Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Science Hardware

Transparent Transistors Printed On Paper 51

Posted by Unknown Lamer
from the next-step-dispoable-eink dept.
MTorrice writes "To make light-weight, inexpensive electronics using renewable materials, scientists have turned to a technology that is almost 2,000 years old: paper. Researchers fabricated organic transistors on a transparent, exceptionally smooth type of paper called nanopaper. This material has cellulose fibers that are only 10 nm in diameter. The nanopaper transistors are about 84% transparent, and their performance decreases only slightly when bent."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Transparent Transistors Printed On Paper

Comments Filter:
  • by dmbasso (1052166)

    It will be nice when we could print designs once made for fpga.

  • by Required Snark (1702878) on Tuesday February 05, 2013 @06:30AM (#42794991)

    The nanopaper transistor also showed excellent optical transmittance up to 83.5%. The device configuration can be applied to many other semiconductor materials toward flexible green electronics.

    This is confusing. Is it green or is it transparent? Maybe it's a light green. Just make up your mind.

    • by oodaloop (1229816)
      Haven't you ever heard of colorless green ideas? I hear they don't sleep well.
    • by c0lo (1497653)

      The nanopaper transistor also showed excellent optical transmittance up to 83.5%. The device configuration can be applied to many other semiconductor materials toward flexible green electronics.

      This is confusing. Is it green or is it transparent? Maybe it's a light green. Just make up your mind.

      From TFA:

      Only a 10% decrease in mobility was observed when the nanopaper transistors were being bent.

      Well, one fact is certain: the paper transistor is very much like a crocodile [hu-berlin.de], as it is more flexible than it is green (it's 90% flexible and at most 16.5% green).

    • If you think it is confusing, you should see who created the nanopaper transistor. It's the Invisible Pink Unicorn.

      Oh wait, you won't see her either.

  • 2000 year old? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by dabadab (126782) on Tuesday February 05, 2013 @06:39AM (#42795021)

    That is certainly a lot more modern, than silicone, which is about 14 billion years old.

    Could we skip this bullshit? This nanopaper most certainly don't have too much in common with the paper made 2000 years ago.

    • which may be due to the large binding energy between polymer dielectric and cellulose nanopaper

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papyrus [wikipedia.org]

      papyrus is stable, formed as it is of highly rot-resistant cellulose

      Paper can cut. Facts can hurt those who are ignorant and arrogant.

      • by c0lo (1497653)

        which may be due to the large binding energy between polymer dielectric and cellulose nanopaper

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papyrus [wikipedia.org]

        papyrus is stable, formed as it is of highly rot-resistant cellulose

        Paper can cut. Facts can hurt those who are ignorant and arrogant.

        No shit, Watson! [wikipedia.org]

        (just in case you wonder what's the relevance of the article I linked: the same relevance papyrus has for nanopaper. And that's a fact. Does it hurt you?)

      • by azalin (67640)
        Papyrus is not paper. Paper making requires putting short fibers pulped in water, spreading the pulp, pressing and drying it. Papyrus on the other hand is created by weaving Papyrus grass.
    • Re:2000 year old? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by SuricouRaven (1897204) on Tuesday February 05, 2013 @08:18AM (#42795375)

      Silicon. Not silicone. Silicone is a polymer compound of silicon and oxygen, commonly used as a sealant.

    • Dude,

      Silicone: (^)(^)
      Silicon: sand and computer chips.

  • . . . do you end up with a raging fire . . . ?

    • by azalin (67640)

      . . . do you end up with a raging fire . . . ?

      I think Boing is using batteries for that

  • TFA (Score:5, Interesting)

    by codeButcher (223668) on Tuesday February 05, 2013 @07:51AM (#42795263)
    I've read the fine article, and it might not be immediately clear from the summary that the breakthrough here is not the transistor per se - the important step was in using the "nanopaper" (which is tech that is in fact NOT 2KA old).

    And while the nanopaper may be biodegradable, I am wondering about the carbon nanotubes they are printing on top (as conductors). While the toxicity of carbon nanotubes is still being studied, there are good indications that they might behave similar to asbestos fibres. So not something you would necessarily want to throw on your compost heap.

    • by Anonymous Coward

      > While the toxicity of carbon nanotubes is still being studied, there are good indications that they might behave similar to asbestos fibres

      When shown to be true, this of course severely limits the applicability of CNTs. However, being 100% carbon (or near 100% if doped) means it should at least be possible to incinerate them cleanly. So all is not lost.

  • by Overzeetop (214511) on Tuesday February 05, 2013 @08:14AM (#42795353) Journal

    Yes. Thank you for all coming today. I have here, in my hand, a new type of transistor that I have printed on this ORDINARY piece of paper. ...
    What?
    Of course you cant see them - they're transparent. ...
    Do they work? Of course they do, and Jimmy here has a nice computer simulation of the process. ...
    No, of course we can't demonstrate on the real thing, we still have to work out the interconnects and external interface, but trust me - they're on here. ...
    Yes, I have printed what is essentially invisible transistors on this paper, and it will change the world. I just need a few million dollars in funding to help me work out some of the critical issues.

  • by Anonymous Coward

    Really, bendable and transparent? I want my transistors fast and low power. It's just becoming silly.

  • Looks like we'll be watching and trying not to hear poor renditions of happy birthday in the not too distant future.

  • Why do these renewable fanatics (not neccessarily these scientists, maybe the journos reporting this) always pick on the wrong things to renew. Looking around things that are manufactured - and discarded - the weight of transistors cannot constitute even 0.0001% of it all.

    Why don't the greenies pick on something like the fact that many people rip out and replace their bathrooms and kitchens and general furniture every five years.

    Unfortunately, making things "renewable", and hence compromising their r
    • by volmtech (769154)
      I guess i"m not "many people". Here I sit on a 32 year old kitchen chair at my 32 year old kitchen table. I did remodel my bathroom ten years ago because the floor rotted out from all the water my kids splashed out of the tub. Today I'm going over to my cousin's house to redo his kitchen floor. Fifty six years of wear and Florida humidity have left the flooring to weak to support his 400 lbs. Did I mention that after 40 years of farm work and over the road truck driving both of us are wore out and on disabi
  • Now we can see electrons diffusing along the mesa, falling into holes and being swept away by an avalanche!
  • are now a step closer..

Things are not as simple as they seems at first. - Edward Thorp

Working...