Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip

On 6/30/26 11:27, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 30/06/2026 10:14, c186282 wrote:
>> On 6/29/26 07:20, Mr. Man-wai Chang wrote:
>>> On 6/29/2026 1:39 PM, c186282 wrote:
>>>>
>>>>     Amazed they were able to get this small - but do
>>>>     expect a wall/seal is pretty much here. We're
>>>>     talking kinda atomic dimensions now - nowhere else
>>>>     to go using any conventional approaches. Anything
>>>>     much further won't be 'electronics' as we know it,
>>>>     some kind of weird quantum stuff.
>>>>
>>>>     STABLE deca-state logic maybe ?
>>>
>>> Can you fabricate 0.000000...0000000001 nm chips?
>>>
>>> Is zero the seal or wall? :)
>>
>>    Um, pretty quick you get to ATOMS ... and, for any
>>    normal electronics, that's IT.
>>
> Actually the limit is a fair bit above atoms

   True ... but 'atoms' can be easily grasped as
   an absolute limit for any conventional electronics.

> GOOGLE AI
> =========
> "Transistor nodes have shrunk dramatically, with leading developers like 
> IBM advancing into the sub-1 nanometre realm (e.g., 0.7-nanometer tech). 
> However, absolute limits are rapidly approaching due to several factors:
> 
>      Quantum Tunnelling: At sizes measuring just a few atoms across, 
> electrons no longer stay neatly in their channels. They start randomly 
> leaking or tunnelling through insulation barriers, resulting in massive 
> power loss and data corruption.
> 
>      Atomic Boundary: The absolute physical limit for a silicon 
> semiconductor is effectively constrained by the size of the silicon 
> crystal unit cell (about 0.54 nm).
> 
>       Heat Density: Shrinking transistors allows more components to be 
> packed together, but it creates extreme heat concentrations. The 
> challenge shifts from building them to keeping them cool without burning 
> out£

   Yep ... shrink too much and yer electrons start
   disappearing and showing up in weird places.

   IBM may have just built the Final Chip, so
   to speak. Better stuff will have to use very
   different technologies.

> .....
> 
> I note that google can't spall 'nanometre' OR 'tunnelling; correctly

   Lots of words I have problems with as well - and I was
   always good at spelling.

   'nanometre' ... sounds almost like a Euro spelling, kind
   of like the Brits use 'colour'  :-)