Slashdot Mirror


Law-Defying Transistor Smashes Industry 'Limit', Measures Just 1nm (thestack.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Stack: U.S. researchers have unveiled the world's smallest transistor reported to date, combining a new mix of materials, which makes even the tiniest silicon-based transistor appear big in comparison. The team, led by the U.S. Department of Energy's Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, designed the minuscule transistor with a working one-nanometer gate -- far surpassing any industry expectation for reducing transistor sizes. In the scientific study, MoS2 transistors with 1-nanometer gate lengths, published today in the journal Science, the researchers describe a prototype device which uses a novel semiconductor material known as transition metal dichalcogenides (TMDs). The transistor structure uses a single-walled carbon nanotube as the gate electrode and molybdenum disulfide (MoS2) for the channel material, rather than silicon. "The semiconductor industry has long assumed that any gate below 5 nanometers wouldn't work, so anything below that was not even considered. This research shows that sub-5-nanometer gates should not be discounted. Industry has been squeezing every last bit of capability out of silicon. By changing the material from silicon to MoS2, we can make a transistor with a gate that is just 1 nanometer in length, and operate it like a switch," explained study lead Sujay Desai.

7 of 66 comments (clear)

  1. 5nm Limits? Phooey by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This..
    >The semiconductor industry has long assumed that any gate below 5 nanometers wouldn't work, so anything below that was not even considered.

    This is simply false.

    --
    I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
  2. Simulation by Dan+East · · Score: 5, Funny

    This is great news! The information density with these 1 nanometer transistors should be such that I can simulate simulate the universe with enough accuracy for sentient beings to eventually come into existence. Eventually they will advance sufficiently enough to question whether or not they are in a simulation, and they will begin efforts to test how accurate my simulation is in order to determine its existence. Then, just when they discover that the simulation is flawed in some way, and thus detectable, I'll pull the plug and start a fresh simulation.

    --
    Better known as 318230.
    1. Re:Simulation by MichaelSmith · · Score: 5, Funny

      I'll pull the plug and start a fresh simulation.

      I think that is highly un

  3. Excellent by c · · Score: 4, Funny

    ... Apple should be able to knock at least another 2-3mm of thickness off the iPhone with these things.

    --
    Log in or piss off.
  4. Re:what's this about effective channel length by Plus1Entropy · · Score: 4, Informative

    from the paper's abstract: "Simulations show an effective channel length of ~3.9 nm in the Off state". what does this mean? that the gate, in it's off state, needs 4nm or it will start interfering with nearby gates?

    The word Gate is not referring to a logic gate (which is what it sounds like you're inferring), but to the Gate terminal of the transistor. When the correct polarity of voltage is applied to the Gate, the field effect causes a channel of charge carriers to form between 2 other terminals, the Source and Drain, allowing current to flow between them. The channel length refers to the distance between the Source and Drain terminals.

    The channel length (as well as other parameters like the width, charge carrier mobility, etc.) determines how much current can flow between the Drain and Source when a given voltage is applied (i.e. resistance). By applying higher voltage to the Gate, you are narrowing the "effective" channel length (lowering the resistance).

    When you switch transistors on and off, you are basically charging and discharging capacitors, which takes time. How much time is determined by the time constant, RC (resistance x capacitance). So, shorter channel length = lower resistance = smaller time constant = faster charge/discharge = higher speeds. That's why we make transistors smaller to make computers faster.

    --
    Only crack the nuts that crack. You don't put the ones that don't crack in the sack.
  5. Re:Law defying? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    No.
    One of the most damaging effects of Radiation on solid state devices is permanent damage to the Silicon crystalline structure. (Usually, one just gets a SEU; a change in state corresponding to the Energy lost by particles passing through, which can be cleared by refreshing the device.) This can either lead to either less or more Resistance, or even a short or an open.
    These Transistors don't use Silicon, and in principle at least, should be far less susceptible to Radiation Effects and Radiation Damage.

    One thing not addressed with this Tech, and in fact is rarely addressed, is Molecular Creep. (Most of us know about this because of the "Tin Whiskers" Problem.) This means at the most basic level, permanent movement atom by atom, along the Electrical paths. Which means that over time, the MoS2 can migrate to where it's not wanted. But the Gate switching is at the tens of milliVolts level, so even that may not be an issue.

    A bigger significance is here, from Wikipedia:
    "The band gaps of TMDC monolayers are in the visible range (between 400 nm and 700 nm)."
    This is a game changer for Optics, all sorts of Optics.

  6. Re:Just use smaller electrons, maybe? by GuB-42 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Audiophile gear had this for years!
    Muons, which are more massive than elections, give more bass presence and smoother transitions.