Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

IBM Researchers Image Electrical Charge Distribution In a Single Molecule

timothy posted more than 2 years ago | from the yeah-but-which-one dept.

IBM 37

alphadogg writes with this selection from Network World:"IBM researchers for the first time have succeeded in imaging how charge is distributed inside a single molecule, which is a fundamental research breakthrough as scientists try to miniaturize circuitry to the nanometer scale. IBM is studying molecular structures when put on artificial surfaces so functional molecules in the future can be used as switches or transistors, said Fabian Mohn, an IBM researcher. IBM used advanced microscopy tools and techniques to image how charge is redistributed and arranged when chemical bonds are formed between atoms and molecules on surfaces."

cancel ×

37 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Woo Hoo off topic (-1, Offtopic)

Teeroy32 (2512400) | more than 2 years ago | (#39169783)

Woo Hoo first post time to get modded down lol

Re:Woo Hoo off topic (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39170167)

No, Terry, you are already down

No Pictures? (3, Insightful)

Pikoro (844299) | more than 2 years ago | (#39169811)

And once again, there is no picture in the article. Why post a story about the creation of an imaging technique without pics.

tl;dr pics or it didn't happen.

Re:No Pictures? (5, Funny)

game kid (805301) | more than 2 years ago | (#39169837)

It was a naked molecule, all alone. If we don't know its age how can we be sure the pictures are even legal?

Re:No Pictures? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39170007)

Well, "game kid," once upon a time, billions and billions and billions of years ago, there was a really, really big BANG, and this molecule was formed...

Re:No Pictures? (1)

toruonu (1696670) | more than 2 years ago | (#39170041)

Not entirely true. Molecules are combinations of atoms meaning that you cannot be certain this one wasn't produced mere seconds before it was "photographed". Then again, noone considers a picture of a newborn baby nude as child porn so again, why no picture.

Oh and even atoms cannot be considered as something that was made at the big bang. There's nuclear fusion and fission happening all the time. At best the underlying quarks may or may not have been originally created or they may have come into existence during flavor changing currents (i.e. weak interaction as in W or Z exchange).

Re:No Pictures? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39170263)

Not entirely true. Molecules are combinations of atoms meaning that you cannot be certain this one wasn't produced mere seconds before it was "photographed". Then again, noone considers a picture of a newborn baby nude as child porn so again, why no picture.

Oh and even atoms cannot be considered as something that was made at the big bang. There's nuclear fusion and fission happening all the time. At best the underlying quarks may or may not have been originally created or they may have come into existence during flavor changing currents (i.e. weak interaction as in W or Z exchange).

Then of course there's the issue of whether it's even meaningful to distinguish a "particular" indistinguishable particle from all the others in the universe (particularly in the case of quarks...)

Re:No Pictures? (1)

umghhh (965931) | more than 2 years ago | (#39170553)

this is pure pr0n - I got a hard on already....

Re:No Pictures? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39173299)

That's funny - got a hadron.

FTFY (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39174069)

this is pure pr0n - I got a hard on already....

We're talking physics here. The joke should have been:

"this is pure physics pr0n - I got a hadron already...."

Re:No Pictures? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39170327)

It was definitely a minor entity. So, pictures are not legal.

Re:No Pictures? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39170605)

It seems they are not proud of what they had to do to this naked molecule...

Re:No Pictures? (2)

mazarin5 (309432) | more than 2 years ago | (#39169845)

At least one pic here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-17156036 [bbc.co.uk]

Re:No Pictures? (4, Informative)

mazarin5 (309432) | more than 2 years ago | (#39169853)

Re:No Pictures? (1)

TheInternetGuy (2006682) | more than 2 years ago | (#39169929)

Meh,

Those pictures are so obviously photo-shopped.

Re:No Pictures? (1)

ColdWetDog (752185) | more than 2 years ago | (#39172469)

No! It's saying that the Universe is really Red vs. Blue.

I'm all depressed again....

Re:No Pictures? (2)

FrootLoops (1817694) | more than 2 years ago | (#39171295)

That is the beauty of physics--getting hard-to-obtain experimental evidence that agrees with theory [wikipedia.org] , vindicating the theory enough in similar situations to trust theoretical calculations in lieu of performing difficult experiments. Bonus points if the theory is mathematically beautiful (as quantum mechanics is; go ahead, try and tell me the spectral theorem's characterization of Hermitian operators in Hilbert space isn't astonishingly pretty when interpreted physically!). Even more points for awesome pictures.

Re:No Pictures? (3, Informative)

PatPending (953482) | more than 2 years ago | (#39169895)

Here is the source: Full text and pictures here [nature.com] or as a PDF here [readcube.com] .

Re:No Pictures? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39169863)

The molecule in question is under-aged. Won't someone think of the children?

Re:No Pictures? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39172775)

this is a valid and enforceable DMCA (thinking of the children) take down notice ...

Re:No Pictures? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39169947)

He must have put it on the page. Must have required you to view it in an Electron Microscope :P

Re:No Pictures? (1)

flyneye (84093) | more than 2 years ago | (#39171313)

Turns out they were "shopped" by the Chinese "Scientists".

Flickr (4, Informative)

PS3Penguin (1048518) | more than 2 years ago | (#39169877)

Amazing discovery(ies) (3, Insightful)

hcs_$reboot (1536101) | more than 2 years ago | (#39169967)

Jan 26, IBM creates 9nm carbon nanotube transistor
Oct 14, IBM Eyes Brain-Like Computing
Aug 18, IBM creates learning, brain-like synaptic CPU
...more here... [slashdot.org]
Is it only a recurring signal to motivate the shareholders, or is it intended to produce some tangible applications in a not-so-far future?

Re:Amazing discovery(ies) (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39171027)

Is it only a recurring signal to motivate the shareholders, or is it intended to produce some tangible applications in a not-so-far future?

Depends on your definition of "not-so-far". Base research is not meant to yield immediate results to put in a product to sell. These discoveries are meant to open completely new horizons which most likely will end up with some product, but not in the short term. Base research is a long term investment, and IBM's base research has always been truly impressive.

Re:Amazing discovery(ies) (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39171779)

At least they're spending that $10B investment [bizjournals.com] from Berkshire on something cool.

Re:Amazing discovery(ies) (1)

bws111 (1216812) | more than 2 years ago | (#39171813)

You think IBM gets the money when Buffett (or anyone else) buys stock?

Re:Amazing discovery(ies) (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39173035)

It drives the price up and they can issue more shares at a premium or use increased equity for loans. It's true that it doesn't go directly to their coffers unless it is an issuance of new stock, but it does support the financials in other ways.

Re:Amazing discovery(ies) (1)

VortexCortex (1117377) | more than 2 years ago | (#39175379)

Jan 26, IBM creates 9nm carbon nanotube transistor
Oct 14, IBM Eyes Brain-Like Computing
Aug 18, IBM creates learning, brain-like synaptic CPU
Is it only a recurring signal to motivate the shareholders, or is it intended to produce some tangible applications in a not-so-far future?

I suppose that depends on whether you think your neural network is the highest bar nature is likely to achieve, or if having an evolutionary mechanism become self aware could possibly NOT accelerate the evolutionary process... Well, actually, I suppose it really depends on if you think there is any money to be made in the inevitable Cyborg Revolution.

I speak Machine Code, guess who's side I'm on? .... Wrong! No ones! Muah ha HA!

Re:Amazing discovery(ies) (1)

dsgrntlxmply (610492) | more than 2 years ago | (#39176355)

Perhaps it is a signal to shareholders that IBM, unlike most other corporations, maintain a time horizon that extends beyond three or twelve months, and demonstrate this by investing in basic research. That bears a continuing expense, but it also can sustain the company farther into the future. The capacity to contribute to current advancement in foundational science, can also bring the capacity to inform and advise efforts in domains closer to application.

Here's a picture, the actual article, etc. (5, Informative)

cowtamer (311087) | more than 2 years ago | (#39170033)

You would think that any journalist who is writing an article about something being imaged would also include the picture:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-17156036 [bbc.co.uk]

Here's the link to the actual article with more pictures:

http://www.nature.com/nnano/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nnano.2012.20.html [nature.com]

Here's the article:
Imaging the charge distribution within a single molecule
Fabian Mohn, Leo Gross, Nikolaj Moll & Gerhard Meyer
Nature Nanotechnology (2012) doi:10.1038/nnano.2012.20

It's lazy journalists who couldn't do 2 minutes of Googling who are killing journalism, not the Internet or Online Publishing!

Obligatory (4, Funny)

Ihmhi (1206036) | more than 2 years ago | (#39170087)

Obligatory physics jokes, let's just get them outta the way:

A photon goes to the airport and buys a ticket. The ticket agent asks if he has any luggage. "Nope," says the photon, "I'm traveling light."

Next!

Re:Obligatory (1)

Ihmhi (1206036) | more than 2 years ago | (#39174987)

Almost 12 hours and not a single reply? Slashdot, I am disappointed in you. Go to your root dir and no supper until you clear your cache.

Re:Obligatory (1)

Traksius Egas (12395) | more than 2 years ago | (#39178381)

Here's an olde for ya:

"A neutron walks into a bar; he asks the bartender, 'How much for a beer?' The bartender looks at him, and says 'For you, no charge.' "

In Soviet Russia.... (-1)

wbr1 (2538558) | more than 2 years ago | (#39171383)

...molecule images you!
Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?