FilterHN

I thought this video was a lot better than the Veritasium video. The Veritasium video was awkward. I think they tried to follow the formula from the (excellent) blue led video that performed so well, but it just didn't work.

▲

Hikikomori

2 hours ago

[-]

https://youtu.be/NGFhc8R_uO4

Or this presentation which came out way long ago.

▲

kristjansson

27 minutes ago

[-]

This is worth the (re)watch every time it comes up.

▲

seanalltogether

1 hour ago

[-]

The thing I didn't understand after watching that video was why you need such an exotic solution to produce EUV light. We can make lights no problem in the visible spectrum, we can make xray machines easily enough that every doctors office can afford one, what is it specifically about those wavelengths that are so tricky.

▲

zozbot234

48 minutes ago

[-]

There is such a thing as X-ray lithography, but it comes with significant challenges that make it not really worth it compared to EUV.

▲

bpavuk

40 minutes ago

[-]

I'd like to hear more about these challenges

▲

magicalhippo

21 minutes ago

[-]

As I understand it, primarly because due to the high energy level of x-rays, light x-ray interacts very differently with materials[1]. Primarily they get absorbed, so very difficult to make mirrors or lenses, which are crucial for litography to redirect and focus the light on a specific miniscule point on the wafer.

The primary method is to rely grazing angle reflection, but that per definition only allows you a tiny deflection at a time, nothing like a parabolic mirror or whatnot.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X-ray_optics

▲

on_the_train

1 hour ago

[-]

It really is the specific wavelength. Higher or lower is easier. But euv has tricky properties which make it feasible for Lithography (although just barely it you have a look at the optics) but hard to produce with high intensities.

▲

formerly_proven

51 minutes ago

[-]

Specifically, what makes x-rays easy to generate are these: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Characteristic_X-ray In essence, smashing electrons into atoms allows you to ionize the inner shell of an atom and when an electron drops down from an outer shell, the excess energy is shed as high-energy photons. This constrains the energy range of X-ray tubes ("smash electron into metal") to wavelengths well below 13.5nm.

(These emission lines are also what is being used in x-ray spectroscopy to identify elements)

▲

s0rce

39 minutes ago

[-]

You can also generate broad spectrum bremsstrahlung radiation easily, this is widely used for medical X-rays.

▲

YetAnotherNick

1 hour ago

[-]

Any source to this? I am hearing this for the first time.

▲

s0rce

39 minutes ago

[-]

ITs easy to make X-rays, you just hit a metal target with electrons: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X-ray_tube

▲

culi

3 hours ago

[-]

Here's your link without the surveillance

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MiUHjLxm3V0

▲

skrebbel

2 hours ago

[-]

With slightly less surveillance

▲

lencastre

1 hour ago

[-]

try duck player

▲

hinkley

3 hours ago

[-]

The whole “exploding tiny drops of metal” in the middle of this is just Loony Toons. This machine is literally insane and two of the companies I am long-long on would be completely fucked without it.

▲

patmorgan23

2 hours ago

[-]

You forgot WITH LASERS, and IN A VACUUM

▲

atonse

2 hours ago

[-]

Yes it was crazy when I first heard about it "wait what? they shoot it in mid-air?" and that was before I found out they did that like 30k times a second.

But now 100k times a second apparently. Humans are amazing.

▲

hinkley

2 hours ago

[-]

You have a machine that’s basically a clean room inside and one of the parts is essentially electrosputtering tin but then throwing all the tin away and using the EM pulse from the sputter to do work.

Oh and can you build it so it can run hundreds or thousands of hours before being cleaned? Thanks byyyyyyyyeeeeee!

▲

lelandbatey

1 hour ago

[-]

The inside of those machines are far, far cleaner than the inside of any clean room ever entered by a human. They have to be molecularly clean.

▲

b3orn

57 minutes ago

[-]

Which isn't easy considering they explode tin droplets in the machine. I think that's the point the other commenter wanted to make.

▲

flowerthoughts

1 hour ago

[-]

> We are going to spray expensive stuff in an extremely fine and precise line. Then we're going to shoot a laser at each droplet.

< Why?!

> To make a better laser.

< Yes, of course you are.

> 100,000 times per second.

< [AFK, buying shares.]

▲

hinkley

1 hour ago

[-]

I have shares in one of their biggest customers, and one of their customer’s biggest customers.

We are quickly leaving the realm of dependent variables still looking anything like diversification.

▲

hinkley

2 hours ago

[-]

Okay this is weird.

> The key advancements in Monday's disclosure involved doubling the number of tin drops to about 100,000 every second, and shaping them into plasma using two smaller laser bursts, as opposed to today's machines that use a single shaping burst.

This is covered in that video. Did they let him leak their Q1 plans?

▲

hobofan

6 minutes ago

[-]

That has been covered before in other videos[0] that this is their roadmap to higher power, so I'm also not sure what they have announced now that wasn't previously announced.

[0]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MXnrzS3aGeM

▲

xnx

3 hours ago

[-]

> The company's researchers have found a way to boost the power of the EUV light source to 1,000 watts from 600 watts now.

> "We see a reasonably clear path toward 1,500 watts, and no fundamental reason why we couldn't get to 2,000 watts."

▲

tromp

50 minutes ago

[-]

The light power increase is even more impressive at 67%:

> The company's researchers have found a way to boost the power of the EUV light source to 1,000 watts from 600 watts now.

with more on the horizon:

> We see a reasonably clear path toward 1,500 watts, and no fundamental reason why we couldn't get to 2,000 watts.

▲

throw0101a

3 hours ago

[-]

So how small are individual components (e.g., transistors) nowadays? Presumably there's a lower limit: once you're a few atoms across, it seems that you can't go any smaller (?).

▲

ahazred8ta

3 hours ago

[-]

Gates are about 30-50 nm wide, even though they're called '3nm' for marketing reasons.

▲

phkahler

1 hour ago

[-]

Metal pitch is 26nm. That means parallel wires can be placed 2 wavelengths apart with 13.5nm light.

▲

penguin_booze

1 hour ago

[-]

Like free range chicken.

▲

kakacik

1 hour ago

[-]

You only need to live in reasonable place for that phrase to have a proper meaning, across whole market from cheapest to most expensive.

▲

whazor

3 hours ago

[-]

This is about increasing output per machine via upgrades.

▲

cyptus

2 hours ago

[-]

some gates are only 10-14 nm wide, thats about 50 silicon atoms!

▲

ranger_danger

3 hours ago

[-]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2_nm_process

▲

hinkley

2 hours ago

[-]

I still think we should have gone with average gates per square mm as a new yardstick. It would also make sense to the Numbers Go Up people.

▲

itopaloglu83

1 hour ago

[-]

It’s going to be quite funny if they can go below 40nm in gate pitch size, because they’ll need to call it 0nm.

▲

dogma1138

1 hour ago

[-]

They are moving to angstroms, hence 18A for example.

▲

onjectic

3 hours ago

[-]

> SAN DIEGO, California

> to help retain the Dutch company's edge over emerging U.S. and Chinese rivals

Great news, but what a strange attempt to equate the U.S. and China in this and build a narrative. Cymer was founded in San Diego.

▲

petcat

2 hours ago

[-]

Yeah it's an interesting angle in the article. The EUV light source technology is completely designed, developed, and manufactured by Cymer in California, which is a US company that ASML acquired in 2013. If export control agreements were not in place then ASML would have never been permitted to acquire Cymer. And if they are not enforced then the US would almost certainly require ASML to sell Cymer back to US ownership, TikTok-style.

The reality is that it's American technology that is used in ASML machines so I don't know why the article tries to frame it like it's a competition.

▲

merb

43 minutes ago

[-]

Your take is also a bad one. No what asml builds is not American technology. Why asml succeeded is because they got tons of company’s and people to help them advance the technology of the chip industry. Yes it wouldn’t be possible without the Americans. But it would also not be possible without the Europeans, the Koreans, etc… what asml did was basically ask the technology leaders in each field to build their best product so that they can take their parts and assembly this awesome piece of technology.

▲

ahartmetz

2 hours ago

[-]

Which American rival would that be anyway? I have not heard of any.

▲

petcat

1 hour ago

[-]

xLight is the promising new US competitor to Cymer. Lots of funding from the US CHIPS And Science Act. Founded by Dept. of Energy engineers who formerly worked on large-scale X-Ray systems and particle accelerators.

▲

christkv

1 hour ago

[-]

I think the Japanese are also working on potentially competing technology

▲

on_the_train

3 hours ago

[-]

This is a steep increase of power to get out of a vacuum system that is highly sensitive to temperature changes.