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.'"
are we talking H or Uuq sized DRAM? because I don't want to be obsolete within a year.
Video explaining the process.
One atom ought to be enough for anybody.
(Sorry)
WALSTIB!
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
the processor on my computer runs on a single Atom already. I'm not impressed.
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?
It doesn't apply, Moore's law only applies to transistor count on processors.
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.
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?
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.
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.
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...
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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