SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Technology Stocks : JMAR Technologies(JMAR) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: X-Ray Man who wrote (9364)3/5/2001 6:19:00 PM
From: MRothaus1  Respond to of 9695
 
Please continue to post. Reporting from SPIE is very useful and interesting.



To: X-Ray Man who wrote (9364)3/5/2001 10:43:35 PM
From: Bilberry  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 9695
 
Xrayman, are the x-ray masks not funded by DARPA and other federal agencies? It would seem unwise for them to fund JMAR and Sal and not fund those that make the masks that makes silcon based x-ray lithography work. You stated that you were concerned that the mask makers would stop producing. If its government funded I doubt it would go away. Here are some links to the government funded mask efforts. Your opinion would be appreciated.

Also, keep on posting, my post to you was a gut reaction from dealing with bashers.

It looks like the government (DARPA and US Navy) has been funding the development of
resists and x-ray masks. See this .pdf file:

www-mtl.mit.edu

Here is another article (in .pdf format) mentioning DARPA support for x-ray mask technology:

nanotech.wisc.edu



To: X-Ray Man who wrote (9364)3/9/2001 6:08:59 PM
From: timwa  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 9695
 
X-ray man. I really appreciate you taking the time to post here.

I was wondering if you have any thoughts or current information regarding the use of an x-ray source such as JMAR's or the microfocus source licensed from Bede for non-lithography applications, such as nanotomography, x-ray fluorescence, radiobiology, etc...