Is a 1-Dimensional Superlattice Truly Central to Computer Processor Design?

[ferretgr]

I kind of stumbled into a debate, and while I saw some obvious flaws, it went into thermophysics, solid state, and quantum, which are areas that I didn't study in much depth.

Here's a quote that I wonder if you folks could help me out with:

"A 1-dimensional superlattice is a basic definition of a computer processor. As far as the electrons are concerned, it's just one long squiggle of N and P junctions that electricity flows through in only one direction. It's a 2-dimensional construct existing in a 3D space, but the quantum effect that makes it all work occurs in only 1 dimension."

I can't make sense of this. I haven't done much in the way of IC design and whatnot, but I don't recognize superlattices as being a part of the design. To be perfectly honest, I don't even know what a superlattice is beyond a textbook definition, and I don't understand how one (or anything outside of string theory or some other exotic situation, for that matter) can be one-dimensional. Am I missing something obvious, or is this statement the work of a crackpot?

Thanks for your help.

 

[ZapperZ]

I kind of stumbled into a debate, and while I saw some obvious flaws, it went into thermophysics, solid state, and quantum, which are areas that I didn't study in much depth.

Here's a quote that I wonder if you folks could help me out with:

"A 1-dimensional superlattice is a basic definition of a computer processor. As far as the electrons are concerned, it's just one long squiggle of N and P junctions that electricity flows through in only one direction. It's a 2-dimensional construct existing in a 3D space, but the quantum effect that makes it all work occurs in only 1 dimension."

I can't make sense of this. I haven't done much in the way of IC design and whatnot, but I don't recognize superlattices as being a part of the design. To be perfectly honest, I don't even know what a superlattice is beyond a textbook definition, and I don't understand how one (or anything outside of string theory or some other exotic situation, for that matter) can be one-dimensional. Am I missing something obvious, or is this statement the work of a crackpot?

Thanks for your help.

First of all, you should understand why something like this is frustratingly annoying. We get a glimpse of the the stuff (who knows what the whole issue is) and not only that, you are bringing some "crap" from other forums into here. We have had too many of that (example: that silly question about airplane on a conveyor belt that keeps popping on PF like zits).

People who think 1D conductors are easy and that electrons behave as they should have never heard of Luttinger Liquid. That's all I'm going to say.

Zz.

 

[ferretgr]

Sorry about this... I didn't mean to ruffle any feathers. I just wanted to get some clarification on what exactly a 1-dimensional superlattice is. I apologise if this kind of thing is inappropriate for these forums. I realize that highbrow discussion is more appropriate here; that's why I filtered my question down to that specific piece of writing.

Again, sorry! Feel free to remove the message if you feel it is in violation of any guidelines you folks have.

 

[marlon]

"A 1-dimensional superlattice is a basic definition of a computer processor. As far as the electrons are concerned, it's just one long squiggle of N and P junctions that electricity flows through in only one direction. It's a 2-dimensional construct existing in a 3D space, but the quantum effect that makes it all work occurs in only 1 dimension."

If you want to talk about computer processors, i suggest you first study the different junctions that are present in a CMOS transistor.

Besides, what quantum effect are you referring to. In CMOS there are several quantum effects that influence the operation : Poole Frenkel Defects , Fowler-Nordheim tunneling, Mobility in the substrate channel, Transport caracteristics, ...

marlon