Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.os.linux.misc > #88538

Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip

Date 2026-06-30 12:18 -0400
Subject Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip
Newsgroups comp.os.linux.misc
References (2 earlier) <111sup8$349r$3@toylet.eternal-september.org> <VuOcnRx1hrX_mN_3nZ2dnZfqn_qdnZ2d@giganews.com> <111tkdh$a0h0$1@toylet.eternal-september.org> <LMacnao1i-yBFN73nZ2dnZfqnPGdnZ2d@giganews.com> <1120n8s$167k7$1@dont-email.me>
From c186282 <c186282@nnada.net>
Organization wokiesux
Message-ID <Db2cnc0287_ocd73nZ2dnZfqnPadnZ2d@giganews.com> (permalink)

Show all headers | View raw

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'  :-)

Back to comp.os.linux.misc | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-28 00:36 -0400
  [HK01]IBM研發首款0.7nm晶片 指甲大小塞滿1000億電晶體 效能飆升50% "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2026-06-29 00:01 +0800
  Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-06-28 18:09 +0000
    Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2026-06-29 13:11 +0800
      Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-29 01:39 -0400
        Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2026-06-29 19:20 +0800
          Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-29 12:57 +0100
          Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-30 05:14 -0400
            Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2026-06-30 21:51 +0800
              Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-30 12:06 -0400
                Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-06-30 18:51 +0000
                Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2026-06-30 17:58 -0400
                Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-01 01:15 -0400
                Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-01 10:15 +0100
                Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-30 23:51 +0000
                Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-01 03:16 -0400
                Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-01 10:05 +0100
                Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-01 17:43 +0000
                Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-01 20:23 +0100
                Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-02 01:57 +0000
                Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-02 16:48 -0400
                Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-02 21:32 +0000
                Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-02 18:15 -0400
                Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-03 11:03 +0100
                Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-04 09:32 -0400
                Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-07-04 17:06 +0000
                Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-07-04 19:24 +0200
                Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-04 18:20 +0000
                Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-04 23:37 -0400
                Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-04 19:20 +0100
                Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-07-04 20:28 +0000
                Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-04 20:47 +0000
                Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-05 00:33 +0100
                Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-04 20:42 +0000
                Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-04 23:51 -0400
                Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-05 06:57 +0000
                Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-07-05 13:38 +0200
                Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-04 23:45 -0400
                Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-05 10:49 +0100
                Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-06 00:33 -0400
                Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-07-06 13:19 +0200
                Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-06 12:39 +0100
                Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-06 12:32 +0100
                Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-01 00:48 -0400
                Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-30 23:45 +0000
                Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer.... physics? "quantum"? "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2026-07-01 12:24 +0800
                Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-01 03:13 -0400
                Re: IBM - New SUB .... quantum mechanics is quantitative philiosphy? "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2026-07-01 15:29 +0800
                Re: IBM - New SUB .... quantum mechanics is quantitative philiosphy? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-01 04:22 -0400
                Re: IBM - New SUB .... quantum mechanics is quantitative philiosphy? "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2026-07-01 23:41 +0800
                Re: IBM - New SUB .... quantum mechanics is quantitative philiosphy? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-02 01:56 -0400
                Re: IBM - New SUB .... quantum mechanics is FLAT? "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2026-07-02 14:04 +0800
                Re: IBM - New SUB .... quantum mechanics is FLAT? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-02 16:50 -0400
                Re: IBM - New SUB .... quantum mechanics is FLAT? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-02 21:26 +0000
                Re: IBM - New SUB .... quantum mechanics is FLAT? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-02 18:11 -0400
                Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2026-06-30 22:09 -0400
                Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-01 03:29 -0400
                Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-01 10:11 +0100
                Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-01 10:08 +0100
            Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-30 16:27 +0100
              Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-30 12:18 -0400
                Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-30 17:32 +0100
                Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-30 23:40 +0000
                Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-01 02:53 -0400
                Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-07-01 10:01 +0100
                Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-01 00:17 -0400
                Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-30 23:37 +0000
                Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-01 02:33 -0400
              Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-30 23:28 +0000
                Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-07-01 02:04 -0400
                Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2026-07-01 04:33 -0400
    Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-29 01:34 -0400
    Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-07-07 01:21 +0000
      Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-07-07 04:14 +0000
      Re: IBM - New SUB-Nanometer STACKED Chip "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-07-07 08:31 +0200

csiph-web