The smallest posible computer core is probably smaller than you think. In Eric Drexlers book he talkes about a nanocomputer thats 400 cubic nm. And thats fully mechanical. I imagine that using quantum electrodynamic effects you could shring it quite a ways.
As for communicating with the nanomachines, you could think of a number of uni-directional methods. Flashes of light (if the nano machine is protected against EM radiation in that band) could be used to communicate both power and instructions. Or how about a nanomanufactured record of sorts, where the nanomachine could ride the grove reading different atoms as ones and zeros.
Well, I am by no means qualified to say this, but I think that getting information to the nanomachine wont be a very large hurdle, perhaps getting information back to a human will be though.
I think this is beeing worked on. If you look at the FAQ that came with the recent release of XFree/GLX stuff over at Nvidia you will see that that release is just to hold everyone over while XFree 4.0 comes out. I am very happy that I have a TNT (and a voodoo 2). Nothing can stop me now.
As far as I know this is not something that is going to be enforced. If your system has the same libraries as RH you can run these apps. Its just a way for the software companies to know what is available to them and how the system is set up.
I wish this was a joke. it seems like a major waste of hardware. I really like the roller on the top of the mouse that MS gave us, but I dont think this mouse was a good idea. Plus, it seems they are trying to play off the iMac style, not my personal favorite.
Ray tracing, depth of field not that important
on
DVD in your Glasses
·
· Score: 1
You know, I have the same sort of situation with the SIRD images. I can do it really easily, but now my eyes can lose focus sometimes. I havn't had to have glasses though. It could also be that we are just showing our age. That and the fact that the human eyes and mind were not designed to read small print.
Ray tracing, depth of field not that important
on
DVD in your Glasses
·
· Score: 1
The nice thing about ray tracing is that it is sub-linear in time complexity. The bad thing about raytracing is that it has a large constant factor associated with it. This means that as scenes get more and more complex raytracing will be more and more feasible. I do agree though that its not the end all be all for rendering, right now polygon based systems are far more responsive. I dont agree that depth of field is not important however. There was a study that showed that without depth of field VR can mess up the link between focal length and paralax depth information in your brain. I forget who found this out but they found it out because they messed some poor kids vision.
It seems to me that the efficiency of the device is most likely pretty bad. I dont know for sure, but it looks like the clusters would have to be in the laser beam, and even then its random how many of the atoms colide.
You can bet that one of the factors will be cross-compiling. The psx2's processor is completely new. I for one am interested in paying for one of the development platforms and using the power of this new processor to run some robots. Perhaps even a bunch of psx2's networked together using the fire-wire interface. A supercomputer made out of playstations is not as far fetched as you might think. I am going to try my best.:)
Slashdot Mirror
The smallest posible computer core is probably smaller than you think. In Eric Drexlers book he talkes about a nanocomputer thats 400 cubic nm. And thats fully mechanical. I imagine that using quantum electrodynamic effects you could shring it quite a ways.
As for communicating with the nanomachines, you could think of a number of uni-directional methods. Flashes of light (if the nano machine is protected against EM radiation in that band) could be used to communicate both power and instructions. Or how about a nanomanufactured record of sorts, where the nanomachine could ride the grove reading different atoms as ones and zeros.
Well, I am by no means qualified to say this, but I think that getting information to the nanomachine wont be a very large hurdle, perhaps getting information back to a human will be though.
I think this is beeing worked on. If you look at the FAQ that came with the recent release of XFree/GLX stuff over at Nvidia you will see that that release is just to hold everyone over while XFree 4.0 comes out. I am very happy that I have a TNT (and a voodoo 2). Nothing can stop me now.
As far as I know this is not something that is going to be enforced. If your system has the same libraries as RH you can run these apps. Its just a way for the software companies to know what is available to them and how the system is set up.
I wish this was a joke. it seems like a major waste of hardware. I really like the roller on the top of the mouse that MS gave us, but I dont think this mouse was a good idea. Plus, it seems they are trying to play off the iMac style, not my personal favorite.
You know, I have the same sort of situation with the SIRD images. I can do it really easily, but now my eyes can lose focus sometimes. I havn't had to have glasses though. It could also be that we are just showing our age. That and the fact that the human eyes and mind were not designed to read small print.
The nice thing about ray tracing is that it is sub-linear in time complexity. The bad thing about raytracing is that it has a large constant factor associated with it. This means that as scenes get more and more complex raytracing will be more and more feasible. I do agree though that its not the end all be all for rendering, right now polygon based systems are far more responsive. I dont agree that depth of field is not important however. There was a study that showed that without depth of field VR can mess up the link between focal length and paralax depth information in your brain. I forget who found this out but they found it out because they messed some poor kids vision.
It seems to me that the efficiency of the
device is most likely pretty bad. I dont know for
sure, but it looks like the clusters would have to
be in the laser beam, and even then its random how
many of the atoms colide.
You can bet that one of the factors will be cross-compiling. The psx2's processor is completely new. I for one am interested in paying for one of the development platforms and using the power of this new processor to run some robots. Perhaps even a bunch of psx2's networked together using the fire-wire interface. A supercomputer made out of playstations is not as far fetched as you might think. I am going to try my best. :)