This is interesting in that it seems to be making the grind more efficient. I think the true breakthrough will likely be proper scale quantum computing to make the first principles design feasible
Materials innovation has a scale-up problem, not discovery
11–17 of 17 posts
Re: Materials innovation has a scale-up problem, not discovery
#12> THE MATERIALS OF THE FUTURE ALREADY EXIST IN THE LAB Do they? There’s plenty of stuff in our labs, most of them are completely useless, some that were bought to be useless become fashionable again, and we get new and exciting ones every day. There are a lot of issues in going from concept to useable material, and "scaling up" is only one of them. > FRONTIER INTELLIGENCE WILL BRING THEM TO THE WORLD. It will probabl…
All the properties have to be right and the price has to be right too. Mainstream plastics, like all the ones that have their own recycling symbols, are made from monomers that cost about 50 cents a pound. There are thousands and thousands of polymers you've never heard of, some of which are very high performance, which are many times more expensive. I think of the story that Silicon is not that good of a semiconduct…
Re: Materials innovation has a scale-up problem, not discovery
#13Its curious that they picked this example. The challenge with HKMG was not the material itself, but how to integrate into into the transistor stack.
There were two completely different approaches: Gate first and replacement gate. Gate first is what the industry was already using for silicon oxide so everybody tried to go with as little change as possible. Only intel decided for replacement gate, which worked much better and reaped some other benefits on the way.
This was a watershed moment in the industry and ultimately led to some of the players dropping out of the cmos race.
But is this really a "scale-up" problem? It required development of novel manufacturing processes (atomic layer deposition), but was still mainly a process integration and device engineering topic.
The part of the thesis I have to agree with is that there is a data problem. The development above relies on executing lots of time consuming and tedious split experiments that often cannot be parallelized. The outcome of this relies heavily on the experience and diligence of the experimenters.
It's probably well suited for an "autoresearch" approach, bridging to the phyiscal world and dealing with the timescale is the challenge.
Re: Materials innovation has a scale-up problem, not discovery
#14Materials science fundamentally has a math & computability problem. Rigorous materials simulations at a nanometre scale seem now feasible - so you could model physical properties of small groups of atoms - eg. Modeling molecular reactions at a sub-atomic level. Bulk property simulations at a centi and up scale also work and so you can do first principles based design and use tricks like finite element methods to deal…
Computational design of a target microstructure and material composition is one area, engineering solutions to produce these targets is other level of difficulty.
Re: Materials innovation has a scale-up problem, not discovery
#15Earlier quoted context omitted.
All the properties have to be right and the price has to be right too. Mainstream plastics, like all the ones that have their own recycling symbols, are made from monomers that cost about 50 cents a pound. There are thousands and thousands of polymers you've never heard of, some of which are very high performance, which are many times more expensive. I think of the story that Silicon is not that good of a semiconduct…
Yeah. Think of how many man-hours over the past ~35 years have been spent in trying to make graphene and carbon nanotubes into useful products. It's easily somewhere in the millions. And really all we have to show for it are resins with slightly improved thermal conductivity and a rogues' gallery of grifters and failed startups. Discovery's easy, scaling in the real world is hard, and scaling something that makes goo…
Re: Materials innovation has a scale-up problem, not discovery
#16Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah. Think of how many man-hours over the past ~35 years have been spent in trying to make graphene and carbon nanotubes into useful products. It's easily somewhere in the millions. And really all we have to show for it are resins with slightly improved thermal conductivity and a rogues' gallery of grifters and failed startups. Discovery's easy, scaling in the real world is hard, and scaling something that makes goo…
I get laughed at if I go to a conference and suggest that carbon nanotubes could be the answer to something!
Re: Materials innovation has a scale-up problem, not discovery
#17Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah. Think of how many man-hours over the past ~35 years have been spent in trying to make graphene and carbon nanotubes into useful products. It's easily somewhere in the millions. And really all we have to show for it are resins with slightly improved thermal conductivity and a rogues' gallery of grifters and failed startups. Discovery's easy, scaling in the real world is hard, and scaling something that makes goo…
I get laughed at if I go to a conference and suggest that carbon nanotubes could be the answer to something!
Institutions look for the "killer app" but it's the
network effects that makes unaffordable the playing fee. any entity that wants to disrupt the house has to .. ship all the _tooling_ at once [and all made of/dependent on nanotubes, for instance]..
Aside from that: Carbon nanotubes shareholders will have to learn basic strat from a future Social Network that puts Meta in the recycle bin (short of emptying it, so that could well be Meta reinventing itself!)