is a solution searching for a problem, still worth. Who knows, maybe could be used in space (satellites, space probes, etc), maybe the next best place for datacenters is in orbit. Or be ready till some other advancements turn them into something practical.

  9. Re:So.. Much as it seems like it, this does not qu by hedwards · · Score: 3, Informative

    It doesn't apply, Moore's law only applies to transistor count on processors.

  10. Re:Quantum effects? by harley78 · · Score: 2, Funny

    yes and no, just don't ever try to access the data...

  11. Re:Quantum effects? by kurokame · · Score: 3, Informative

    You have to start worrying at quantum effects WAY before the scale which is currently in most modern computers. Interesting question though.

    And while single-atom memory is an interesting feat, memory density isn't everything. It lets you get more capacity into less space, which can be nice. But if size was everything, I'd use my hard drive instead of my system memory and CPU cache. After all, it's easy to get a hard drive on the order of a couple terabytes while system memory is still typically on the order of a few gigabytes, and CPU cache is on the order of a few megabytes.

  12. Nothing to see here by meteficha · · Score: 2, Funny

    We Haskellers already use STM since a long time.

  13. How many atoms in the sensor? by OrangeTide · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Call me when the sense hardware is only an atom per bit.

    --
    “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
  14. Just One Bit? by Greyfox · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Slackers! Most atoms have way more electrons than that!

    --

    I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

  15. Re:Quantum effects? by c0lo · · Score: 3, Informative

    And while single-atom memory is an interesting feat, memory density isn't everything. It lets you get more capacity into less space, which can be nice.

    yes, indeed, will let you get more capacity only when you fit the probe in the same space. For the time being, an STM is about this big.
    As a research technique, is amazing. As an applicative discovery... a long way yet until the real-life consumer grade direct application will emerge (if ever)

    But if size was everything

    Hit the nail in the head here: latency and power consumption spring into my mind as well.

    --
    Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
  16. Re:Quantum effects? by suomynonAyletamitlU · · Score: 3, Interesting

    yes, indeed, will let you get more capacity only when you fit the probe in the same space. For the time being, an STM is about this big.

    I'd dearly love to know how they plan on locating any particular atom, let alone redirect the read/write head to it and only it.

    Even if the atoms are arranged in an array, flat, how does an atom-scale read head know where it is pointing with sufficiently minuscule granularity? Do they intend to put markers on the surface nearby--oh no wait atoms. Well, they can probably have wires leading--oh no wait atoms. Well, maybe if they color--oh.

    Well I guess they'll just have to have one atom surrounded by its own read-write logic, flash-style, and completely negate the whole point of having the actual storage on the atomic size. Oh no wait, that's not even what this research is about.

    Seriously, I don't think this has much potential for engineering, as much as it may be clever science.

  17. Re:And by Moore's Law... by jameskojiro · · Score: 5, Funny

    1 year after that we will be encoding data on quarks themselves.....

    6 months later we will make neutrinos our bitches for storing and processing data....

    3 months after that we will be creating even smaller particles from cosmic strings to process and store data int he fabric of spacetime.

    1 day later we will make God cry.

    --
    Tsukasa: All I really want, is to be left alone...
  18. Re:Quantum effects? by kurokame · · Score: 3, Interesting

    You apply a voltage gradient. By some clever field manipulation, sensor placement, and computational wizardry you can address a spot in a three-dimensional lattice. It would probably work something like an MRI, if it had the bastard child of an STM.

  19. Re:So.. Much as it seems like it, this does not qu by Khyber · · Score: 3, Informative

    And that single atom in a RAM cell doesn't count as a transistor?

    If it performs the same functions, there is no reason to not apply the same law.

    Oh, hey, look, we've got Transistors with THREE atoms.

    ONE atom shouldn't be a problem. If it acts like a transistor, it's a transistor.

    A transistor either acts as an amplifier or an electrical signal switch.

    Therefore, a single-atom DRAM cell would be using single-atom transistors.

    Want to try making this argument against someone *NOT* deeply involved in this industry?

    --
    Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
  20. IBM's Almaden Research Center now sells lumber by viking80 · · Score: 2

    TFA referes to "capability recently demonstrated for iron atoms by IBM's Almaden Research Center in San Jose, Calif"

    I remember that place. It used to be one of the biggest research parks in the are. Then an few years ago it became Hitachi, say "Inspire the Next", research after Hitachi bought that division of IBM many years ago. I think they shut it down a few years ago, because it all became tall weeds, and now a brand new Lowe's store emerged in its place.

    BTW, someone should collect slogans of Japanese companies: "Inspire the Next", WTF does that mean?

    --
    don't cut it off www.mgmbill.org
  21. Re:Where on the DRAM spectrum? by zrbyte · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Yes it does. This is entirely basic research, although a very exciting (especially for me since I work with STMs)! The pulsed STM concept is the interesting part here for a scientist. The application to memory is just a kind of long term prospect they have to write into the paper, to get it published in a high ranking journal. It is not very applicable in practice yet. I guess I need not say that the reading, writing, addressing of more than 1 bit of memory is not possible yet. Furthermore, these STMs operate at liquid helium temperatures (3.2 Kelvin). Who would want to carry around a cryostat with they laptop? :)

  22. Re:Next up by Khyber · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Single-atom DRM?

    Guess we'll need nuclear reactors to crack that.

    But, then again, I don't think the **AA will exist by the time that comes around. I would really think by then independent artists might actually rule the scene as they show their unique talent versus the cultured BS of the other industries.

    --
    Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
  23. Re:Next up by Khyber · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I've already cracked their master-copy machines (own one myself for my own music recordings, and the data trace protection is WEAK,) so as it stands right now, unless they CAN modify the universe or come out with a new technology that I (or my company) can't purchase and bypass, they're SOL.

    I made it a lifelong goal to screw the assholes screwing us, and I'm pretty close to having enough money and power to do it.

    I will become the lobbyist you always dreamed of - one that actually cared about humanity instead of profit.

    --
    Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
  24. Crappy headline. by vegiVamp · · Score: 2, Informative

    The article is about IBM's new pulsed STM tech, and notes that "it may enable atom-scale memory in the future". They did NOT demonstrate single-atom DRAM.

    --
    What a depressingly stupid machine.
  25. Re:Where on the DRAM spectrum? by vidnet · · Score: 4, Funny

    Who would want to carry around a cryostat with [their] laptop?

    Just slap an Apple logo on it, and people will never leave home without it.

  26. Old hat by SpaghettiPattern · · Score: 2, Funny

    This is so horribly old hat. I mean, we know atoms for ages now so IBM needn't be smug about them. IBM, stop wasting our time and give the world a call as soon as single Higgs boson DRAM is available to retailers!

    Now, what was I doing again? Yes, studying Xiph' Digital Media Primer For Geeks and appreciating sample videos with scarcely clothed women.

    --

    I hadn't the slightest objection to his spending his time planning massacres for the bourgeoisie... (P.G. Wodehouse)
  27. Re:So.. Much as it seems like it, this does not qu by TheRaven64 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Actually, Moore's law applies to the number of components on an integrated circuit (for a fixed cost). The original paper makes no mention of processors, and only talks about transistors as an example of the components you put on an IC. It directly applies to RAM, and any other kind of IC, because it's talking about process technology not about what you do with the ICs.

    --
    I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  28. Re:So.. Much as it seems like it, this does not qu by TheRaven64 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Nope, there are lots of subatomic places where we could store information. The spin on electrons, for example. Another simple alternative would be to use the photovoltaic effect to move electrons up and down energy levels. Fire a photon at the atom to move the electron up one energy level, measure its charge to find the current one.

    Of course, when I say simple, I mean in terms of theoretical physics. In terms of engineering, it's quite the opposite.

    --
    I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  29. Next Up: by seven+of+five · · Score: 2

    Single-atom DRM.