Seriosly, all those companies're trying hard to put more cpus on a chip because there is an advantage on that or because of marketing decisions?
If there is an advantage, what it is? I can't see why jionning multiple microprocessors on a single chip may make a computer faster or cheaper than using mutiple (and much more cheap) microprocessors, one per chip.
Surely, there is some economy on cache memory, but the cache will not be divided between all the cpus? What is tha advantage on doing a big cache instead of a lot of smaller ones?
Actually, it doesn't. However far apart those pennies are when you set up the communications, the "remote half" had to travel at most the speed of light to get there. So, you do not get any increase in the total communication speed.
Yes, but, at leat by your explanation, you could transmit an information that was generated after you sent the fotons. So it's still faster than light communication.
Stimulated emission occurs when an atom absorbs a photon causing an electron to move to a "higher" state but in this case the electron can immediately jump back to it's lower state. This causes two photons to be emitted in exactly the same direction as the original photon was travelling.
The reason that you get monochromatic light (normally) is that the wavelength of the photons produced is exactly related to the energy levels in the atom producing them. The reason you get coherent light is because the photons are travelling in the same direction.
The fotons are emitted with the same phase, that is what causes stimulated emisssion to be coherent.
The light generaly is highly monochomatic beause the stimulated states generaly have long life times, what is not true for gas lamps (while they often generate light from single excited states).
Finally, lasers' fotons can travel preciselly on the same direction because they are coherent, and do it often because lasers are normaly obtained fron the mirror apparatus you described, that amplifyes light only on one direction.
Another important (maybe, because I don't understand the subject very well either) is if there aren't something better to do with the additional transistors used than an entire second core.
Microprocessors today are so greatly optimized that there is no need for additional transistors in their core? And yeld is so low that is cheapper to achieve a certain performance level with a single huge silicon chip than with two smaller single core chips?
Is that anyhow lega in US?
I mean, in Brazil some telecom companies tryed to do something similar (with executive's support) and where forced to move back by the judiciary because such terms are illegal here.
It's very probable that companies adhere to this scheme. It's interesting for companies to have an entire PC configured before they by it, as it is to have software subscription. PCs also have short lifetimes on companies, that can calculate how much they may pay for a hardware subscription.
This stuff has some market, but will not replace general pourpose PCs, I guess.
In fact, a DNA based life form is (on my also uneducated mind) very more likely to happen than computers programmed in C. DNA, RNa and aminoacids are very common substances, proven to be found even out of Earth.
So while we don know other way of generatting metabolism, guessing that an unknown life form is DNA or RNA and protein based is a good hunt.
It's more likely to be lucky, but now that you said, they maybe can correct this.
It is amazing how, linving in Brazil, I inly have this kind of news by Slashdot.
Regulatin nanotech falls into the same problem of regulating drougs, whith an advanced knowlege about it, it will be (at least is what people intend) possible to make nanobots whith cheap and easy do make assemblers. Governments can prohibit selling theese assemblers, but it is not very effective.
Slashdot Mirror
Seriosly, all those companies're trying hard to put more cpus on a chip because there is an advantage on that or because of marketing decisions?
If there is an advantage, what it is? I can't see why jionning multiple microprocessors on a single chip may make a computer faster or cheaper than using mutiple (and much more cheap) microprocessors, one per chip.
Surely, there is some economy on cache memory, but the cache will not be divided between all the cpus? What is tha advantage on doing a big cache instead of a lot of smaller ones?
Actually, it doesn't. However far apart those pennies are when you set up the communications, the "remote half" had to travel at most the speed of light to get there. So, you do not get any increase in the total communication speed.
Yes, but, at leat by your explanation, you could transmit an information that was generated after you sent the fotons. So it's still faster than light communication.
Stimulated emission occurs when an atom absorbs a photon causing an electron to move to a "higher" state but in this case the electron can immediately jump back to it's lower state. This causes two photons to be emitted in exactly the same direction as the original photon was travelling.
The reason that you get monochromatic light (normally) is that the wavelength of the photons produced is exactly related to the energy levels in the atom producing them. The reason you get coherent light is because the photons are travelling in the same direction.
The fotons are emitted with the same phase, that is what causes stimulated emisssion to be coherent.
The light generaly is highly monochomatic beause the stimulated states generaly have long life times, what is not true for gas lamps (while they often generate light from single excited states).
Finally, lasers' fotons can travel preciselly on the same direction because they are coherent, and do it often because lasers are normaly obtained fron the mirror apparatus you described, that amplifyes light only on one direction.
Another important (maybe, because I don't understand the subject very well either) is if there aren't something better to do with the additional transistors used than an entire second core. Microprocessors today are so greatly optimized that there is no need for additional transistors in their core? And yeld is so low that is cheapper to achieve a certain performance level with a single huge silicon chip than with two smaller single core chips?
Is that anyhow lega in US? I mean, in Brazil some telecom companies tryed to do something similar (with executive's support) and where forced to move back by the judiciary because such terms are illegal here.
It's very probable that companies adhere to this scheme. It's interesting for companies to have an entire PC configured before they by it, as it is to have software subscription. PCs also have short lifetimes on companies, that can calculate how much they may pay for a hardware subscription. This stuff has some market, but will not replace general pourpose PCs, I guess.
In fact, a DNA based life form is (on my also uneducated mind) very more likely to happen than computers programmed in C. DNA, RNa and aminoacids are very common substances, proven to be found even out of Earth. So while we don know other way of generatting metabolism, guessing that an unknown life form is DNA or RNA and protein based is a good hunt.
And you can aways use an algoritm key to send a diferent sequence each time a connection succedes.
It's more likely to be lucky, but now that you said, they maybe can correct this. It is amazing how, linving in Brazil, I inly have this kind of news by Slashdot.
It can be assumed that? Or he's merely espaculating?
Regulatin nanotech falls into the same problem of regulating drougs, whith an advanced knowlege about it, it will be (at least is what people intend) possible to make nanobots whith cheap and easy do make assemblers. Governments can prohibit selling theese assemblers, but it is not very effective.