- #1
ferretgr
- 3
- 0
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.
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.