We can, when necessary: ​​domestic post-silicon electronics

10 176 47
We can, when necessary: ​​domestic post-silicon electronics
Source: ortsci.ru


The end of the silicon era


Transistors on a crystal will double in size every eighteen months to two years. This is Moore's Law, which still only applies very loosely. But silicon, like any material, has a physical limit to miniaturization, and modern electronics are already approaching it. When the transistor gate length drops below five nanometers, quantum effects begin to dominate: electrons tunnel through the gate barrier even when the transistor is off, causing it to lose its ability to reliably switch between the "on" and "off" states.



This phenomenon, known as the short-channel effect, leads to a sharp increase in leakage currents—parasitic currents that flow through the transistor even when it should be off. The result is increased power consumption, excessive heating of the crystal, and reduced reliability of the entire chip. This is why, in recent years, process nodes designated as "3 nm" or "2 nm" have long ceased to reflect the actual physical dimensions of components—they are more marketing designations for process generations than literal dimensions. The industry has essentially hit a wall, and this is precisely why interest in alternative semiconductor materials capable of operating at the atomic scale without catastrophic loss of control has surged in recent years.


Among the candidates for replacing silicon, two-dimensional (2D) semiconductors—materials consisting of one or more atomic layers—occupy a special place. The most famous representative of this family is graphene, discovered in 2004 by Andre Geim and Konstantin Novoselov (Nobel Prize in Physics 2010). It possesses fantastic electron mobility, but it lacks an intrinsic band gap, meaning that a transistor based on it cannot be reliably "turned off"—current always flows.

This problem has led researchers to turn their attention to a special class of materials, including molybdenum disulfide (MoS₂), tungsten disulfide (WS₂), molybdenum diselenide (MoSe₂), and tungsten diselenide (WSe₂). Unlike graphene, these materials have an intrinsic band gap, making them ideal semiconductor channels for transistors.

Breakthrough moment in stories The material's breakthrough came in 2011, when András Kisz's group at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology in Lausanne first demonstrated a working transistor on a single layer of MoS₂ with excellent characteristics—a high on/off current ratio and low power consumption. Since then, molybdenum disulfide has become one of the most researched materials in post-silicon electronics, with thousands of scientific publications and dozens of laboratories worldwide, from MIT and Stanford to the University of California at Berkeley.

China also joined the race: in the summer of 2026, researchers from Nanjing reported the creation of the first industrial six-inch MoS₂ wafers. Against this backdrop, the announcement of the technology developed by scientists at the Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology appears to be a logical continuation of the global scientific race, in which Russia has long been more of an observer than a participant. This is the first domestic development of a complete manufacturing cycle for molybdenum disulfide transistors.

The essence of the Russian development


The main technical problem our scientists solved seems simple at first glance. However, in reality, it was precisely this problem that for many years hindered the use of ultra-thin two-dimensional semiconductors in real-world plants. The crux of the matter is this: how to attach a metal contact (electrode) to a material just one atom thick without destroying its incredibly fragile structure?

In conventional microelectronics, contacts are made by literally sputtering a metal (usually gold, titanium, or chromium) directly onto the semiconductor surface in a vacuum. If we're working with a regular, thick piece of silicon, this is perfectly safe. But if we're using a one-atom-thick layer of molybdenum disulfide, where every atom is exposed and uncovered, such sputtering can be disastrous. Fast, heavy metal atoms strike the crystal surface at incredible speeds, knocking out sulfur atoms—the weakest links in this material. This creates "holes" (voids) in the otherwise perfect lattice. These defects disrupt the crystal's order, create electronic interference, and severely impair the electrical contact between the metal and the semiconductor itself. As a result, the transistor develops excessively high resistance, operates unstably, and is no longer suitable for real electronic devices. Roman Romanov, a senior researcher at the Atomic Layer Deposition Laboratory at MIPT, described this situation very accurately:

Ultrathin materials have long promised a breakthrough in electronics manufacturing, but a wall of technological challenges stands between lab experiments and real-world production. The main one is how to connect a wire to a single-atom-thick material without breaking it.


Researchers from the Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology (MIPT) have found a solution to this problem, and their findings were published in the international scientific journal Vacuum. The idea is to place a very thin insulating layer of titanium dioxide between the metal electrode and the semiconductor itself. This layer is only a few atoms thick. It is applied using atomic layer deposition (ALD). It sounds complicated, but in fact, this layer-by-layer sputtering method has long been successfully used in modern factories. This means that factories won't have to completely redesign their production lines to accommodate the new technology.

This intermediate layer has two functions that at first glance seem incompatible. On the one hand, it acts as a reliable shield: it physically encloses the semiconductor and prevents heavy metal atoms from penetrating its structure when contact is made. On the other hand, this spacer is so thin that electrons can still pass through it freely. This occurs thanks to quantum tunneling—a special phenomenon in the microworld whereby a particle can pass through a barrier (as if through a wall), even if, according to the laws of classical physics, it should not have enough energy to do so. Ilya Zavidovsky, a senior researcher at the Center for Photonics and 2D Materials at MIPT, explained it this way:

This thin layer acts as a smart barrier. It protects the material from destruction by metal atoms, yet electrons easily pass through it thanks to the laws of quantum physics.

But in practice, another difficulty arose: it's impossible to simply apply titanium dioxide to a perfectly smooth semiconductor surface. The atoms of the protective layer simply have nothing to "cling" to on this chemically passive surface, so the film lays down unevenly, in patches, leaving bare, unprotected areas.

To circumvent this obstacle, scientists from MIPT came up with a beautiful and elegant solution. Before applying the protective film, they lightly irradiate the semiconductor surface with helium ions. The energy of these ions is perfectly calibrated: they don't cause serious damage to the material, but rather gently knock out individual, rare sulfur atoms. Tiny micro-pits or "hooks" appear at the sites of the knocked-out atoms. It is these spots that titanium dioxide molecules cling to as the protective film begins to grow, allowing it to form tightly and without a single gap.

This precise approach allowed the scientists to grow a completely continuous, hole-free protective layer just about one nanometer thick. Moreover, this was achieved using materials grown using industrial methods, which is critical for future mass production. Furthermore, during their experiments, the scientists demonstrated and precisely measured for the first time an important fact: if even a single microscopic gap remains in the protective layer through which the metal touches the semiconductor, it will immediately and dramatically degrade the electrical properties of the entire contact. This means the protective coating must be perfect, with no room for error.

As Roman Romanov puts it, this discovery "changes the requirements for technology" and sets a completely new, stringent quality standard for the production of ultra-thin electronics. More importantly, this method works not only with molybdenum disulfide. Additional experiments have shown that this technology is universal. It can also be applied to a whole group of similar ultra-thin semiconductors (for example, tungsten disulfide or diselenides), which similarly suffer from brittleness when electrodes are connected to them.

National technological sovereignty


Let's imagine an ideal scenario: the technology developed at MIPT has successfully reached mass production. And, crucially, the factories are built right here in Russia, not abroad. What will this mean for ordinary people in their everyday lives? First and foremost, we're talking about a completely different level of energy savings. Scientists have calculated that new ultra-thin transistors will consume hundreds of times less electricity than conventional silicon components of the same size.

Considering that any modern processor contains tens of billions of such microswitches, the savings are colossal. Today, the massive server centers around the world that power the internet consume approximately 1–2% of all electricity produced on the planet. And this figure is only growing due to the boom in neural networks and artificial intelligence. Therefore, even a slight reduction in transistor consumption—let alone a hundredfold reduction—will lead to enormous benefits.

For ordinary users, this means smartphones and laptops will last several times longer on a single charge. For large companies, this represents a chance to dramatically reduce the cost of cooling gigantic servers and mitigate harmful emissions. A second major advantage is the ability to create flexible and completely transparent electronics. Regular silicon is brittle: bend it and it simply cracks. But new materials, just one atom thick, can be bent to any shape. This opens the way to the gadgets of the future: smartphones that can be rolled into tubes, smart clothing with sensors embedded directly in the fabric, and invisible medical patches for health monitoring. We will be able to create transparent screens for smart glasses or car windshields. Furthermore, such lightweight and energy-efficient components are ideal for satellites and the so-called "Internet of Things"—smart sensors in homes and on streets, where every drop of energy is crucial to ensure batteries last for years without replacement.

And this technology is already moving beyond the stage of tentative experiments. For example, this summer, 2026, foreign scientists announced that they had assembled a small prototype processor from molybdenum disulfide, combining 1400 transistors on a single chip. This proves that the technology is maturing: scientists have moved from creating single transistors to assembling complete microcircuits. Of course, 1400 transistors is still very small compared to the billions of components in conventional silicon chips, but it's a start.


It's important to remain realistic: it's too early to say that the new material will wipe out silicon from factories worldwide tomorrow. As experts write in the authoritative scientific journal Nature Communications, engineers still face many complex challenges. For example, they need to learn how to make these ultra-thin films large, smooth, and completely free of defects (scientists in China are currently actively working on this, and have already succeeded in creating such films with a diameter of about 15 centimeters).

Furthermore, the new technology needs to be integrated with modern factories, which cost billions of dollars and are designed exclusively for silicon processing. This is easier in Russia, paradoxical as it may sound. We don't have factories, so building everything from scratch is much easier and cheaper than reworking old ones. It's also important to make the production of new chips affordable. Along the way, a host of other technical challenges need to be addressed: how to make chips resistant to heat and humidity, how to properly add impurities to them to adjust current, and how to ensure their reliable operation for years to come.

Due to all these complexities, most experts are confident that ultra-thin electronics will not eliminate silicon in the near future, but rather work alongside it. These new materials will fill niches where conventional silicon simply cannot cope—where incredible compactness, flexibility, transparency, or maximum battery life are needed. Only then, in ten years or even longer, will this technology mature enough to begin displacing silicon from conventional mass-market computers and smartphones.

And this is where the breakthrough by our MIPT scientists becomes incredibly important, not just as a scientific fact, but as a strategic asset for the entire country. Russian microelectronics is currently under severe sanctions, which have blocked our access to the most advanced foreign factories. The best we can currently produce ourselves on a mass scale (for example, at the Mikron plant in Zelenograd) are 90-nanometer chips. Meanwhile, global giants like Taiwan's TSMC or Korea's Samsung are already making chips 30-40 times smaller (2-3 nanometers). Trying to catch up with them on their own turf, in the production of good old silicon, is an extremely difficult task. But thanks to MIPT's breakthrough, Russia has a unique opportunity.

We no longer need to chase the passing train of obsolete technologies. We can leap into tomorrow and enter the race for the technologies of the future on a completely equal footing. In this new field, we are not laggards, but leaders, on par with the best laboratories in the US, China, and Switzerland. Of course, the path from a beautiful article in a scientific journal to a real factory printing processors is very long. It will require years of hard work and huge financial investments. We must build our own factories from scratch, train specialists, and build the entire chain: from growing the materials themselves to packaging the finished chips into housings.

But the most important achievement has already been achieved. Russian scientists have solved a complex fundamental problem that many considered a dead end: they've figured out how to attach a contact to a single-atom-thick material without destroying it. And it's especially encouraging that their method is suitable for several new materials and can be easily implemented on existing industrial equipment. This means Russia now has a powerful technological lead, recognized by the global scientific community. We've secured our place in the most important technological race of the coming decades—the race to create a material that will replace silicon when it finally reaches the limits of the laws of physics.
47 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. + 12
    4 August 2026 04: 21
    I read the article with great interest, thank you. Frankly, with my daily responsibilities, I don't have time to keep up with current trends in microelectronics technology. I'm afraid we'll once again fall into the same trap our industry has fallen into: the transition from scientific research to industrial production. Even in Soviet times, so-called "implementation" was extremely difficult due to industry's complete lack of interest in innovation. The exception was the military-industrial complex, where innovations were forced through.
    1. osp
      + 10
      4 August 2026 04: 47
      And where in the military-industrial complex was it pushed through by coercion?
      Our combat aircraft have been produced for decades without any modernization at all.
      And their life cycle also proceeds without any significant modernization.
      For example, the plant produces fuel-measuring equipment for fighter jets, which was developed back in 1989 using components from that era (140-amplifier and 564-logic microcircuit series). And the customer is satisfied with this.
      He's not providing funding for the development of a new, modernized version of this equipment, built with modern components. It's lighter and smaller.
      Because there is a lot that needs to be coordinated and long flight tests need to be carried out.
      No one needs it.
      And yes, we did have the Air Force of the Air Defense Forces of the country, which ordered fighters (Su-27P and MiG-31) without any capability to strike ground targets!
      They didn't need it - it wasn't their profile.
      As a result, part of the avionics was cut down - everyone was happy.
      And the manufacturers that they did not do more and the Customer that he received only what he needed.
      And what happened next...
      1. +7
        4 August 2026 06: 07
        I completely agree. I spoke with shipbuilders in the mid-2000s; it was their first time dealing with a military order. They said that if the construction documents for a civilian vessel are older than five years, the registry won't approve them, but with the military, it's the opposite. The documentation was approved in the 60s, and there's no way to deviate from it—military acceptance won't approve it, and any changes are considered modernization work, requiring new type testing.
      2. +1
        4 August 2026 10: 08
        And where in the military-industrial complex was it pushed through by coercion?

        I don't like the word "coercion"; let's call it "command methods." I worked in the military-industrial complex for 15 years during the Soviet era, so I know the methods there firsthand.
    2. +1
      4 August 2026 08: 06
      The exception is the military-industrial complex, where innovations were pushed through by coercion.

      Torsion fields
      In the mid-80s, A. Akimov joined A. Deev. With his help, D-rays were converted into spinor fields. Under a cloak of secrecy, the first experiments with the military on transmitting signals via a spinor communication channel began in 1986. According to A. Akimov, these experiments were successful (as we will see later, experts gave a different assessment!).
      In 1987, a document describing the unique military potential of spinor beams landed on the desk of the Chairman of the USSR Government. It was stated that the USSR was currently leading, but if appropriate measures were not taken, "the lag in the theory and practice of spinor fields could have irreversible consequences in such defense areas as: methods and means of highly reliable detection of enemy strategic weapons... long-range non-contact engagement of enemy strategic weapons, covert, jam-proof communications with objects in space, on the ground, underground, and underwater, mobile assets based on gravity control principles, psychophysical and medical-biological effects on troops and the population, etc." And further: "Many, perhaps quite unexpected, applications of spinor fields are now difficult to even foresee, just as in Faraday's time it was impossible to predict all the modern applications of electromagnetism." What was the Chairman of the Government to do? If you don't give the money, you'll get "irreversible consequences." A large sum had to be paid: 500 million rubles (US$700 million). Had professional physicists been familiar with this document, the scam could have been shut down immediately. But the document was top secret, and physicists only learned of the torsion field scam (as spinor fields had come to be known by this time) in March 1991, when Corresponding Member of the USSR Academy of Sciences (now Academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences) E.B. Alexandrov revealed the document's contents at the Academy's General Meeting. A scandal erupted. After discussing the situation, the Department of General Physics and Astronomy of the USSR Academy of Sciences filed a protest with the Committee on Science and Technology of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR. In July 1991, the Committee adopted a resolution "On the vicious practice of funding pseudoscientific research from state sources."
      "In Defense of Science" / [editor-in-chief E.P. Kruglyakov], Commission for Combating Pseudoscience and Falsification of Scientific Research of the Russian Scientific Council. - Moscow: Nauka, 2006

      For a long time, a certain military astrologer named A. Buziiov worked for the Ministry of Defense. Since every military (and other) ship, tank, and aircraft has its own "birthdate," this gentleman struck gold by extending astrological rules to military equipment! Our media did everything they could to boost his popularity. Of course! After all, he accurately predicted a number of disasters, including the sinking of the ferry "Estonia" in the Baltic, the "Ruslan" aircraft near Irkutsk, the submarine "Komsomolets," and so on. However, for some reason, we only learned about these miraculous predictions after the fact.
      I'd like to mention an incident that the media ignored. Immediately after the tragic events surrounding the apartment building bombings in Moscow, Mr. Buzinov reported to the Federal Security Service (FSB) for Moscow and the Moscow Region and claimed he could determine where the terrorists were hiding explosives. It's hard to say whether the FSB officers believed the soothsayer, but they can be understood – the consequences could have been too serious. A thorough search of the dozen addresses Buzinov provided was quickly organized. And what happened? No explosives were found, of course. For some reason, the media kept silent about this fact. Yet this fact alone would have been enough to forget this gentleman forever.
      Kruglyakov E.P.
      “Scientists” from the Highway-3 / E.P. Kruglyakov; Commission on Combating Pseudoscience and Falsification of Scientific Research. RAS. - M.: Nauka, 2009. - 357 p. - ISBN 978-5-02-037043-2 (in translation).
      This and more in the "In Defense of Science" bulletins https://www.ras.ru/digest/fdigestlist/bulletin.aspx?print=1
      A large article "On the use of psychics by Stalin and the Soviet (Russian) intelligence services: myths and reality" by R.G. Ardashev, N.N. Kitaev
      There is also information about HF 10003
      https://klnran.ru/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/BVZN_13-14.pdf
      1. 0
        4 August 2026 10: 04
        I'm familiar with the work of Doctor of Engineering, Captain 1st Rank Sergeev, on this topic in detail. He attempted to create biofield sensors based on liquid crystal. The work contained many controversial points, such as two awards for inventions (which were essentially about nothing). A more specific explanation is impossible to provide in a single paragraph.
        1. 0
          4 August 2026 10: 41
          More on this topic

          Reading the bulletins makes me feel angry.
    3. +1
      4 August 2026 10: 46
      These scientists are pushing around their developments in Russia, and then selling them to competitors abroad, and the FSB won't pat them on the head or wag its finger at them for it. How many of these people have already been jailed!
      1. +1
        4 August 2026 11: 27
        Here the scientists are struggling with the implementation of their developments in Russia, and then they sell them to competitors abroad,

        The guys won't be able to sell the technology to competitors; they don't own the rights. But they could sell their brains by simply moving abroad and taking a job with a foreign company. I'm surprised they haven't done that yet. And no FSB can stop them.
      2. +1
        4 August 2026 11: 38
        Quote: andrewkor
        These scientists are pushing around their developments in Russia, and then selling them to competitors abroad, and the FSB won't pat them on the head or wag its finger at them for it. How many of these people have already been jailed!
        You beat me to it. I read it.
        Let's imagine an ideal scenario: the technology created at MIPT has successfully reached mass production.
        and immediately imagined how everything is sold for three kopecks and not a penny is invested in their own production. crying We have no one to plan the future of Russia; all the rulers live now and in their own pockets, and after that, let the grass not grow.
      3. 0
        4 August 2026 13: 24
        It's unlikely they'll sell anything to anyone; they submitted their work to a journal, not Nature or Science. Labs have made so many transistors from a handful of atoms, but when it comes to cramming a hundred million of them onto a chip, it turns out it's impossible to figure out how to do it at all.
  2. osp
    + 10
    4 August 2026 04: 32
    Nowadays, these nanometers mean little to the domestic electronics industry.
    Because the lag was not in this - it was deliberately created for other reasons back in Soviet times.
    Domestic cores and processor architectures of original design have always been developed by Soviet and Russian electronics engineers!
    Sometimes even better than anything available in the world at that time - the Zelenograd K1801BE1 microcontroller from 1980 or even the original high-density ternary logic.
    However, the circuit designers, programmers, the customer, and especially the politicians were against this! Almost always.
    They all demanded that a microcircuit be made hardware-compatible with some foreign analogue.
    For example Intel 286 or MicroVAX.
    Because compatible operating systems and programs could be used with these types of hardware-compatible clones.
    But for our own architectures, we had to write everything ourselves from scratch!
    That is why the majority in the country was against genuine movement forward in their own way.
    Make it compatible with the imported prototype and that's it.
    But for a number of reasons it could turn out worse than the original - and that's where the lag began.
    The customer didn't want to see any new microchips at all—they'd have to redesign the hardware, rewrite the software, and start the testing cycle. As a result, not much of the original domestic technology caught on:
    The Minsk 588 series (known as "Elektronika-60") caught on—it was first developed for CNC machines in the 80s. But it migrated to avionics, where it is still used today.
    The Zelenograd DVK (a development of the unpopular K1801VE1) saw limited success when it was converted to CMOS. It is still used today, primarily for avionics. During the Soviet era, the 1801 series was popular in many devices; it is 16-bit.
    Tesey is also from Zelenograd; it has an original architecture. Several processors and microcontrollers were built on it, but since 2000, only one 8-bit one has been produced.
    The customer was happy with this, but recently a 32-bit microcontroller was released on this core.
    Well, yes, for your original you always need your own debug boards and environments - this categorically did not suit either the Customer or the hardware developers.

    This is precisely why we have become the ones playing catch-up. And badly so.
    If we had gone our own way, things would have been different. Maybe even without that IBM-compatible thing.
    1. -1
      4 August 2026 04: 49
      Quote from osp
      If we had gone our own way, things would have been different.

      Yeah... There wouldn't have been the collapse of the USSR and the destruction of industry?
    2. +1
      4 August 2026 09: 45
      If we had gone our own way, things would have been different. Maybe even without that IBM-compatible thing.

      It's not a given; maybe we would have failed earlier. Why was the decision made to copy Western developments? To save on software development. Even if we were to include the CMEA, the socialist market was still several times smaller than the Western one, meaning R&D would have been a higher proportion of product costs. No one would have let us into the West, unless our technology had been vastly superior to Western technology. Ternary logic, for example, is closer to the "golden ratio," but compatibility is out of the question. Basically, we would have had at least two ecosystems (binary and ternary logic), and how could we combine them all, again, given the limited market?
    3. +1
      4 August 2026 10: 39
      Quote from osp
      However, the circuit designers, programmers, the customer, and especially the politicians were against this! Almost always.
      They all demanded that a microcircuit be made hardware-compatible with some foreign analogue.

      There are many reasons, including external lobbying and the lure of scientists and developers, as well as the leadership's poor assessment of the prospects. But most of all, I believe the USSR was simply unlucky. Timing. Today, the number of sectors and industries that require their own processors is simply enormous, and this could have allowed for the creation of their own platforms, programming languages, operating systems, and so on. Even smartphones, tablets, and laptops—everyone buys and replaces them, even on credit. And that's just a small part of what's visible. Back then, the USSR's consumption simply couldn't justify all this. There were great advances in theory, and a lot of work and research at research institutes. But for practical application and cost recovery, a market was simply needed. China was lucky in this regard; its development coincided with, or, conversely, was due to, the rapid overall development of electronics, its widespread and active use, including in everyday life—and it was on this wave that China made such a significant leap in production and development.
  3. +4
    4 August 2026 04: 38
    The author's optimism is limited by the industrial base. For example, the Institute for the Physics of Microstructures of the Russian Academy of Sciences can produce Mo/Si, Ru/Be, and Mo/Be mirrors for lithographs. But we have nowhere to install them because we don't have EUV lithographs. Previously, the Institute for the Physics of Microstructures of the Russian Academy of Sciences received funding from ASML and Carl Zeiss, meaning it worked for the EU, but today, contacts have been severed. As the author (and many others) say, we should gain independence from foreigners and all that. But how do they even see it? It's impossible to create modern manufacturing in a vacuum. It's impossible without the help of industry leaders. People forget that Stalin built Soviet industry with the help of leading foreign companies. If the USSR had been under sanctions during the first five-year plans, as we are today, there would have been no Soviet industry. China became a leader not because it closed itself off from the rest of the world, but rather because it gained access to cutting-edge technologies.
    We need to build our own factories from scratch, train specialists, and build the entire chain: from growing the materials themselves to packaging the finished chips in housings.

    Pure naivety and complacency. And where will the equipment for these hypothetical factories come from?
    1. osp
      +6
      4 August 2026 05: 02
      Thus, the US helicopter industry was created by Igor Sikorsky, a native of the Russian Empire.
      But this didn't stop Kamov and Mil from creating their own helicopter engineering school in the USSR. Here.
      The problems and lag in the electronics industry arose for other reasons – because they didn't want to follow their own path, which was always open and even promised progress.
      Take industrial automation, for example. About 20-25 years ago, it became firmly reliant on two pillars: PIC and Atmel microcontrollers from American companies. They began to be used to assemble absolutely everything from pressure sensors and gas meters to industrial controllers.
      Could Angstrom with its Theseus core show them the way out of our market?
      Probably yes - the technology and expertise allowed it.
      Were consumers ready? Of course not! Because it was necessary to create original programs, debugging environments, and debug boards for mass use.
      Nobody wanted to finance this - it went to the military Customer and that was enough.

      So, even if the technology, equipment, and specialists are there, it's not a fact that the products they release will be of interest to anyone here.
      Due to the peculiarities of the market and the socio-political system.
      Why do we need your Theseus? Give us a hardware-compatible equivalent of the PIC16 we've been working with for a long time, and that's it.
    2. +1
      4 August 2026 09: 57
      In the 30s, the US was in the midst of a Depression caused by a crisis of overproduction, and it was highly profitable for them to sell their factories for hard currency. Now, China needs to quickly catch up with ASML, and X-ray optics (emitters and mirrors) would be in high demand. After all, ASML and Zeiss didn't collaborate with IPM and ISAN for charity. As for production, yes, it's probably a disaster. It's like the auto industry: they have robots and technology, but it's no use...
      1. +1
        4 August 2026 10: 50
        Quote: Dmitry Eon
        At the time of the 30s, the US was in the midst of a Depression caused by a crisis of overproduction, and it was very profitable for them to sell their factories for hard currency.

        What does it change?
        Quote: Dmitry Eon
        Now China needs to quickly catch up with ASML, and work on X-ray optics (emitters and mirrors) would be in high demand.

        However, China is not seeking to take the place of Carl Zeiss and ASML, claiming that it has "mastered" X-ray mirrors itself.
        ASML and Zeiss did not collaborate with IFM and ISAN for charitable reasons.

        They cooperate with many people, these are ordinary commercial relationships.
        Quote: Dmitry Eon
        As for the production issue, yes, it’s most likely a mess.

        The end will come when we lose our last competencies due to a lack of funding and demand. We can't build an EUV lithograph ourselves, and we can't sell X-ray mirrors to anyone, meaning there will be no more funding.
        1. +3
          4 August 2026 11: 50
          Quote: Puncher
          The end will come when, due to lack of funding,
          If the government sets a goal, funding will be forthcoming. A couple of streets in Moscow won't be paved, and that's where the funding will come from.
    3. +1
      4 August 2026 11: 18
      Quote: Puncher
      As the author (and many others) say, we need to gain independence from foreigners and all that. But how do they even see it? It's impossible to create modern manufacturing in a vacuum. It's impossible without the help of industry leaders.
      So what do you think we should do, surrender if the advanced countries, to put it mildly, don't wish us well? Isn't your last name KATZ, by any chance, who also suggested surrender? As philosophers say, the road is mastered by the one who walks it. But to listen to you, we can't get anywhere without the advanced countries. The Koreans and Iranians, for example, didn't listen.
      there would be no Soviet industry
      Some nuclear weapons were created by other missile technologies and drones. And why? They talked less and did more.
  4. +3
    4 August 2026 04: 44
    When the length transistor gate goes down

    In fact, a field-effect transistor has a PN junction thickness, and it doesn't decrease, but rather gets smaller....
    1. +4
      4 August 2026 06: 52
      A field-effect transistor does not have a p-n junction, but has a p or n channel, and the gate is generally isolated from the channel by a dielectric.
      1. +1
        4 August 2026 10: 15
        You're talking about MOSFETs, which are used in digital microcontrollers. But there are also field-effect transistors with a p-n junction as a control transistor.
  5. osp
    +4
    4 August 2026 05: 29
    About 20-25 years ago in Munich, Germany, there was a small laboratory that was engaged in the production and development of detection units for X-ray fluorescence analysis.
    Having practically no experience in this field, the people who worked there were mainly passionate students and enthusiasts.
    And today they are the Ketek company, which is a world leader in the production and development of silicon drift SDD detectors for X-ray fluorescence analyzers.
    Whose annual turnover is up to 30-40 million euros.
    And back then, in the early 2000s, no one in Germany had such technologies in such a specific industry...
    ... when almost everything came from Russia!
    Miniature Peltier coolers for this type of detector, the TO-8 sealed enclosures and capacitor welding technology, glass-ceramic substrates and beryllium windows – all from Russia!
    But in Russia, even after more than 20 years, no one is producing such detectors.
    Although all the competencies in this area have been in the country since the Lunokhod program, when the Rifma regolith analyzers operating on the X-ray fluorescence principle were created.
    Not to mention modern SDDs, no one even produces Si-PIN in Russia.
    And today the global market in this industry is divided between two main players: Amptek (USA) and Ketek (Germany).
    There are also smaller ones - Moxtek (USA) and Oxford Instruments (UK).
    Russia is not even on the domestic market - although everything has been there since Soviet times.
    But somehow it didn't work out...
    1. 0
      4 August 2026 06: 23
      Quote from osp
      And back then, in the early 2000s, no one in Germany had such technologies in such a specific industry...
      ... when almost everything came from Russia!

      What's so surprising about this? If there are technologies in the world and people willing to develop and monetize them, then everything comes down to finance and interstate connections. This is the norm in an open world.
    2. -2
      4 August 2026 12: 44
      Solid-state drives (SSDs) and memory modules for the corporate and government sectors are produced in Russia, including drives from Graviton, GS Group, and TMI. Manufacturers and Brands: Graviton: produces client and server SSD lines included in the Ministry of Industry and Trade's register. GS Group (GS-Nanotech): assembles domestic solid-state drives using its own production lines in the Kaliningrad region. TMI (Telecom and Microelectronic Industries): produces 2.5" SATA and M.2 registered drives with capacities up to 1 TB. Beshtau Electronics: develops localized electronics production, including data storage components.
  6. +2
    4 August 2026 06: 27
    I highly doubt all these fantastical things will reach the average person, certainly not here. Innovations of any kind don't work here, unless they're just advertising. All startups are suppressed, young talent isn't allowed in, and so on. Our system is designed in such a way that it kills any initiative or desire to advance anything.
  7. +4
    4 August 2026 06: 55
    The main problem with our electronics industry is its reliance on market mechanisms and self-financing from profits. There will never be profits. As soon as we have competitive production, the West will lower the price of similar products and ruin them.
    Therefore, no sane businessman will invest in the Russian economy, not just in electronics.
    The solution is simple: public investment. Currently, public investment is being squandered. It should be used for effective development. Policy must change, starting with the president and the Central Bank.
    .
    The ultimate goal is by no means complete import substitution. We must participate in the international division of labor. But let me give you an example. For Mercedes-Benzes to sell for a million a pop in the country, Ladas must sell for three hundred thousand. Only having our own competing production will force the West to sell us (and the rest of the world, too) the same microchips at reasonable prices.
    1. +4
      4 August 2026 07: 01
      I'll add, since editing time has expired: Thus, unprofitable domestic production will generate enormous profits for the country as a whole. We just need to choose the right directions.
      .
      The West understands this better than we do. That's why, through its agents, it's depriving our factories of funds. Nabiullina simply hands over the money to the West, while agents like Dmitriev bury resources in unprofitable and hopeless projects like the tunnel to America, the high-speed railway, the Phobos-Grunt railway, and so on.
  8. +3
    4 August 2026 07: 53
    Technology needs to be developed, but the demand for electronics and automation is more important. In my work, I've never needed power beyond the capabilities of a 386 processor. But somehow, in 30 years, factories haven't replaced manual labor with automation.
    1. +1
      4 August 2026 14: 10
      Quote: also a doctor
      In my work, I have never needed power that exceeded the capabilities of a 386 processor.

      Same thing. It's true, this isn't powerful enough to tighten the necessary nuts and bolts, but we're still managing that ourselves. Yes
  9. +1
    4 August 2026 08: 40
    Transistors on a crystal will double in size every one and a half to two years. This is Moore's Law. - not entirely correct statement/phrase. Transistors cannot double.
    Moore's Law isn't a law of nature, but rather an empirical observation dating back to the 1960s, made by Intel co-founder Gordon Moore. New series of microchips released annually saw the number of transistors roughly double each year. This was driven by both the increase in chip area and advances in transistor miniaturization technology. The pace then slowed, and in 1975, the "law" was amended to state that the doubling should occur every 24 months. This ultimately became a marketing slogan with little basis in reality.
  10. +1
    4 August 2026 08: 48
    I can't help but draw an analogy: the Russian Empire had great scientists and excellent engineers, but everything they discovered and designed was either never used or was produced in one-off, small-scale production runs. Unlike the USSR, up until the 80s.
    Our current country is more reminiscent of the Russian Empire of 15 than even the late USSR...
  11. 0
    4 August 2026 08: 52
    Leaping into tomorrow? Sounds tempting. But that's just the beginning. As noted above, only Micron produces 90nm chips that are at the level of CPUs from 2000, a quarter-century behind.
  12. +1
    4 August 2026 08: 58
    The best we can currently produce ourselves on a mass scale (for example, at the Zelenograd Mikron plant) are 90-nanometer chips. These are lithography standards, which ultimately determine the dimensions of the active and passive elements of a microchip. These standards (their definition is a separate discussion, and it's important to separate reality from marketing) influence all the basic characteristics of the product. However, strictly speaking, these standards are not related to the specific semiconductors used.
    Therefore, new materials and contact manufacturing technologies are good, but they don't solve the problem of lithography—the size and precision of transistor manufacturing. We'll have to create our own lithography.
  13. -2
    4 August 2026 09: 29
    We no longer need to chase the passing train of obsolete technologies.

    Actually, not outdated, but modern and, moreover, in development.

    We can leap forward into tomorrow and enter the race for future technologies on a completely equal footing. In this new field, we are not laggards, but leaders, on par with the best laboratories in the US, China, and Switzerland.


    It turns out that this is a good thing about being behind in modern technology - we can scribble down some scribbles about all this and we don’t need it, but in this kind of the future "They jumped!" (something Brazilian) and just like someone else.
    "Russia's past was amazing, its present is more than magnificent, As for the future, it is beyond anything that the boldest imagination can draw."
    Chief of the Gendarmes under Nicholas I
  14. 0
    4 August 2026 09: 46
    Clearly, the search for new materials doesn't solve the key problem of transitioning from binary to multipolar logic using natural numbers. In other words, they don't understand at all that working with extremely large data sets requires solving completely different problems. One of these problems is energy efficiency.
  15. +1
    4 August 2026 11: 57
    Despite my engineering background, it's difficult for me to assess the adequacy of the article and the breakthrough nature of the technology, but if everything is as the author describes, then one question arises: "Why are our scientists describing their invention in the international press? "
    1. -1
      4 August 2026 12: 47
      because they are required to be published on international platforms
      1. -1
        Yesterday, 10: 37
        Кому они обязаны? И чем?
        1. +1
          Yesterday, 11: 45
          все открытия, научные работы должны опубликованы на таких площадках, если не публиковать то их никто не признает в мире. открытие вам не засчитают
          1. 0
            Yesterday, 16: 16
            Т.е. нам как стране важнее признать за каким то учёным или институтом открытие, чем создать прорывную технологию и устранить отставание от других стран? Это кем-то считается правильным?!!!!!
  16. +2
    4 August 2026 16: 47
    MIPT are awesome. They invented it, so keep your mouth shut. Now the Chinese will master this technology and sell us finished products at exorbitant prices.
    1. -1
      6 August 2026 19: 09
      Quote: helilelik
      MIPT are awesome. They invented it, so keep your mouth shut. Now the Chinese will master this technology and sell us finished products at exorbitant prices.

      Would silence have made things much better? It's downright laughable to read yet another "patriotic" guardian. It's unclear why they should keep everything secret. Because their own industry is in deep crisis. And, judging by everything, the country's leadership doesn't need it at all.
      1. 0
        Yesterday, 10: 38
        Действительно. Если бы наши враги не получили новую технологию вместе с нами - стало бы лучше? Дайте подумаю 🤔
  17. 0
    9 August 2026 12: 12
    I would just like to have a full range of components, because now we are switching to imports again.