Could Molybdenite Replace Silicon?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter sanman
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Silicon
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the potential of molybdenite (MoS2) as a semiconductor material in comparison to silicon (Si). Participants explore its properties, possible applications, and the implications for future technology, touching on theoretical and practical aspects of semiconductor materials.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants highlight that molybdenite may have superior semiconductor properties compared to silicon, questioning whether it could be a viable successor for future applications.
  • Others argue that silicon, despite being a poor semiconductor, has been foundational to modern technology due to its abundance and the advantages of the Si/SiO2 interface.
  • A participant notes that the success of silicon has driven the exploration of other materials, including III-V semiconductors, which are used in applications where silicon falls short.
  • Concerns are raised about the feasibility of developing practical devices from MoS2, with some suggesting that the claims of its revolutionary potential should be viewed with skepticism.
  • There is a discussion about the possibility of modifying MoS2 through dopants and the need for viable deposition technologies to utilize it effectively as a semiconductor.
  • Participants mention the ongoing search for alternatives to silicon due to scaling issues, referencing various materials studied for potential replacement, including carbon nanotubes and complex oxides.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a mix of skepticism and optimism regarding molybdenite as a semiconductor. While some see potential in its properties, others emphasize the challenges and uncertainties involved in its practical application and the historical success of silicon.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the dependence on specific definitions of semiconductor performance, the unresolved nature of practical applications for MoS2, and the complexity of developing new deposition technologies.

sanman
Messages
737
Reaction score
24
Here's an interesting article about molybdenite having superior semiconductor properties in comparison to silicon:

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2011-01/epfd-nta012811.php

What's the verdict? Is this stuff the better material? Could be it a viable successor for future applications?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I don't know anything about MoS2, but having superior properties compared to Si is nothing to write home about. Si is a very poor semiconductor.
 
And yet our modern informatics technologies are overwhelmingly based on it. Perhaps because of its abundance?

Molybdenite is supposed to be fairly abundant too, although probably not as much as silicon. I can't wait to see someone come out with the first molybdenite chip. I wonder where we'd be today if this material had been selected over silicon from the very beginning?
 
sanman said:
I wonder where we'd be today if this material had been selected over silicon from the very beginning?
The major advantage of Si is really the Si/SiO2 interface, and the real question is where would we be without it. I wonder if we may have called it quits on the MOSFET if it had been as hard as with other semiconductors like III-Vs (there is still no equivalent MIS type device in III-Vs, but we don't really need it). Without MOSFETs, you would not have VLSI. And ironically, the low electron mobility in Si is what makes CMOS possible. The success of Si was a driving force for III-Vs since we knew that the concept worked. But Si is still a poor semiconductor. There are plenty of others in use right now for applications that cannot be accomplished with Si. Your cell phone is full of III-V devices.

Don't hold your breath on MoS2 devices. Just because the place that made them says it will revolutionize the world doesn't mean it's true. They just want funding. I've heard it all before. But it doesn't necessarily mean they won't work either. Just take it with a grain of salt.
 
Last edited:
Well, what would be the counterpart to the Si/SiO2 interface? Couldn't MoS2 be similarly modified through dopants as well? I think the next step is for someone to create some practical working devices from MoS2, and show their performance advantages.

Currently there are mixed lattice substrates which mate one silicon to other materials. Maybe this could be done with MoS2 as well.
 
sanman said:
And yet our modern informatics technologies are overwhelmingly based on it. Perhaps because of its abundance?

Molybdenite is supposed to be fairly abundant too, although probably not as much as silicon. I can't wait to see someone come out with the first molybdenite chip. I wonder where we'd be today if this material had been selected over silicon from the very beginning?

As a former mineral collector, just want to pass the two comments:

1) Silicon is the most common solid element in the Earth's crust by far. However, extracting elemental silicon is extremely energy intensive, and it never occurs in elemental form in nature.

2) Molybdenite is a reasonably common mineral and occurs as is. Only purification needed to use it as a semiconductor.
 
The beauty of Si as a semiconductor was that you could oxidise the surface then deposit an electrode on top of it to form a MOSFET. Now, with deposited dilectrics like HfO2, that advantage is unimportant and the opportunity exists for new substrates. MoS2 looks interesting but a viable deposition technology shall be required. That probably requires volatile reactive precursors for MOCVD or ALD. There's a lot more to it than only purification to use it as a semiconductor!
 
Due to scaling issues with Si, the ongoing search for replacements is extremely widespread. One need only check out the "Beyond CMOS" session at one of the anuual conferences of the Materials Research Society. From CNT based FET's to complex oxide based Mott Transistors to (now) Molybdenite, there have been thousands of materials that have been studied for potential to replace Silicon, and many dozens have graced the pages of Science, Nature and Nanoletters, as suitable candidates. Yet, here we are, still with Si-based technology.

I'm not saying that Silicon won't be replaced - I believe that to some extent it almost definitely has to be, if we hope to keep scaling channel sizes downward ... but in the mean time, one has to not be tempted to think that the next material that is expected to potentially replace Silicon (especially in the Press), will likely do so. There's many a slip between the lab and the lip of the science reporter.
 

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
9K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
10K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
6K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
8K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
6K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
10K