Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Committee on CMMP 2010 Solid State Sciences Committee Board on Physics and Astronomy Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS 500 Fifth Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20001 NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance. This study is based on work supported by Contract No. DE-FG02-05ER46206 between the National Academy of Sciences and the Department of Energy and Grant No. DMR-0525628 between the Na- tional Academy of Sciences and the National Science Foundation. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the organizations or agencies that provided support for the project. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data National Research Council (U.S.). Board on Physics and Astronomy. Committee on CMMP 2010. Condensed-matter and materials physics : the science of the world around us / Committee on CMMP 2010, Board on Physics and Astronomy, Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references. ISBN 978-0-309-10969-7 (pbk.) â ISBN 978-0-309-10970-3 (pdf) 1. Condensed matterâ ResearchâUnited States. 2. Power resourcesâResearchâUnited States. 3. MaterialsâResearchâ United States. 4. Technological innovationsâUnited StatesâForecasting. I. Title. QC173.456.N38 2007 530.4Â´1âdc22 2007041250 Additional copies of this report are available from the National Academies Press, 500 Fifth Street, N.W., Lockbox 285, Washington, DC 20055; (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313 (in the Washington metropolitan area); Internet, http://www.nap.edu; and the Board on Physics and Astronomy, National Research Council, 500 Fifth Street, N.W., Washington, DC 20001; Internet, http://www.national- academies.org/bpa. Cover: Correlated motion of densely packed, air-driven steel spheres showing that driven granular systems near a jamming transition behave like supercooled liquids near a glass transition. Colors indicate mobility (red = high, blue = low) and arrows show direction of motion of highly mobile spheres. Courtesy of A.S. Keys, University of Michigan; A. Abate, University of Pennsylvania; S.C. Glotzer, University of Michigan; and D.J. Durian, University of Pennsylvania. Copyright 2007 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America
The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal govern- ment on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone is president of the National Academy of Sciences. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. Charles M. Vest is president of the National Academy of Engineering. The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Harvey V. Fineberg is president of the Institute of Medicine. The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to as- sociate the broad community of science and technology with the Academyâs purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone and Dr. Charles M. Vest are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research Council. www.national-academies.org
COMMITTEE ON CMMP 2010 MILDRED S. DRESSELHAUS, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Co-Chair WILLIAM J. SPENCER, SEMATECH (retired), Co-Chair GABRIEL AEPPLI, University College London SAMUEL D. BADER, Argonne National Laboratory WILLIAM BIALEK, Princeton University DAVID J. BISHOP, Alcatel-Lucent ANTHONY K. CHEETHAM, University of California at Santa Barbara JAMES P. EISENSTEIN, California Institute of Technology HIDETOSHI FUKUYAMA, Tokyo University of Science LAURA GARWIN, Harvard University PETER F. GREEN, University of Michigan FRANCES HELLMAN, University of California at Berkeley RANDALL G. HULET, Rice University HEINRICH M. JAEGER, University of Chicago STEVEN A. KIVELSON, Stanford University ANDREA J. LIU, University of Pennsylvania PAUL McEUEN, Cornell University KARIN M. RABE, Rutgers University THOMAS N. THEIS, IBM T.J. Watson Research Center Staff DONALD C. SHAPERO, Director, Board on Physics and Astronomy NATALIA J. MELCER, Program Officer CARYN J. KNUTSEN, Senior Program Assistant PHILLIP D. LONG, Senior Program Assistant (until August 2006) VAN AN, Financial Associateâ âLaura Garwin resigned from the committee in October 2006. âFrances Hellman resigned from the committee in September 2006.
SOLID STATE SCIENCES COMMITTEE PETER F. GREEN, University of Michigan, Chair BARBARA JONES, IBM Almaden Research Center, Vice-Chair DANIEL AROVAS, University of California at San Diego COLLIN L. BROHOLM, Johns Hopkins University PAUL CHAIKIN, New York University GEORGE CRABTREE, Argonne National Laboratory ELBIO DAGOTTO, University of Tennessee and Oak Ridge National Laboratory DUANE DIMOS, Sandia National Laboratories SIDNEY R. NAGEL, University of Chicago MONICA OLVERA DE LA CRUZ, Northwestern University ARTHUR P. RAMIREZ, Lucent Technologies, Inc. MARK STILES, National Institute of Standards and Technology ANTOINETTE TAYLOR, Los Alamos National Laboratory DALE J. VAN HARLINGEN, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign FRED WUDL, University of California at Santa Barbara Staff DONALD C. SHAPERO, Director, Board on Physics and Astronomy NATALIA J. MELCER, Program Officer CARYN J. KNUTSEN, Senior Program Assistant MERCEDES M. ILAGAN, Administrative Assistant VAN AN, Financial Associate vi
BOARD ON PHYSICS AND ASTRONOMY ANNEILA I. SARGENT, California Institute of Technology, Chair MARC A. KASTNER, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Vice-Chair JOANNA AIZENBERG, Lucent Technologies JONATHAN A. BAGGER, Johns Hopkins University JAMES E. BRAU, University of Oregon PHILIP H. BUCKSBAUM, Stanford University ADAM S. BURROWS, University of Arizona PATRICK L. COLESTOCK, Los Alamos National Laboratory RONALD C. DAVIDSON, Princeton University ANDREA M. GHEZ, University of California at Los Angeles PETER F. GREEN, University of Michigan LAURA H. GREENE, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign WICK C. HAXTON, University of Washington JOSEPH HEZIR, EOP Group, Inc. ALLAN H. MacDONALD, University of Texas at Austin HOMER A. NEAL, University of Michigan JOSE N. ONUCHIC, University of California at San Diego WILLIAM D. PHILLIPS, National Institute of Standards and Technology CHARLES E. SHANK, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (retired) THOMAS N. THEIS, IBM T.J. Watson Research Center MICHAEL S. TURNER, University of Chicago C. MEGAN URRY, Yale University Staff DONALD C. SHAPERO, Director TIMOTHY I. MEYER, Senior Program Officer MICHAEL H. MOLONEY, Senior Program Officer ROBERT L. RIEMER, Senior Program Officer NATALIA J. MELCER, Program Officer BRIAN D. DEWHURST, Senior Program Associate DAVID B. LANG, Research Assistant CARYN J. KNUTSEN, Senior Program Assistant MERCEDES M. ILAGAN, Administrative Assistant VAN AN, Financial Associate vii
Preface The National Research Council (NRC) of the National Academies convened the Committee on CMMP 2010 to study the opportunities and challenges in condensed-matter and materials physics (CMMP) in the next decade. The Solid State Sciences Committee (SSSC) of the NRCâs Board on Physics and Astronomy developed the charge for this study in consultation with the studyâs sponsors at the Department of Energy and the National Science Foundation. The Committee on CMMP 2010 was charged to identify recent accomplishments, compelling scientific questions, and new opportunities in the field; to identify CMMPâs potential future impact on other scientific fields; to consider how CMMP contributes to meeting national societal needs; to identify, discuss, and suggest priorities for the construc- tion, purchase, and operation of tools and facilities; to examine the structure and level of the current research effort and funding for research; and to make recom- mendations on how to realize the full potential of CMMP research. The complete charge is presented in Appendix A. The report is part of the ongoing Physics 2010 survey, the latest decadal assessment of and future outlook for the field of physics conducted under the auspices of the Board on Physics and Astronomy. In preparing for the decadal survey of CMMP, the SSSC called on the commu- nity for input on opportunities and challenges in the field. This input was compiled and presented to the Committee on CMMP 2010 at its first meeting, in February 2006. In addition, the committee received direct input from the community at five town meetings held at professional society meetingsâthe March (2006) meeting of the American Physical Society in Baltimore, Maryland; the spring meeting (March 2006) of the American Chemical Society in Atlanta, Georgia; the spring meeting ix
Preface (April 2006) of the Materials Research Society in San Francisco, California; the fall meeting (November 2006) of the Materials Research Society in Boston, Massachu- setts; and the March (2007) meeting of the American Physical Society in Denver, Colorado. The committee thanks the professional societies for their support and encouragement in helping to arrange these town meetings. The committee also solicited community input through nine focus groups at universities and national laboratories, each with an attendance of between 10 and 15 researchers. The com- mittee thanks the hosts at these institutions for arranging these important ses- sions, at which the discussions were lively and enlightening. The committee also solicited input through a public Web site. The comments supplied by the CMMP community through these venues provided extremely valuable primary input to the committee. The committee that prepared this report is composed of experts from many different areas of CMMP research, prominent scientists from outside the field, and leaders from industry (see Appendix D for biographical sketches of the committee members). The committee met in person four times (see Appendix B) to address its charge, forming subcommittees to study different aspects in greater depth. The committee thanks the speakers who made formal presentations at its meetings; those presentations and the ensuing discussions strongly informed the committeeâs deliberations. The federal agencies that fund CMMP research in the United States also pro- vided input to the committee, through their direct testimony at committee meet- ings and their written responses to requests for information on funding trends and other statistical data. These data are summarized in Chapter 10 of the report. The committee is also grateful to the staffs at the Office of Science and Technology Policy and the Office of Management and Budget for their input on connections between CMMP and national science policy. In September 2006, the committee released a short interim report that sum- marized important opportunities and challenges for CMMP research in the coming decade. That report was used as a basis for subsequent discussion with the CMMP community at town meetings and focus groups. This, the committeeâs final report, expands on these themes, discusses them in further detail, and provides recom- mendations for further advancement of the field. To help address the charge to identify, discuss, and suggest priorities for the construction, purchase, and operation of tools and facilities, the committee con- vened a workshop in January 2007 to hear from members of the community and the federal agencies on future facility needs for CMMP researchers. Appendix C provides further details on this workshop. The committee expresses its apprecia- âNational Research Council, Condensed-Matter and Materials Physics: The Science of the World Around Us: An Interim Report, Washington, D.C.: The National Academies Press, 2006.
Preface xi tion for the input received from the 30 presenters and more than 70 participants in that workshop. As co-chairs, we are grateful to the committee members for their wisdom, cooperation, and commitment to ensuring the development of a comprehensive report. The report reflects the committeeâs heartfelt enthusiasm for the field of CMMP and its future potential and past accomplishments. Finally, we also thank the NRC staff (Natalia Melcer, Donald Shapero, Phillip Long, and Caryn Knutsen) for their guidance and assistance throughout the development of this report. Mildred S. Dresselhaus, Co-Chair William J. Spencer, Co-Chair Committee on CMMP 2010 Committee on CMMP 2010
Acknowledgment of Reviewers This report has been reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise, in accordance with procedures ap- proved by the National Research Councilâs (NRCâs) Report Review Committee. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the institution in making its published report as sound as possible and to ensure that the report meets institutional standards for objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process. We wish to thank the following individuals for their review of this report: Gordon A. Baym, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Malcolm R. Beasley, Stanford University, Paul M. Chaikin, New York University, Elbio Dagotto, University of Tennessee and Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Robert R. Doering, Texas Instruments, Inc., Martha A. Krebs, California Energy Commission, James S. Langer, University of California at Santa Barbara, Allan H. MacDonald, University of Texas at Austin, Jose N. Onuchic, University of California at San Diego, Julia M. Phillips, Sandia National Laboratories, Sunil K. Sinha, University of California at San Diego, Maury Tigner, Cornell University, John Tranquada, Brookhaven National Laboratory, xiii
xiv Acknowledgment of Reviewers Dale J. Van Harlingen, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, and Thomas A. Witten, University of Chicago. We also wish to thank the following individuals for their review of the com- mitteeâs interim report: Elihu Abrahams, Rutgers University, Frank S. Bates, University of Minnesota, Gordon A. Baym, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Arthur I. Bienenstock, Stanford University, J.C. SÃ©amus Davis, Cornell University, Barbara A. Jones, IBM Almaden Research Center, Marc A. Kastner, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Hyla S. Napadensky, Napadensky Energetics, Inc., Julia M. Phillips, Sandia National Laboratories, and Peter G. Wolynes, University of California at San Diego. Although the reviewers listed above have provided many constructive com- ments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or rec- ommendations, nor did they see the final draft of the report before its release. The review of this report was overseen by Venkatesh Narayanamurti, Harvard University. Appointed by the NRC, he was responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with institutional procedures and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content of this report rests entirely with the authoring committee and the institution.
Contents SUMMARY 1 â 1 OVERVIEW 7 Six Scientific Challenges for the Next Decade, 8 How Do Complex Phenomena Emerge from Simple Ingredients?, 8 How Will the Energy Demands of Future Generations Be Met?, 10 What Is the Physics of Life?, 12 What Happens Far from Equilibrium and Why?, 14 What New Discoveries Await Us in the Nanoworld?, 17 How Will the Information Technology Revolution Be Extended?, 18 Societal and Scientific Impact of CMMP Research, 20 Industrial Research, 23 Structure and Level of the Current Research Effort, 24 Tools, Instrumentation, and Facilities for CMMP Research, 26 Concluding Comments, 28 â 2 HOW DO COMPLEX PHENOMENA EMERGE FROM SIMPLE 30 INGREDIENTS? Emergent Phenomena: Beautiful and Useful, 30 Superconductivity: An Illustrative Example and a Frontier of Research, 32 Fermi Liquids and Non-Fermi Liquids, 36 Quantum Hall Systems and the Discovery of New Quantum States of Matter, 41 xv
xvi Contents Critical Phenomena and Universality, 45 Emergence in Ultracold Atomic Gases, 47 Emergence in Classical Condensed-Matter Systems, 48 Realizing the Full Potential of Emergence, 51 Conclusions, 52 â 3 HOW WILL THE ENERGY DEMANDS OF FUTURE GENERATIONS 53 BE MET? Setting the Context, 54 Energy Conversion, 56 Solar Cells, 56 Hydrogen Generation by Photocatalysis, 57 Fuel Cells, 58 Thermoelectrics, 59 Biofuels, 60 Nuclear Energy Conversion, 61 Energy Storage, 62 Batteries, 62 Hydrogen Storage, 63 Supercapacitors, 64 End-Use Energy Efficiency, 64 Solid-State Lighting, 65 Smart Windows, 67 Other Energy Conservation Opportunities, 68 Conclusions, 69 â 4 WHAT IS THE PHYSICS OF LIFE? 70 Overview, 70 An Introductory Example: High Fidelity with Single Molecules, 71 Organizing Our Thoughts and Opportunities, 74 Noise Is Not Negligible, 75 Molecule Counting in Chemotaxis, 75 Noise in the Regulation of Gene Expression, 78 Signals and Noise in the Brain, 82 Fine-Tuning Versus Robustness, 83 Protein Folding and the Space of Sequences, 84 Ion Channels and the Computational Function of Neurons, 85 Adaptation, 87 Fulfilling the Promise, 90
Contents xvii â 5 WHAT HAPPENS FAR FROM EQUILIBRIUM AND WHY? 91 The Importance of Far-from-Equilibrium Phenomena, 91 Key Themes Defining the Scope of the Challenge, 93 What CMMP Brings to the Table, 94 How Do Systems Reach the Far-from-Equilibrium Regime and What Makes Far-from-Equilibrium Physics Difficult?, 95 Far-from-Equilibrium Materials, 97 Far-from-Equilibrium Processing and Assembly, 98 What Determines Behavior Far from Equilibrium?, 99 Systems with Hydrodynamic Equations of Motion, 100 Turbulence and Fracture, 102 Singularities, 103 Robustness as a Design Principle, 104 Predictability and Control: What Can We Learn from Fluctuations?, 106 Formal Theoretical Developments, 107 Getting (Un-)Stuck: Jammed States and Jamming Transitions, 107 The Next Decade, 110 â 6 WHAT NEW DISCOVERIES AWAIT US IN THE NANOWORLD? 111 Why Nano?, 111 Nanoscale Structures: How Do We Build Them?, 113 Patterning at the Nanoscale: Lithography and Self-Assembly, 114 Controlling Growth at the Nanoscale, 116 Molecular and Biological Building Blocks, 116 Studying Nanostructure Building Blocks: The Atomic Physics of Nanoscience, 118 Quantum Manipulation, 119 Controlling Light: Nano-Optics, 120 Probing Molecular Machines, 121 Combining Different Properties, 122 Assembling the Blocks: The Condensed-Matter Physics of Nanoscience, 122 Ordered Arrays, 122 Arbitrary Structures, 124 Small Probes and Big Ideas: Critical Needs for a Nano Future, 124 Better Eyes, 125 Improved Sensing, 126 A Greater Understanding, 126
xviii Contents â 7 HOW WILL THE INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY REVOLUTION 127 BE EXTENDED? The Road Ahead, 127 New Devices for Mass Storage of Information, 134 New Solid-State Memory Devices, 134 New Devices for Processing Information,136 Quantum Computing, 140 Conclusions, 141 â 8 THE IMPACT OF CONDENSED-MATTER AND MATERIALS 144 PHYSICS RESEARCH Impact on Society, 144 Education, 144 The Economy, 147 Energy, 149 Medicine and Health Care, 151 Impact on Other Scientific Disciplines, 152 Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics, 152 Nuclear and High-Energy Physics, 156 Astronomy, 157 Chemistry, 159 Biology, 160 Information Technology and Computer Science, 162 Interdisciplinary Research in CMMP, 163 Recommendations, 164 â 9 INDUSTRIAL LABORATORIES AND RESEARCH IN CONDENSED- 165 MATTER AND MATERIALS PHYSICS History of Industrial Research Laboratories, 165 Filling the Gap: New Approaches to Long-Term Research, 167 Conclusions, 170 Recommendation, 171 10 STRUCTURE AND LEVEL OF THE CURRENT RESEARCH EFFORT 172 Federal Funding for CMMP Research, 172 Funding Success Rates, 177 Grant Sizes, 180 International Data, 180 Demographics of CMMP, 180 Women and Underrepresented Minorities in CMMP, 183 Doctoral Degrees in Physics by Citizenship, 186
Contents xix Publication Trends, 187 Recommendations, 191 11 TOOLS, INSTRUMENTATION, AND FACILITIES FOR 193 CONDENSED-MATTER AND MATERIALS PHYSICS RESEARCH Tools and Instrumentation for CMMP Research, 194 Instrumentation in CMMP Research, 195 Computation in CMMP Research, 198 Centers and Facilities in CMMP Research, 203 Scientific User Facilities for CMMP Research, 207 Light Sources, 208 Neutron Sources, 216 Electron Microscopy, 222 High-Magnetic-Field Facilities, 228 Nanocenters and Materials Synthesis, 231 Large-Scale High-Performance Computing Facilities, 235 Conclusions, 238 CONCLUDING REMARKS 239 APPENDIXES A Statement of Task 243 B Agendas of Committee Meetings 245 C Agenda and Participants at Facilities Workshop 250 D Biographies of Committee Members 255