Follow this blog:
RSS

Computing faster than electricity

By | May 6, 2010, 12:00 PM PDT

There’s a big bottleneck in front of Moore’s Law, whether you apply it to chips or the networks that carry data.

Electricity. (Picture from Wikipedia.)

This has been known for decades, since the old AT&T first started spinning optical fibers from glass at a plant in Norcross, Ga., near my home.

I got a tour of the plant while working for a local newspaper and the great unanswered question was how you connect the fibers together.

For a long time the answer was a simple switch. Data would be turned from light to electricity, run through the switch, then get turned back into light.

Today we have all-optical switches, so even though fibers no longer send a single beam of white light, but a stream of signals in a rainbow of colors (seen and unseen) our networks can handle the load.

There remains the problem of scaling that down. How do we move data between chips, within systems, at the speed of light rather than the speed of electricity?

Scientists at UC San Diego say they now have the answer — a laser measuring one micron in size, built with super-thin layers of silica and aluminum, that works at room temperature and emits a beam whose wavelength is 1.4 microns, larger than the laser itself.

These nanolasers can be packed onto a wafer with the aluminum acting as a heatsink. Lasers can be run as close together as circuit lines on current chips. The pulsing of the light can represent 1s and 0s, read on either side of the junction by a diode.

Nanolasers like those made at UC San Diego could hit commercial production in just a few years, built into optical networking gear or, perhaps, directly onto chips, reducing that bottleneck between electricity and light still further.

So no matter how fast you think you think tomorrow’s chips and networks will think faster, because our chemical brains are still running on electricity while tomorrow’s networks will run on light.

Start your week smarter with our weekly e-mail newsletter. It's your cheat sheet for good ideas. Get it.

Dana Blankenhorn

About Dana Blankenhorn

Dana Blankenhorn was a contributing editor for SmartPlanet from 2009 to 2010.

Dana Blankenhorn

Dana Blankenhorn

Contributing Editor, Technology

Dana Blankenhorn has written for the Chicago Tribune, Advertising Age's "NetMarketing" supplement and founded the Interactive Age Daily for CMP Media. He holds degrees from Rice and Northwestern universities. He is based in Atlanta.

Follow him on Twitter.

Dana Blankenhorn

Dana Blankenhorn

Dana Blankenhorn has been a technology reporter since 1982, a business reporter since 1978, and a writer for as long as he can remember. His Schwab IRA has a few tech stocks in it, most notably some Intel and Applied Materials bought over 10 years ago. But the vast majority of his tiny fortune (emphasis on the word tiny) is invested in mutual funds. He presently writes for no one else but ZDNet, SmartPlanet and himself. But if you've got an opportunity let him know. If he takes the gig he"ll first add it to this disclosure page.

He writes for SmartPlanet and is not an employee of CBS.

If you liked this, don't miss...
16
Comments

Join the conversation!

Follow via:
RSS
0 Votes
+ -
Very Cool
Very cool indeed.

There has been talk of using light paths instead of electrical
paths inside of high-speed chips for at least a couple of decades.
It's nice to see someone finally pursuing it in earnest.

It will be interesting to see how this develops over the next few
years, especially as we think about the per-unit production costs,
and how they go about keeping those down without sacrificing
performance.

Thanks for the great post!
Posted by roncemer
7th May 2010
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Computing faster than electricity
Optical computers have been on the test-bed for two decades - it's not surprising that new fabrication techniques are finally addressing the size/heat problem. Moore's law remains secure for now.
Posted by mwagner@...
7th May 2010
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Computing faster than electricity
One point of confusion about the "speed of light." Light in an optical fiber moves about 66% of the speed of light in a vacuum. Some coaxial cables can carry signals at 90%--faster than optical fibers. Wireless works at the speed of light.
Electromagnetic energy travels at the "speed of light," be it electrical energy, radio, or optical energy. But the speed depends on the medium.
None of which is meant to suggest optical transmission/processing is not the better choice.
Posted by skipdon
7th May 2010
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Computing faster than electricity
Yawn. Check out some of the EXISTING PATENTS from Marvin Bausman on this issue.

We were doing this over 20 years ago at CRI. If JR hadn't pulled the plug om the MP 64 project ( follow on to the Y-MP ) we would have been running this stuff 10 years ago...We were building clock prototypes with our own fab area. JR SHOULD have been shot....
Posted by Old Timer 8080
7th May 2010
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Computing faster than electricity
Nice post. Thanks.
Posted by ITOdeed
7th May 2010
0 Votes
+ -
And it is not affected by EMP
As more and more of our infrastructure is upgraded to fiber optic, it is hardened to the ill effects of EMP. The threat of an EMP strike by an enemy nuclear missile at 3.5 miles above the Dakotas has been recognized since the late 1950s.
Posted by Sagax-
7th May 2010
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Computing faster than electricity
everything following the opening paragraph dhows the opening paragraph to be a compleat falsehood.
are you people publishing to communicate or to garner page views?
Posted by gabriel bear
8th May 2010
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Computing faster than electricity
Ironically this laser-on-a-chip trick dates back to the 90's, IIRC.

I remember reading about it, and realized it would be possible to
make a pair of video glasses with a million laser elements per
inch.

I thought we'd have them by now. Ideally you could send a HD
signal to the video glasses and project it straight on to your
retina.

And for all the wisenheimers, the wattage would be too low to
harm your eyes..
Posted by Jkirk3279
8th May 2010
0 Votes
+ -
Progress geared towards money and control...
It doesn't surprise me in the slightest that us poor schmucks are still having obsolete technology foisted on us. Look at CDs / DVDs - late 1960's tech! And what about hard drives? Those were technically obsoleted around 1985 with bio-engineered pig's brain cells read by lasers. Of course, "they" didn't want to have to shut down their obsolete, expensive HDD manufacturing plants, and they've made so many billions more in profit off of us in the interim - why should they release dirt-cheap, fast tech to the masses when they can fleece us? Truth is: "they" and "them" have very, very advanced tech - it's you and I that funds it. As a sop, "they" eek out woefully antiquated, obsolete tech - a few crumbs - to keep us quiet. We could have had iPhones & Octo-core CPUs 20 years ago...
Posted by naibeeru
19th May 2010
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Computing faster than electricity
Can you spell useless?
Posted by smeezekitty2
20th May 2010
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Computing faster than electricity
The news here is that they have made an interesting breakthrough that may allow implementation of concepts that we have been pursuing for some time. I am looking forward with great anticipation to trying out the first fully optical processing engine.

The brain reference, however, is unworthy. Our brains work at chemical speed, not on electricity. Our computers and 'logical' devices are based upon electricity, and then only on binary systems. Optical may perform better than either, but is still unproven. Signal or flow speed alone is only one factor in processing efficiency.

Electricity based multi-state (non-binary) systems have potential to be orders of magnitude faster than binary systems, but would be complex and expensive to implement using today's technology. Optical system still have some hurdles to clear before being presented as a practical technology, but are an even more exciting concept.
Posted by wpeckham@...
20th May 2010
0 Votes
+ -
B and R&D
we are interested to receive more information for business and
Research , please contact us
al_batuul2000@yahoo.com
Posted by fbaothman
20th May 2010
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Computing faster than electricity
Don't you guys research before you publish?

"Electricity" (or more technically, the propagation of the electromagnetic wave that is of use as a signal) already moves at the speed of light (in a vacuum - and at something like 96% of the speed of light on a copper conductor).

What slows current technology down is how fast material responds to the electromagnetic wave.

And what will slow down light-based devices is exactly the same thing. Getting the signal from one place to another on a chip isn't the problem - it's getting the device on the chip to respond to the change in the signal.
Posted by ghastly
20th May 2010
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Computing faster than electricity
so what happened to HP (or Intel, I can't remember) all optical
processors. are they ready yet?
Posted by joel@...
20th May 2010
0 Votes
+ -
I anticipate
Architectures with truly enormous word length millions perhaps billions of bit words. All in good time some one else wants it first no doubt ask again in 25 years. Terra hertz clocks oh yea fast.
Posted by Altotus
20th May 2010
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Computing faster than electricity
Dr. Shepard? Dr. Shepard, Wake up, we're here, we've landed.

Sorry to bust yout ballons, but "Lost" is just Jack's dream and all the characters are the people Jack saw at the airport just before the flight took off and the series ends as a stewardess awakes Jack.

That way the writers don't have to explain anything.

As for filling in the gap that the shows ending brings, think like a football fan...next season is not that far off and you'll find a replacement for that time slot or stare at the TV every Sunday hoping they'll play a surprise game.

TEE HEE!
Posted by sykandtyed
20th May 2010
Join the conversation
Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]

Join the SmartPlanet community and join the conversation! Signing up is fast and free. Don't wait -- we want to hear your opinion!