Breaking News
Blog

Debating Olympic technology

NO RATINGS
View Comments: Newest First | Oldest First | Threaded View
<<   <   Page 2 / 2
george.leopold
User Rank
Author
re: Debating Olympic technology
george.leopold   7/25/2012 8:46:48 PM
NO RATINGS
Reminds me a bit of the "Saturday Night Live" skit about the "All-Drug Olympics." Main difference is your variation wouldn't be illegal.

DataBass
User Rank
Author
re: Debating Olympic technology
DataBass   7/25/2012 7:11:15 PM
NO RATINGS
Perhaps there should be an Olympic category for enhanced/augmented people. Items such as the carbon fiber blades, I suspect, have much more "rebound", lacking a better term, than an normal achiles tendon. As such, the technology is providing a definite advantage over the un-augmented competitor. Taking this to a silly extreme, what about the competitor who has roller skates put on the end of his/her prosthesis? Just keep augmented and unaugmented competititions separate.

wilber_xbox
User Rank
Author
re: Debating Olympic technology
wilber_xbox   7/25/2012 4:46:35 PM
NO RATINGS
These sports are to test the human endurance and capabilities. Aiding the effort with technology would undermine the purpose itself.

george.leopold
User Rank
Author
re: Debating Olympic technology
george.leopold   7/25/2012 3:55:35 PM
NO RATINGS
To a large extent, they are.

askubel
User Rank
Author
re: Debating Olympic technology
askubel   7/25/2012 3:36:49 PM
NO RATINGS
The Olympics is about countries competing to be the best at a particular sport. Why shouldn't engineers be part of that competition?

<<   <   Page 2 / 2
Most Recent Comments
michigan0
 
SteveHarris0
 
realjjj
 
SteveHarris0
 
SteveHarris0
 
VicVat
 
Les_Slater
 
SSDWEM
 
witeken
Most Recent Messages
9/25/2016
4:48:30 PM
michigan0 Sang Kim First, 28nm bulk is in volume manufacturing for several years by the major semiconductor companies but not 28nm FDSOI today yet. Why not? Simply because unlike 28nm bulk the LDD(Lightly Doped Drain) to minimize hot carrier generation can't be implemented in 28nm FDSOI. Furthermore, hot carrier reliability becomes worse with scaling, That is the major reason why 28nm FDSOI is not manufacturable today and will not be. Second, how can you suppress the leakage currents from such ultra short 7nm due to the short channel effects? How thin SOI thickness is required to prevent punch-through of un-dopped 7nm FDSOI? Possibly less than 4nm. Depositing such an ultra thin film less then 4nm filum uniformly and reliably over 12" wafers at the manufacturing line is extremely difficult or not even manufacturable. If not manufacturable, the 7nm FDSOI debate is over!Third, what happens when hot carriers are generated near the drain at normal operation of 7nm FDSOI? Electrons go to the positively biased drain with no harm but where the holes to go? The holes can't go to the substrate because of the thin BOX layer. Some holes may become trapped at the BOX layer causing Vt shift. However, the vast majority of holes drift through the the un-dopped SOI channel toward the N+Source,...

Datasheets.com Parts Search

185 million searchable parts
(please enter a part number or hit search to begin)
Like Us on Facebook
EE Times on Twitter
EE Times Twitter Feed