facebook rss twitter

Blue-light LED inventors land Nobel Prize in physics

by Mark Tyson on 8 October 2014, 13:35

Quick Link: HEXUS.net/qacj2z

Add to My Vault: x

The 2014 Nobel Prize in Physics has been awarded to the three Japanese scientists who invented the first efficient blue light emitting diodes (LEDs) in the mid 1990s, reports the BBC.

Isamu Akasaki, professor at Meijo University and Nagoya University in Japan, Hiroshi Amano, professor at Nagoya University also based in Japan and Shuji Nakamura, an American citizen and professor at the University of California in Santa Barbara, share the coveted prize. The trio also share 8m Swedish kronor (£690,000) for "the invention of efficient blue light-emitting diodes which has enabled bright and energy-saving white light sources."

The invention of the bright blue LEDs created the white LED lighting innovation. Their combination with red and green light emitting LEDs (or phosphor) allows the technology to generate white light for all sorts of illumination purposes. These LEDs are so efficient for lighting that the UK close eight power stations if it switched over completely, according to a Guardian quote. LED 'bulbs' are also robust and longer lasting.

"A quarter of energy consumption goes to illumination," said Per Delsing, a physics professor at the Chalmers University of Technology in Sweden, during a press conference announcing the award, reports CNet. Consequently, any increase in efficiency and subsequent saving of energy "is really going to have a big impact on modern civilization," he said.

Not only did the three researchers help revolutionise lighting with vastly improved energy efficiency and brightness, these light-emitting diodes are also usful in everything from traffic signals to high-speed networking, data storage, smartphones, and water purification.

Gallium nitride was discovered to be the key ingredient capable of creating bright blue LEDs. However, the big obstacle was in trying to find a way to grow large enough crystals of this compound to be useful. Profs Akasaki and Amano managed to grow them in 1986 on a specially-designed scaffold made partly from sapphire, whilst Prof Nakamura managed to make a similar breakthrough four years later, using a clever manipulation of temperature to boost the growth of the crystal.    

The trio were named at a press conference in Sweden, where the Nobel jury highlighted that these prizes were established to acknowledge developments which delivered "the greatest benefit to mankind", whilst accentuating the usefulness of the invention.



HEXUS Forums :: 7 Comments

Login with Forum Account

Don't have an account? Register today!
A Nobel Prize? These guys single handedly destroyed the reddy/pink and lime green cold cathode modding market!
that is less cash, they should have been given $5 million each, I cannot understand why an actor who acts in a 2 hour movie gets more than a scientist who changes the way technology works to the better of mankind.
lumireleon
…I cannot understand why an actor who acts in a 2 hour movie gets more than a scientist who changes the way technology works to the better of mankind.

Perhaps the same reason an actor or author's work gets many more years of copyright protection than a patent offers? The people (generally politicians and lawyers) that decide this sort of thing enjoy the arts but appear neither to understand nor respect engineering and science. Can you think of a senior politician other than Margaret Thatcher (BSc Chemistry) that has worked as a research scientist?

They may sometimes appreciate shiny toys but not what makes them work (Remember Steven Fry claiming the new iPhone to be the greatest thing ever a few years after he explained on television that a sat-nav sends your position to a GPS satellite).
lumireleon
that is less cash, they should have been given $5 million each, I cannot understand why an actor who acts in a 2 hour movie gets more than a scientist who changes the way technology works to the better of mankind.
Brian224
Perhaps the same reason an actor or author's work gets many more years of copyright protection than a patent offers? The people (generally politicians and lawyers) that decide this sort of thing enjoy the arts but appear neither to understand nor respect engineering and science. Can you think of a senior politician other than Margaret Thatcher (BSc Chemistry) that has worked as a research scientist?

They may sometimes appreciate shiny toys but not what makes them work (Remember Steven Fry claiming the new iPhone to be the greatest thing ever a few years after he explained on television that a sat-nav sends your position to a GPS satellite).
+1 on both of these. Although maybe there's an unwillingness to have someone who's “hands on” after Baroness T's example. For my mind though there's too many “arts” and “business” folks in charge, we need more engineers in there to restore some balance.
lumireleon
that is less cash, they should have been given $5 million each, I cannot understand why an actor who acts in a 2 hour movie gets more than a scientist who changes the way technology works to the better of mankind.

I can't understand that either. :shocked2:

Most people just have no clue how important this development was. Science just isn't sexy enough… so I suppose that makes it a marketing problem :) We just needed giant blue LEDs with naked men/women draped over them to make people understand how awesome them are or something.