Re: Is it time to stop research in Computer Architecture ?
- From: "Del Cecchi" <delcecchiofthenorth@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 17:53:33 -0500
"Bernd Paysan" <bernd.paysan@xxxxxx> wrote in message
news:nrbcr6-rs6.ln1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Del Cecchi wrote:
You could use SOI, no bulk. :-)
There still is a bulk, there is just no substrate, so the bulk is
left
floating. The diodes I mentioned are sill there, supplying the bulk
when forward biased (this is the well-known effect of SOI to have
variable gate thresholds through charging and discharging the bulk
below
the diodes threshold, unless you add in a real bulk contact like on
stock silicon wafers).
You could go fully depleted, although IBM didn't last I heard.
I don't get the point of the AC. Light bulbs and space heaters are
AC
powered and still disipate power. What did I miss?
I can't tell you. Andy apparently doesn't care much about the
physics
behind integrated circuits, his knowledge stops at the gate level.
This
is completely ok for digital design, but I wonder why he makes that
sort
of suggestions ;-).
One interesting property of quantum mechanics is that for
irreversible
logic, there's a minimum amount of energy that is necessary to make
it
happen. Reversible logic does not have this drawback. Therefore,
people investigate into reversible logic, even though the actual
components to get that benefit are not in sigh (not even carbon
nanotube
switches have these properties, even though they are much closer to
the
physical limits for irreversible logic). Many people also forget
that
quantum mechanics does not properly take changes in the system into
account, and that means that your reversible logic only works with
the
predicted low power when the inputs are not changing any more - and
this
is just the uninteresting case (the coherent one - changes in the
system
lead to decoherence, and thereby to classical physics).
I am so disappointed. I thought QM explained everything. :-)
The theory of circuits that require unobtanium to build is widespread.
--
Bernd Paysan
"If you want it done right, you have to do it yourself"
http://www.jwdt.com/~paysan/
.
- References:
- Is it time to stop research in Computer Architecture ?
- From: Jean
- Re: Is it time to stop research in Computer Architecture ?
- From: ChrisQ
- Re: Is it time to stop research in Computer Architecture ?
- From: Daniel A. Jimenez
- Re: Is it time to stop research in Computer Architecture ?
- From: Brett Davis
- Re: Is it time to stop research in Computer Architecture ?
- From: Daniel A. Jimenez
- Re: Is it time to stop research in Computer Architecture ?
- From: Brett Davis
- Re: Is it time to stop research in Computer Architecture ?
- From: Andy \"Krazy\" Glew
- Re: Is it time to stop research in Computer Architecture ?
- From: Robert Myers
- Re: Is it time to stop research in Computer Architecture ?
- From: Andy \"Krazy\" Glew
- Re: Is it time to stop research in Computer Architecture ?
- From: Tom Knight
- Re: Is it time to stop research in Computer Architecture ?
- From: Andy \"Krazy\" Glew
- Re: Is it time to stop research in Computer Architecture ?
- From: Bernd Paysan
- Re: Is it time to stop research in Computer Architecture ?
- From: Del Cecchi
- Re: Is it time to stop research in Computer Architecture ?
- From: Bernd Paysan
- Is it time to stop research in Computer Architecture ?
- Prev by Date: Re: Is it time to stop research in Computer Architecture ?
- Next by Date: Re: Fermi
- Previous by thread: Re: Is it time to stop research in Computer Architecture ?
- Next by thread: Re: Is it time to stop research in Computer Architecture ?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|