3 ms·
This is absolutely fascinating. I didn't realize that today's nanofab labs used technology that was available in the 1950's (e-beam lithography is pretty common
by cyanoacry 13y ago
This is absolutely fascinating. I didn't realize that today's nanofab labs used technology that was available in the 1950's (e-beam lithography is pretty common, with a second contender for nano-scale structures being FIB[1] milling).
The article's amazing for being a look into a future that could've been. A number of physics tools that are around now depend on microscale cryogenics, but they're still fairly rare (like SQUIDs[2]).
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Focused_ion_beam http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Focused_ion_beam
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SQUID http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SQUID
- gaze 13y agoThere's quite a large effort in superconducting qubits, superconducting quantum limited amplifiers, at least one company doing rapid single flux quantum circuitry. Superconducting circuits are reasonably popular.
- cyanoacry 13y agoWow, that's neat! Has any of this technology made it out of the lab? It feels like the main limit to mass production of this technology (if people wanted it) is the cryogenics system involved. What other barriers (other than lack of demand) are there to, say, placing a superconducting device in a mass-market product?
- kordless 13y agoI'd like to see some of the labs providing APIs to some prototypes, sorta like this random number generator: http://qrng.anu.edu.au/index.php http://qrng.anu.edu.au/index.php