3 D

Despite all the evidence for three dimensions, big chunks of the world like to stay two dimensional. I could be talking about how much most 3-D movies suck, but I wasn't actually. I was thinking more about computer chips. It turns out to be pretty hard to fully exploit all three dimensions in the design of integrated circuits, and as a result most designs have just a few layers.

The human brain is also area intensive - the notoriously wrinkled and crinkled shape is evolution's way of packing more surface area into a reasonable volume. I'm not sure what the biological reasons are restricting more three dimensional designs, but in the case of computer chips, it's heat dissipation and design complexity that rule.

Katherine Bourzac, writing in Technology Review, has the story on the latest attempts to take chips 3-D.

IBM will work with materials manufacturer 3M to develop the necessary mortar to build much more complex three-dimensional computer chips. The companies announced this week that they will aim to develop microchips made of 100 chip layers stacked on top of each other. Stacking chips in this way could make all sorts of electronics faster and more power-efficient.

Three-dimensional chips have already found their way into some niche applications, but they are expensive to make, and can only be stacked about a dozen layers high before they overheat.

Three-dimensional chips can handle data more efficiently because data has to travel less distance to reach a different component. Stacked chips with connections running through them vertically like pipes in a skyscraper should be able to process more data faster, and with lower power requirements.

The key ingredient needed: a material with mechanical strength that is an excellent heat conductor and an excellent electrical insulator to separate the layers. For the most part, these properties don't like to live together - the article doesn't really tell how well the search is going.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Anti-Libertarian: re-post

The most pointed critique of social security and liberalism in general is the libertarian critique. The problem with libertarians, for a liberal, is that we have too much in common. We both believe in individual rights, tolerance of individual differences, and dislike government prescription of religion. The basic difference, it seems to me, is the different answers we give to Cain's (with thanks to the Captain - my original version had the corpse asking the question!) famous question: "Am I my brother's keeper?" That's not really my basic bitch against the libertarians though. My real complaint is the same as my complaint against most religion - its premise is a fraud. For those who can't stand to wait for the punchline, I believe that trying to implement libertarian principles leads to tyranny or social disintegration. Demonstrating that takes some historical (and pre-historical) context. For all but the last 15,000 or so of the 100,000 years the human spec...
Read more

Uneasy Lies The Head

Uneasy lies the head that wears a crown ........... Shakespeare Henry IV, Part II. So it is with us and our slightly distant primate cousins , so it seems. A 9-year study of wild baboons in Kenya by Princeton University and the Institute of Primate Research may turn conventional assumptions of alphas males upside down. The study found that alpha males have high testosterone levels, which allows them to dominate other baboons, get access to more food, and attract better mates. This is expected. Surprisingly, though, the alpha males also have high levels of stress hormone glucocorticoid, which scientists measured from their feces samples. In fact, the stress of alpha baboons was on par with low-ranking baboons. The convention wisdom is that access to food and females provides life security and thus less stress for dominant males. Conversely, weak males who are constantly threatened by starvation and physical violence from stronger males are thought to be more stressed. The st...
Read more

We Call it Soccer

The US played its best, and maybe only good game of World Cup, but lost thanks to brilliant goalkeeping by the Swedish keeper and the bizarre method soccer uses to settle ties when three US stars could not put the ball on frame from the 12 yard spot.  At the end it came down to a blocked shot that spun in by maybe a couple of centimeters. Well, that's football - too much like life.   Which brings me to a modest proposal.  Replace the thirty minute overtimes with as many 7-player 15 minute periods as needed to settle it.  Scoring should be much easier with fewer players.
Read more