[HN Gopher] MEMS Array Chip Can Project Video the Size of a Grai...
___________________________________________________________________
MEMS Array Chip Can Project Video the Size of a Grain of Sand
Author : bookofjoe
Score : 72 points
Date : 2026-04-13 14:26 UTC (8 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (spectrum.ieee.org)
(TXT) w3m dump (spectrum.ieee.org)
| darfo wrote:
| Cool. Now I can show videos to my fruit flies! /s
|
| Srsly title should be "MEMS Array Chip the Size of a Grain of
| Sand Can Project Video"
|
| not
|
| "MEMS Array Chip Can Project Video the Size of a Grain of Sand"
| projektfu wrote:
| It is actually about a 0.125mm projection, not the size of the
| chip. But more about steering lasers, which is really what they
| wanted to do.
| darfo wrote:
| Oh wait. It does have the correct title. My fruit flies are
| cheering.
| dmitrygr wrote:
| What is this, a movie theater for ants?
| m3kw9 wrote:
| We can finally say yes to this question
| numpad0 wrote:
| or AR glasses?
| chihuahua wrote:
| It has to be at least 3 times bigger than this!
| cordwainersmith wrote:
| How do you even fit a video projector onto something that small,
| the physics feel like they shouldn't cooperate.
| CoolThings wrote:
| This might be relevant for Augmented Reality headgear.
| cubefox wrote:
| > The chip projected a roughly 125-micrometer image of the Mona
| Lisa.
|
| This may seem small (barely visible as a dot to the naked eye),
| but that's also the geometric mean of the Planck length and the
| diameter of the observable universe. So average size actually.
| jacquesm wrote:
| I _really_ can 't follow your comment and I've been trying.
| Would you mind a longer explanation of what you're getting at
| here?
| venv wrote:
| They mean 125um = sqrt(a*b), where a is the Planck length*
| and b the size of the observable universe (I didn't verify).
| Implying, 125um is some sort of middle ground. *Often said to
| be the smallest length with physical meaning.
| jacquesm wrote:
| Ok, so it's a bullshit comment. Thank you. You could say
| this about everything that is not 'Planck length', it's
| about as useful as Douglas Adams' 'the universe is empty'
| (only he had a sense of humor).
|
| Oh, even worse they are repeating it in different threads.
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47749957
| jmward01 wrote:
| I wonder if this has implications for custom home
| chips/prototyping. I'm sure a big issue is vibrations but
| something like this could remove the need for masks at least.
| (again, not my area so I am clobbering terminology I am sure). It
| may open up home fab capabilities.
| Joel_Mckay wrote:
| In general, hobby photo-lithography projects already use
| DMD/DLP projectors, and some inexpensive optics.
|
| Huygens Optics:
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_w0Z2Y5vaAQ
|
| Sam Zeloof:
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nxz_ENnmgtI
|
| In general, getting vanity silicon made is usually much less
| expensive than trying to bootstrap a fab line. =3
| jmward01 wrote:
| I think half the fun for people that do things like this is
| figuring out how to out innovate a multi-billion dollar
| company so that they can make something 1/4th as good but at
| 1/10000th the price. I bet there are some -really- innovative
| people out there that would figure alternatives to a lot of
| the expensive parts of the process and figure out how to be
| able to produce 2000's level chips at home. I'm not one of
| them though :)
| volemo wrote:
| I think abusing a write-off electron microscope to side step
| the need for masks is also an interesting idea, however, I
| believe acquiring wafers of sufficient quality and depositing
| layers to be etched could be the bigger challenge here.
| jacquesm wrote:
| And the clean environment as a whole. That's a massive
| investment and there are a million ways to mess that up.
| bigbadfeline wrote:
| > however, I believe acquiring wafers of sufficient quality
| and depositing layers to be etched could be the bigger
| challenge here
|
| Definitely hard for a home fab but how about a community
| fab? Not necessarily a geographic community.
| gaze wrote:
| for making research grade devices you barely need a
| cleanroom
| antimatter15 wrote:
| This reminds me of the original patents that Magic Leap had,
| which involved pumping light through a single optical fiber that
| was wiggled by piezoelectrics into a spiral to project light
| (https://kguttag.com/2018/01/06/magic-leap-fiber-scanning-
| dis...).
| nomel wrote:
| Seems what it is, but with a "waveguide" instead of an "optical
| fiber" wiggling about. Seems like a sneaky use of the word
| "projection" though, since the "surface" the image is
| "projected" is just what the flopping waveguide head traces,
| with no projection extending beyond the end of the waveguide.
| gurumeditations wrote:
| This is revolutionary. No other way to put it.
| topspin wrote:
| It certainly looks like something that will find novel
| applications.
| cyberax wrote:
| This is actually getting close enough to manipulate the _phase_
| of light! And doing that would allow creating true holograms.
|
| Or alternative true augmented reality glasses that are not
| limited to one focal plane.
| volemo wrote:
| Electro-optic modulators already exist -- still no StarTrek. :(
| jacquesm wrote:
| Have I got news for you:
|
| https://www.rp-photonics.com/phase_modulators.html
| cyberax wrote:
| Except that you need that for individual pixels.
| kylehotchkiss wrote:
| Sounds like this will have interesting fiber-optic implications?
| jcims wrote:
| Seems like you could put a few of these on a contact lens and
| minimally get a small private HUD. Seems like with a few of them
| (or fast enough scanning speed) you could build effectively a
| light field to give it depth)
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2026-04-13 23:00 UTC)