First Transistors Made Entirely of 2-D Materials

ckwu (2886397) writes "Two independent research groups report the first transistors built entirely of two-dimensional electronic materials, making the devices some of the thinnest yet. The transistors, just a few atoms thick and hence transparent, are smaller than their silicon-based counterparts, which would allow for a super-high density of pixels in flexible, next-generation displays. The research teams, one at Argonne National Laboratory and the other at the University of California, Berkeley, used materials such as tungsten diselenide, graphene, and boron nitride to make all three components of a transistor: a semiconductor, a set of electrodes, and an insulating layer. Electrons travel in the devices 70 to 100 times faster than in amorphous silicon. Such a high electron mobility means the transistors switch faster, which dictates a display's refresh rate and is necessary for high-quality video, especially 3-D video."

getting real sick of this

[slashmydots]

It has a length, width, and depth. Calling it 2D is just "read me" headline-baiting which is getting more and more annoying on Slashdot lately. Here, let me correct it:
First Transistors Made of Extremely Thin Materials

Two-Dimensional My Ass...

[Penguinisto]

"The transistors, just a few atoms thick and hence transparent,"

Sorry, but "a few atoms thick" still gives it all three axes in Cartesian space, no matter how small any given axis may be. Hell, even "one atom thick" qualifies as three-dimensional.

Pedant Headline Fail, eh?

2d or not 2d, that is what you question

[meerling]

On a measurement level, they are 3 dimensional as nothing in our universe lacks having those 3 dimensions.
Of course, you could never discern that thickness without some highly specialized super sensitive devices.

Then there's the whole effective or design thing going on there. That map you look at when you get lost, it's considered 2d. Not because the ink and paper is composed of atoms and are actually 3d, but rather because the information and design of it's display is only on 2 dimensions. Ever see a 3 dimensional map? Sure, they exist, but you don't carry them around. If you really need 3d info of the terrain, you usually use a topographical map that displays info about the 3d, but in a 2d method.

Sure these new electronic components physically have a 3rd dimension, but it's not part of their functional design. They are laid out like the information on a piece of paper, something generally considered to be 2 dimensional.

So yes, technically your statement of them being 3d is factual, and yet it is completely worthless. Much like most Microsoft technical advice. To quote part of the old joke, "You are in a Helicopter.". If you want to read the whole joke, there are lots of copies of it, here's one: http://www.pcreview.co.uk/forums/microsoft-helicopter-joke-t3245996.html

Re:getting real sick of this

[timeOday]

What percent of discussion on slashdot goes down in flames over semantic quibbles having nothing to do with the substance of the issue at hand?