Using photonics for real-time processing.

On May 22, 6:40 pm, MooseFET wrote in

formatting link
:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > My dream PC is as hardware, real-time, and digital as possible. In > > > > addition, it uses the least amount of buffering required [hopefully > > > > none] and experiences the least amount of latency possible [again, > > > > hopefully none]. > > > This may be your dream but it may also be a nightmare. You also said > > > you wanted low power and no fan. If you want a lot of speed, you > > > really want a good cooling system and a whole lot of power. If you > > > want to make a faster system with low power, you want to make use of > > > things like lookup tables and hashes. > > > Couldn't the problem of excessive heat and large use of power be > > solved [or at least mitigated] by using lower voltages while still > > running things in real-time [and with the least amount of storage, > > software, buffering, and latency possible] and not using fans? > No. It largely can't be avoided. If you have to do your sine function > from first principles and you want speed, you need a huge number of > operations per second.

Do you think the heat generated and power requirements will decrease when photonic chips are available?

AFAIK, photonic circuits produce less heat than electric circuits. However I am aware that even when photonics becomes the norm [i.e. if is does], electricity will still be necessary for power supply.

I am thinking of a purely optical computer that is powered by a main

400 nm laser. The main laser if of course powered by electricity.

This optical PC contains 400 nm lasers but no LEDs. AFAIK, lasers tend to be more efficient that LEDs.

So do you think a chip based on lasers - instead of electricity - can be as real-time, hardware, and digital as possible while using the least amount of buffering required [hopefully none] and experiencing the least amount of latency possible [again, hopefully none] and at the same time being high-speed not getting hot enough to need any cooling equipment?

I think it would be easier to do this in photonics that electronics. Since electronics seem to easily overheat.

Reply to
Radium
Loading thread data ...

If you can describe just what you mean by "photonic chips" and the principles on which such things might operate, then maybe that question would be more readily answered.

Bob M.

Reply to
Bob Myers

Or he could just stop talking bollocks

Reply to
SteveH

He would implode. Do you have any idea what kind of mess that would make?

--
Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
prove it.
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
Michael A. Terrell

This time, you're the idiot (again). There are memory arrays being made now that have no electrical connection to them at all. They are manipulated by light on the molecular level, and read by light. They stand to make OC768 infrastructures look like child's play. Less and less electrical pathways are the goal with fiber optics.

All you have to do, idiot, is read your weekly copy of EE Times.

Reply to
JackShepherd

If one cannot READ it, then it is NOT memory.

Reply to
JackShepherd

When was the last time you read a copy of EE Times?

You only speak for you.

Reply to
JackShepherd

You've never heard of holographic memory arrays?

When was the last time you read a copy of EE Times?

Reply to
JackShepherd

formatting link

martin

Reply to
martin griffith

Calling it "write only" is a misnomer, at best. Especially by today's standards.

If it is written to, but never read from, it has no function. If one checks it to see if the "write" step was successful, then it has been read.

Reply to
JackShepherd

"JackShepherd" wrote in message news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com...

Yes, I have. A "holographic" memory array is hardly an example of something that demonstrates the principles required for the full system that our "friend" Radium seems to be envisioning here. Or are you under the impression that "memory arrays" perform "processing"?

I'm a bit late on this week's issue, since my copy would be back in the office and I've been at a tech conference all week. Now, please permit me to ask a question - are you usually in the habit of coming in late to threads such as this one, taking them far more seriously than they could possibly deserve, and spouting such nonsense (apparently with the primary motivation being the demostration of your own possession of a copy of an industry journal)? I ask simply because I want to know whether or not to killfile you now, or if you intend to actually contribute something of worth to the group at some point in the future.

Bob M.

Reply to
Bob Myers

Good post. I was too lazy to say it, but you said it all, and very well.

Don

Reply to
Don Bowey

Damn, you're thick! You are the first moron that I've ever heard of who can't see that it was a joke. It was an 'April Fools Day' joke from Signetics in 1972, and a VERY well known classic. I guess that you've never learned to read a datasheet because you spend too much time in the bathroom with the EE Times?

--
Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
prove it.
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
Michael A. Terrell

On Fri, 25 May 2007 18:35:08 GMT, in sci.electronics.design "Michael A. Terrell" wrote: snip

Is the EE times any good as a replacement for anal cleansing lamina?

martin

Reply to
martin griffith

You put it on the floor and set your pet on it. if it glances down and sees what its standing on it will walk off the EE Times and crap on the floor.

As far as toilet paper, those glossy pages are full of clay and can cut you, if you're not careful.

--
Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
prove it.
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
Michael A. Terrell

Maybe Radium has a library of old "Electronics" magazines from the

1960/70s. There was a multi-part saga of an outfit promising a "Laser" computer using optical processing with capabilities a magnitude greater than the state of the art of the time. So someone at Boeing Computer Services, knowing that it was some sort of stock scam, ordered one to call their bluff. At which time the "entrepreneur" turned the tables and announced the order, claiming that Boeing was endorsing his technology. It, of course, faded away rapidly, but provided much amusement.

Mark Zenier snipped-for-privacy@eskimo.com Googleproofaddress(account:mzenier provider:eskimo domain:com)

Reply to
Mark Zenier

Fuck you. This is Usenet, and not everyone reads every thread at the same time it is started, or at the same time your stupid ass does.

Just like you don't read every copy of EE Times the same time I do, or apparently, Radium does.

That is all he does. He reads about a new technology (or old in this case), and then asked a question about it to see how many of you "experts" even have a clue about what is going on.

You apparently don't, since it IS being put to use, and they ARE doing away with as many electrical connections in such links as possible.

Reply to
JackShepherd

Fuck you, asswipe. Your put downs of the OP show that it is YOU that needs to be filtered.

Reply to
JackShepherd

1) It was the cover story article.

2) Not everyone reads Usenet articles at the same time, nor at the time they are started.

3) Yes, you are lazy.

4) and a bit stupid if you think what he wrote was "said very well".

Reply to
JackShepherd

scale one to ten.

The signetics joke class: 10

Your joke class: 1 or less.

Your level of immaturity: above ten.

Reply to
JackShepherd

ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.