Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Businesses United States Science Technology

Bell Labs Kills Fundamental Physics Research 460

An anonymous reader writes with this snippet from Wired: "After six Nobel Prizes, the invention of the transistor, laser and countless contributions to computer science and technology, it is the end of the road for Bell Labs' fundamental physics research lab. Alcatel-Lucent, the parent company of Bell Labs, is pulling out of basic science, material physics and semiconductor research and will instead be focusing on more immediately marketable areas such as networking, high-speed electronics, wireless, nanotechnology and software." Jamie points out this list of Bell Labs' accomplishments at Wikipedia, including little things like the UNIX operating system.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Bell Labs Kills Fundamental Physics Research

Comments Filter:
  • by Tenrosei ( 1305283 ) on Thursday August 28, 2008 @04:23PM (#24784353)
  • by Dex5791 ( 973984 ) on Thursday August 28, 2008 @04:28PM (#24784441)
    I once worked there. Man that place has gone to the dogs. "Less learnin, more earnin!" -Alcatel-Lucent CEO
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 28, 2008 @04:33PM (#24784535)

    Here's this old myth being repeated once more.

    Sorry, Bell Labs never invented the transistor. The transistor had been invented (and patented) back in the 1920's. It was in use during WWII (see "A Different Kind of War" by Commodore Myles).

    What Bell Labs DID invent was the SILICON transistor. And of course this was an incredible breakthrough.

    Unfortunately, they also have tried claiming complete credit for the creation of the transistor in general, by propagating the myth that no transistors existed before the invention of the Silicon Transistor.

    Please get your facts right, as it's a discredit to the people who did the original pioneering work in this field. Thanks.

  • Re:The End (Score:4, Informative)

    by afabbro ( 33948 ) on Thursday August 28, 2008 @04:42PM (#24784677) Homepage

    I've seen so many of the big labs die. I happened to be at IBM Alamaden the day IBM exited the disk drive business, a sad day and the beginning of the end for Alamaden. Who in American industry is still doing basic research?

    Well, IBM still is [ibm.com], and on a lot cooler stuff that just disk drives.

  • Re:The End (Score:3, Informative)

    by Abcd1234 ( 188840 ) on Thursday August 28, 2008 @04:49PM (#24784779) Homepage

    Umm... like who? Hell, what startup has the funds to perform basic materials science, anyway? Do you understand the kind of research facilities and monetary outlay required to study nanotechnology or materials science?

  • by worthawholebean ( 1204708 ) on Thursday August 28, 2008 @04:51PM (#24784817)
    It was patented in the '20s but we have no evidence that it was ever built. The first transistor at Bell Labs used germanium.
  • by blind biker ( 1066130 ) on Thursday August 28, 2008 @04:53PM (#24784849) Journal

    Pulling out from materials science research AND focus on nanotechnology and high-speed electronics? That's nonsense.

    Look at Intel: what keeps them one step ahead from an otherwise very creative company as AMD, (apart from the great team Intel has in Haifa) is huge and continuous investments in materials science. A little bit less electromigration, a bit better control of dielectric coefficients, a few nanometers less here and there - it all adds up.

    As a researcher in nanotechnology, I have huge, HUGE respect for my materials science colleagues (as well as physical chemists).

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 28, 2008 @05:01PM (#24784963)

    It was patented by
    Julius Edgar Lilienfeld [wikipedia.org] in 1925.

    See also
    the Wikipedia Entry for the Transistor [wikipedia.org]

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 28, 2008 @05:29PM (#24785387)

    It was patented by
    Julius Edgar Lilienfeld [wikipedia.org] in 1925.

    That's the field effect transistor, while the Bell Labs team supervised by William Shockley invented the bipolar transistor. Different things, different principles of operation.

    So feel free to get *your* facts straight.

  • Re:Six Sigma (Score:5, Informative)

    by Avohir ( 889832 ) on Thursday August 28, 2008 @05:29PM (#24785395)
    humorous, considering the precursor to Six Sigma was actually developed at Bell Labs...

    from Wikipedia:

    In 1924, Bells Labs physicist Dr. Walter A. Shewhart proposed the control chart as a method to determine when a process was in a state of statistical control. Shewart's methods were the basis for statistical process control (SPC) - the use of statistically-based tools and techniques for the management and improvement of processes. This was the origin of the modern quality movement, including Six Sigma.
  • Re:therefore (Score:5, Informative)

    by homer_s ( 799572 ) on Thursday August 28, 2008 @05:34PM (#24785503)
    My old advisor has been spending a lot of time in China and India lately. In his eyes, India really is moving in the direction of major fundamental research. He thinks that if things move at their current pace, there will be a crossover in about 20-30 years when India passes America in innovation.

    I'm 29. I'm from India. I've lived in America for the last 6 years. Your advisor must be smoking something good. Please ask him to stop.
  • USA? (Score:5, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 28, 2008 @05:34PM (#24785505)

    Why is this tagged USA? Alcatel-Lucent is a French company.

  • Re:therefore (Score:4, Informative)

    by StrategicIrony ( 1183007 ) on Thursday August 28, 2008 @05:38PM (#24785567)

    Negative.

    Nanotech is on the leading edge of engineering disciplines, but is hardly pure science, unless you're talking about atomic or quantum level manipulation of matter.

    The idea of making really small electronics and things are really not fundamental science questions, but just a matter of refining manufacturing techniques.

  • by DancesWithBlowTorch ( 809750 ) on Thursday August 28, 2008 @05:46PM (#24785695)
    Actually, we have slightly more nuanced picture over here (Europe). The proverb is that America has the world's five best universities, but also 500 of the worst ones.

    It's true that the Ivy League Schools and MIT, Berkeley, Stanford, CalTech are amazing places to do research. I wouldn't want to leave my beautiful old and very good university in the old world for a random place in the States, though. I find it funny how more or less every American I come across maintains a belief that his particular alma mater is "a very good school" and "everybody is trying to get a place there".
  • by penrodyn ( 927177 ) on Thursday August 28, 2008 @06:18PM (#24786195)
    There is a fundamental difference, vacuum tubes are voltage controlled devices whereas transistors are current controlled.
  • Re:Greed. (Score:3, Informative)

    by Stephen Ma ( 163056 ) on Thursday August 28, 2008 @06:42PM (#24786605)
    The Chinese culture hasn't changed fundamentally. For example, poems written during the Qin dynasty are still readable today, and they rhyme just as well now as they did then.

    Can modern Italians read poets like Virgil or Horace in the original Latin? Not without extensive, specialized education. Whereas any modern Chinese with basic literacy can read and understand the Book of Songs, which contains poetry from periods even earlier than the Qin.

  • Re:therefore (Score:5, Informative)

    by budword ( 680846 ) on Thursday August 28, 2008 @08:23PM (#24787759)
    India is still asking women to list their menstrual cycle on job applications. They aren't passing anyone anytime soon.
  • Re:USA? (Score:4, Informative)

    by jstott ( 212041 ) on Thursday August 28, 2008 @08:53PM (#24788143)

    Why is this tagged USA? Alcatel-Lucent is a French company.

    Because AT+T/Bell and (pre-buyout) Lucent were US companies?

    -JS

  • by AstroByte ( 718093 ) on Thursday August 28, 2008 @09:23PM (#24788475) Homepage
    Ambrose Fleming (English) patented the thermionic valve in the UK in 1904 and in the US in 1905. This was a two electrode device (anode and cathode) which acted as a rectifier/detector, i.e. a diode. It was called a thermionic valve as it was analogous to a standard valve, e.g. in a water pipe. It only allowed current flow in one direction. In 1908, Lee De Forest (American) invented the triode, which was a three electrode device (this has a grid in addition to cathode and anode). This is analogous to the transistor, not Fleming's diode valve. A charge on the grid varies the electron flow between cathode and anode. This enables amplification. In the UK, what (was) known as a thermionic valve (or valve) is what is called in the US a vacuum tube. But as with everything else, the old British terms are dying out, and you often hear them called tubes, e.g. "tube radios" here as well. Much to my disgust :) We also used to call : Aerial = antenna Earth = ground I collect and restore pre-WWII valve radios! (pre WWII a condensor = capacitor).
  • Re:therefore (Score:3, Informative)

    by afidel ( 530433 ) on Thursday August 28, 2008 @09:42PM (#24788665)
    I'm sorry but the advances in the cellular world in the last 8 years are leaps and bounds ahead of what would have come out of a monopoly AT&T in the same time period. Remember it took AT&T almost that long to go from AMPS to D-AMPS (TDMA) and that was with mandated second providers!
  • Re:therefore (Score:3, Informative)

    by homer_s ( 799572 ) on Friday August 29, 2008 @06:28AM (#24792053)
    I spend about 5-10 hours a week talking to folks back home. I spend about 1 month a year back in India.
    Any information I get about India is not from some newspaper or from someone who spent a few weeks there to write a book.

    So, I think I know a lot more about what is going on in India than many people here.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 29, 2008 @07:21AM (#24792357)

    I wasn't arguing that the first FET was not a transistor, but that the design was not viable from a commercial point of view. FETs did not see any real use until the development of silicon models, much later.

    The BJT however was the workhorse of modern electronics for quite a while, and was the first viable transistor. It could actually be mass produced.

    As for the OPs statement about Bell Labs inventing the silicon transistor, that's bullshit, as Shockley's design was germanium based, as were most semiconductor devices from that period.

    It's kind of sad how reading about lions and monkeys on Wikipedia doesn't qualify you to be a vet though, isn't it?

For God's sake, stop researching for a while and begin to think!

Working...