SnO: First Stable P-Type 2D Semiconductor Discovered (phys.org) 63
New submitter Namarrgon writes: Transistors made with Ashutosh Tiwari's new semiconducting material could lead to computers and smartphones that are more than 100 times faster than regular devices. While researchers in this field have recently discovered new types of 2D material such as graphene, molybdenun disulfide and borophene, they have been materials that only allow the movement of N-type, or negative, electrons. In order to create an electronic device, however, you need semiconductor material that allows the movement of both negative electrons and positive charges known as "holes." The tin monoxide material discovered by Tiwari and his team at the University of Utah is the first stable P-type 2D semiconductor material ever in existence.
No, you don't (Score:3, Insightful)
Vacuum tubes work marvelously well with only electrons.
Re:No, you don't (Score:5, Informative)
n-type (negative) electrons
ha
ha ha ha
blargh hah ha hah ha
N-type semiconductors... the materials have excess electrons, and leverage that.
P-type semiconductors... the materials have an electron deficit, creating "holes" in the structure, and the material leverages those deficits.
There are no "positive" electrons. Well, there are, sort of, but they have little to nothing to do with n-type and p-type materials. Unless physics has completely rewritten semiconductor theory while I wasn't looking, which I suppose is possible.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
PS: New leadership: Would you *please* consider hiring some editors that are at least somewhat technically competent? It would also be nice if, you know, they could... edit the written word competently. The best that can be said of slashdot's "editors" to date is that they have been a constant source of amusement for some. Wouldn't it be amazing if TFS's that actually hit the site were edited into well written presentations? Well, it would be for me. Reading most of them so far has been like being poked in
Re: (Score:1)
They did, but that content is on the 'Paywalled' side of this site.
Re: (Score:2)
Isn't it obvious that what was meant here was
allow the movement of N-type, or negative [charges], electrons.
Re: (Score:1)
No, it's not obvious, because N-type or P-type refers to a MATERIAL, not a charge or a particle.
Re: (Score:2)
Also, it's not really 2D since it's made of atoms and atoms are 3D. Do I win the pedantry contest or what?
Also, technically, it's not enough to have both P-type and N-type semi-conductors. You also need to be able to produce them cheaply and precisely and by the billions, both types next to each other. So, technically, don't expect to see this used for anything ever until they solve those problems.
Re: (Score:2)
Vacuous remarks (Score:3)
If by "marvelously well" you mean with high random noise levels, comparatively low current capacities, and comparatively huge volume requirements, sure.
And if by "only electrons" you mean "only electrons, neutrons, protons, electromagnetic fields and - of course - vacuum, sure.
Re: (Score:2)
I have to agree with the OP, at least in a literal sense. Vacuum tubes were indeed "marvels", as people marveled at their function; so to call them marvelous is absolutely correct. You can also say they work marvelously well when compared to electrical devices such as relays. He didn't claim they were efficient, cool, small, low-voltage, short-lived, solid-state, distortion-free, or noise-rejecting. Doesn't mean they weren't marvels.
</nits_picked>
Re: (Score:2)
Having actually studied the data sheets for Nuvistors, I can tell you that their noise performance is inferior to modern semiconductors designed for RF reception.
Nuvistors are thermionic electron tubes, and even with the smoothing effects of space charge their equivalent noise temperature is limited by using a hot cathode to emit electrons. Unlike semiconductors, they can't be cooled to reduce noise.
Re: (Score:2)
more importantly you can get rectifier and transistor action with n-type and certain metals; don't need a p type at all
Re: (Score:2)
Sounds cheaper, too (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Ashutosh Tiwari? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Perhaps you shouldn't have been carrying curry in your backpack, newb.
Negative charges (Score:5, Informative)
they have been materials that only allow the movement of N-type, or negative, electrons. In order to create an electronic device, however, you need semiconductor material that allows the movement of both negative electrons and positive charges known as "holes."
Captain pedantic here. Electron holes [wikipedia.org] are not positive charges. They are the absence of an electron in a lattice where one could exist. This "hole" can be treated for convenience and practicality like a positively charged particle but that isn't technically the same thing.
Re: (Score:3)
As much as I remember 'bout PNP and NPN questions on my radio technician's licensing test from when I was 11, the whole description is a journalistic goofusism.
What I remember is the semiconductor substrate is doped to favor a particular charge--positive or negative--and so it acts according in an electrical circuit. If you have two N-type materials wired into a circuit with a P-type material separating them, the N-type material will resist electrical current flow because electrons want to move into a n
Comment removed (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
True, but basically all semiconductor device engineers don't worry about this distinction. It's true but it doesn't matter.
This is similar to deciding whether to talk about the air or the water in two cases: A drop of water falling down in a container otherwise filled with air, or a bubble flo
Re: (Score:2)
no an electron from any direction can fill the hole, only the holes move along current vector.
So finally we can say - (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
the Amazon planet has dioxide tech so they sing
let it SnOO-SnOO
Re: (Score:2)
Devices 100 Times faster ? No (Score:3)
Electron transit speed is not the limiting factor in device speed. Don't know who wrote the article but there is no way your Iphone is getting a 200 GHZ cpu from this.
Re: (Score:2)
Electron transit speed is not the limiting factor in device speed.
Electrons move thru gates faster when there is less capacitance and less heat from reduction of resistance.
Don't know who wrote the article but there is no way your Iphone is getting a 200 GHZ cpu from this.
Actual text from TFA:
"Transistors made with Tiwari's semiconducting material could lead to computers and smartphones that are more than 100 times faster than regular devices."
Article is silent on the idea of 200 GHZ processors. There are many ways to get to 100 times faster.
Re: (Score:2)
Electrons move thru gates faster when there is less capacitance and less heat from reduction of resistance.
Article is silent on the idea of 200 GHZ processors. There are many ways to get to 100 times faster.
If you seriously believe that charge carrier speed in the substrate is limiting factor in device speed there is not much I can do for you except recommend a book
http://www.amazon.com/Semicond... [amazon.com]
and maybe the following courses of study Electronic circuits I-IV or whatever they may be calling it these days.
Re: (Score:2)
If you seriously believe that charge carrier speed in the substrate is limiting factor in device speed there is not much I can do for you except recommend a book
No of course not, my remarks refer to gate delay. When working with 2-D elements capacitance is much lower.
Devices 100 Times faster ? Yeah, it's possible (Score:2)
It's one of the limits; that speed goes along with a concept called 'mobility' which directly translates to better current-carrying capacity.
Higher mobility for p-type devices DEFINITELY would speed CMOS.
Since SnO is a p-type material, it could become half the circuitry of a CMOS IC, and because it is to be a layer atop (presumably silicon) other materials, it would make for lower silicon area for a given complexity. By using that third
Re:Devices 100 Times faster ? no it's not (Score:2)
It's one of the limits;
Your reply isn't even even logically sufficient.
Here let me give you a car analogy.
You have a junker Saturn and put in a Ferrari's engine, then take it out onto I-95 during rush hour. The engine was never the limiting factor, the tires transmission, steering, and the highway were all the much greater limiting factors.
What the heck is "2D"? (Score:1)
So after reading the fine article, it's apparently stuff that's only about one atom thick. /. to take.
So, pedant maybe, but for me while that's pretty damn thin, it's still three-dimensional.
Blame the bullshit and sensationalism that seems to have to accompany even new announcement today.
In a scientific article, can we just have the facts without the crap?
That would be a good new direction for
now get off my three-dimensional lawn!
Re:What the heck is "2D"? (Score:4, Informative)
What's wrong with calling it 2D? Electron motion is effectively limited to two dimensions, and it doesn't make much sense to talk about lateral movement through the degenerate dimension. And if you hate this you'll be even more angry that scientists often refer to quantum dots as zero dimensional.
Re: (Score:2)
The band structure for a bulk material (full 3-d crystal structure) defines the behavior of electrons deep inside the material, not near a surface - and near-suface conditions are different. The permitted electron orbitals (and bonding, and atomic spacing...) in a very thin layer of SnO might be very different indeed (and have
"Magic" nonsense is still nonsense (Score:2)
No, they will not make anything "100 times faster". The limiter today is interconnect and that does not get any faster at all with this material.
Re: "Magic" nonsense is still nonsense (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
The limiter is on-die interconnect. You may get individual transistors 100x faster, gates 30x faster and CPUs 1.1x faster (if that). Sorry.