Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Scientists Build Three Atom Thick LEDs

Posted by Unknown on from the smaller-better-faster dept.

minty3 tipped us to news that UW researchers have built the thinnest LEDs yet: a mere three atoms thick. Quoting El Reg: "Team leader Xiaodong Xu, a UW assistant professor in physics and materials science and engineering, and his graduate student Ross, have published the technique in the latest issue of Nature Nanotechnology. They report that the LEDs are small and powerful enough to be used in optical chips that use light instead of electricity to shuttle signals and data through a processor, or they could be stacked to make new thin and flexible displays."

32 of 54 comments (clear)

  1. I'll believe it... by Rick+in+China · · Score: 5, Funny

    When I see it!

  2. Only three atoms thick! by hey! · · Score: 4, Funny

    Unfortunately, that means they have to be several kilometers in width...

    --
    Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    1. Re:Only three atoms thick! by Nefarious+Wheel · · Score: 2

      New use for the term "chip real estate".
      Think of the foreclosures!

      --
      Do not mock my vision of impractical footwear
    2. Re:Only three atoms thick! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      Yes, but it's "waffer-thin" !

  3. Insulation... by Miamicanes · · Score: 4, Insightful

    And how many atoms thick does the insulating layer between adjacent photosensitive or photoemitting structures need to be to prevent light emitted by one pair's LED from unduly influencing the state of an adjacent photodiode/phototransistor?

    What, exactly, is the benefit of building a chip whose internal connections are basically all optoisolators?

    1. Re:Insulation... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      He is just making a couple of questions. I don't see him shitting on other people's work(whether this was his intention or not, IDK). Your too fast in to jump in conclusions. If I had an account and mod points you'd definitely get a "flamebait" -1 mod.

    2. Re:Insulation... by Mashiki · · Score: 2

      What, exactly, is the benefit of building a chip whose internal connections are basically all optoisolators?

      Besides omnidirectional communication without the need for direct pathways. Oh...not much.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    3. Re:Insulation... by artor3 · · Score: 1, Insightful

      No, he's not asking questions, he's making insinuations. Like clockwork, in every single discussion on some new technology, there will always be at least one jackass trying to seem smart by suggesting that those idiot scientists missed something important. Every. Single. Time.

      Functional sub-nanometer LED? Pfft. No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame.

    4. Re:Insulation... by MaXiMiUS · · Score: 1

      Pfft. No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame.

      I think transmitting information via light actually counts as wireless, at least with sufficient power and no line of sight issues. Definitely less space than a nomad though. :P

      --
      It's never just a game when you're winning. - George Carlin
    5. Re:Insulation... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      What, exactly, is the benefit of building a chip whose internal connections are basically all optoisolators?

      Light travels faster than electricity, and with less interference. Since a critical limitation of modern chips is that it takes more than 1 clock tick for data to travel from one side of the chip to the other, this is of mindblowing importance.

      And how many atoms thick does the insulating layer between adjacent photosensitive or photoemitting structures need to be to prevent light emitted by one pair's LED from unduly influencing the state of an adjacent photodiode/phototransistor?

      It has to be at least N atoms thick, where N >= 1.

    6. Re:Insulation... by fisted · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What the hell, dude, his question is very justified if you even just briefly think about it.

      --
      CLI paste? paste.pr0.tips!
    7. Re:Insulation... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Modern CPUs are starting to face a bandwidth and power limitation for their interconnects. One solution that is being investigated is using photonics, because light can carry much more data (several THz of bandwidth) vs electrical interconnects (10s of GHz). An on-chip light source would be an important component for this.

    8. Re:Insulation... by thevirtualcat · · Score: 3, Insightful

      As other people have said, the advantage is speed.

      Of course nobody is expecting this tech to replace silicon based chips anytime soon. There's obviously a lot of R&D to be done and, let's face it, nothing may EVER come of it. That's just how science is. We don't know in advance what theories and tech will pan out.

      As for leakage between structures? I'm willing to bet we don't need perfect isolation. Just enough isolation that the interference is predictable. (Much like electrons in silicon...)

    9. Re:Insulation... by BitZtream · · Score: 3, Informative

      We've had that for years already, and no, its not all that useful in computer chips. You need very specific directed communications almost exclusively except for the clock pulse.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    10. Re:Insulation... by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      We've had that for years already, and no, its not all that useful in computer chips. You need very specific directed communications almost exclusively except for the clock pulse.

      Sure, it's not useful in modern chips however. Following the theories on optical chips however, you don't need it to be directed when banks are set projected.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
  4. Didn't Stop At One? by CrankyFool · · Score: 5, Funny

    I'm impressed that they didn't just build one one atom thick LED, but three of them. Was it to prove they could reproduce it?

    1. Re:Didn't Stop At One? by jones_supa · · Score: 2

      They wanted a cool RGB disco light.

  5. In this case, UW == Univ. of Washington by enos · · Score: 4, Informative

    To be clear, only two authors are from the University of Washington. They have many collaborators, including from Univ. of Tennessee, Oak Ridge NL, Germany, Japan, and Hong Kong.

    Submitter: University of Wisconsin and University of Waterloo are also known as "UW". It's worth expanding on first use.

    --
    boldly going forward, 'cause we can't find reverse
    1. Re:In this case, UW == Univ. of Washington by Alomex · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Not to mention University of Warwick, University of Wales, University of Worcested and University of Warsaw all of which use UW to various degrees.

    2. Re:In this case, UW == Univ. of Washington by GTRacer · · Score: 5, Funny

      Wouldn't be very good universities if they didn't have various degrees...

      --
      Defending IP by destroying access to it? That makes sense, RIAA/MPAA. Go to the corner until you can play nice!
  6. p-n junction? by invictusvoyd · · Score: 1

    So the electrons from how many atoms cross the junction?

  7. Scientists Build Three Atom Thick LEDs by Kefeus · · Score: 1

    "Scientists Build Three Atom Thick LEDs"
    Why didn't they just build one ?

  8. Really by eclectro · · Score: 1

    Does anyone else remember when IBM would be the one to do something like this?

    --
    Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
    1. Re:Really by BitZtream · · Score: 1

      They still do, but just not this one.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
  9. Not the only group to have achieved this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    There are two other publications in the same issue of Nature Nanotech., both of which also report the creation of similar systems also utilizing monolayers of WSe2: this one from a group at the Vienna University of Technology and this one from a group at MIT.

  10. Moore's Law(s) by qpqp · · Score: 1
    So, are we back in the game?

    We can observe clear evidence that Moore’s Law is ending, because we can point to a pattern that precedes the end of exploiting any kind of resource. But there’s no reason to panic, because Moore’s Law limits only one kind of scaling, and we have already started another kind.

    1. Re:Moore's Law(s) by qpqp · · Score: 1

      Oops, URL missing: http://herbsutter.com/welcome-...

    2. Re:Moore's Law(s) by Megol · · Score: 2
      Nope. Moore's law is an observation of transistor growth. Doing optical communications have nothing to do with it at least to a first approximation.

      That said optical communication does open up a lot of advantages including (potentially) reduced signal latency, denser and thus higher bandwidth chip I/O and other effects that will (if practically usable) increase performance of computers. But transistor scaling? It's dead.

    3. Re:Moore's Law(s) by qpqp · · Score: 1

      So would it be more correct to say that we're back in the exponential game on single chips (using Moore's law only by inference), as opposed to horizontal scaling by adding cores?

  11. Re: the most dangerous LED displays... evar by Adriax · · Score: 2

    Always wear your iGlove protective gear when taking your iPhone 7n out of your iPants pocket.
    If an accident does occur you can treat small injuries with your iMedkit. More severe injuries you are contractually bound to seek service at your local iCare medical facility. There you can be assured prompt professional service from a certified Apple iDoc.

    --
    I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it!
  12. What about the solder joints? by pmario · · Score: 1

    Hmm, 3 atoms for the LED and a million atoms for each solder joint.

  13. What does it mean? by Crudely_Indecent · · Score: 1

    Is it a single LED that is three atoms thick, or are there 3 individual atom thick LEDs?

    If the latter, 1 atom thick is just an atom. So these guys are claiming to have invented an atom.

    --


    "Lame" - Galaxar