Magnetic transistors have been a hot topic for years, but a breakthrough led by researchers at MIT with chromium sulfur bromide (CrSBr) could push us closer to realizing more energy-efficient and powerful electronics. By replacing silicon with this 2D magnetic material, researchers have overcome a significant hurdle: combining the benefits of magnetism and semiconductor properties in a single device.

The ability to switch or amplify the current by a factor of 10, along with the reduced energy cost of switching, could have huge implications for everything from memory storage to reducing power consumption in devices. And the fact that these magnetic states can be controlled by both electric current and an external magnetic field means added flexibility without added complexity. That's a real game-changer.

The underlying thesis of increasing electronics efficiency is to harness electron spin to control the flow of electricity. It’s that spin that causes electrons to behave like magnets. The combination of magnetism and semiconductor physics is known as spintronics.

Moreover, the international research team, aided by the University of Chemistry and Technology Prague, was able to simplify the transfer process by avoiding solvents and adhesives. This is crucial, as cleanliness is everything in semiconductor manufacturing, meaning they can build more reliable and efficient devices with fewer defects.

The potential to combine logic and memory into a single component could make future devices much more compact and faster. Imagine computers with faster memory access and less power consumption, which could revolutionize everything from AI to consumer electronics.

But while the advancement could dramatically change the way we think about device architecture, it also brings to light a broader and pressing issue in the world of scientific research: the crucial role that international talent plays in driving innovation.

Many of the leading researchers behind these types of cutting-edge developments are foreign scholars who have chosen to study and work in the US. For decades, the US has been a global hub for scientific inquiry, attracting the world’s best minds. This diversity of thought and perspective has been a key factor in unraveling some of science's most complex mysteries.

Recent shifts in US immigration policies, however, coupled with increasing visa restrictions, have started to jeopardize the influx of this vital talent. The reality is that science thrives when the brightest individuals – regardless of nationality – are given the opportunity to collaborate, share ideas and contribute to advancing human knowledge. The decision to restrict access to these international minds would be detrimental, not only to the United States but also to the global scientific community as a whole. After all, unlocking science’s mysteries is not about a person’s birthplace; it’s about applying the best minds to the most pressing challenges.

In light of this, a key question arises: if the federal government steps back from funding basic research, will the private sector step up to underwrite these costs? Historically, industries have benefited immensely from scientific breakthroughs funded by government grants. Many of today’s technological marvels – from smartphones to renewable energy technologies to lifesaving medical advancements – are the direct result of research supported by federal funds. But as some government agencies increasingly focus on short-term economic returns or geopolitical interests, it remains unclear whether private companies will fully invest in long-term, high-risk research.

While some sectors, like commercial software and pharmaceuticals, have made significant investments in R&D, manufacturing is among the industries that often lack the resources or incentive to fund basic research, which often takes years to show a tangible return on investment. Moreover, scientific innovation often happens in unpredictable ways, and private companies tend to be more focused on applied research with a clearer pathway to commercialization. Basic science, by contrast, often seeks to answer fundamental questions, which can seem disconnected from immediate profit motives.

The concern is that without sufficient government backing, we could see a decline in research that doesn't promise immediate financial returns, potentially leaving groundbreaking ideas like the magnetic transistor to languish without the necessary resources to scale. If industry were to take the lead, it would require a significant cultural shift, one where private investment is not just about profit but also about fostering the kind of open, risk-tolerant innovation that has long been a hallmark of basic research.

In short, science’s future may hinge on a delicate balance between government support, private sector investment and, critically, the free movement of intellectual talent across borders. The challenge moving forward will be ensuring that the US remains a place where the best minds from all over the world can come together to push the boundaries of what is possible. If we lose that, we risk losing our edge in the global innovation race.

That’s a scenario that would truly leave us spinning – in place.

P.S. For a front row seat to the state-of-the-art design and manufacturing, join us at PCB West the week of Sept. 29. The one-day exhibition takes place Oct. 1, featuring free lunch on the show floor, 10 free technical sessions and the evening PCB Community Meetup.

Mike Buetow is president of PCEA (pcea.net); mike@pcea.net.