Getting Past Point One

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Image: Charles O'Rear

When it comes to producing ever-shrinking silicon chips, photolithography presents one very serious limit. Because the wavelength of visible light--the "tool" with which photolithographers etch wires onto silicon wafers--measures between 400 and 700 nanometers, it's impossible to sculpt features smaller than 200 nanometers wide. But even tinier circuitry--with features around 100 nanometers, or 0.1 micrometers--could power mightier, more efficient computers. And so researchers have eagerly sought ways past this so-called Point One barrier.

Writing in this week's issue of Physical Review Letters, Jonathan Dowling of the California Institute of Technology and his colleagues describe a quirk of quantum physics that might clear the way: photons, the constituent particles in light, don't seem as fat when they enter a state known as entanglement. Only in the quantum realm can two particles become entangled such that anything happening to one affects the other regardless of the distance between them. And when two entangled photons bounce back toward each other and recombine, Dowling reports, they act like a single photon with half the normal wavelength.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


The paper describes a setup in which mirrors and beamsplitters direct two entangled photons to recombine on a surface. In theory, the light from such reunited entangled photons could shave out chip features four times smaller than normal light. And if three entangled photons passed through the device, the resulting light could produce features nine times smaller--a size at which classical computer designs would fail anyway.

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe