Re: Universal Quantum Computers

Subject: Re: Universal Quantum Computers
From: Robin Lee Powell (rlpowellcalum.csclub.uwaterloo.ca)
Date: Thu Dec 02 1999 - 10:55:00 CST

• Next message: lcs Mixmaster Remailer: "Re: Universal Quantum Computers"
• Previous message: Ben Laurie: "Re: Continuation attacks"
• In reply to: Mike Rosing: "Re: Universal Quantum Computers"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Mike Rosing <eresrchmendota.terracom.net> wrote:
>I don't think that's correct, but the following is pure conjecture.
>Once we get gate sizes in the 10 angstrom level, we'll be doing
>quantum mechanics across the entire structure of a set of gates.
>We're now at the 100 nm == 1000 angstrom level. Since gates go
>as area, it takes 3 years by Moore's law to halve the linear dimension.
>So in 7*3 = 21 years we'll be down to the 10 angstrom level. I think
>we'll learn a lot about quantum effects at that point, and to keep
>Moore's law on track we'll start developing quantum computers.
>At the 1 angstrom level, we'll have to increase the number of bits
>per atom, and that's when quantum computers will be fully operational.
>That's only 30 years from now (give or take 3).

<SIGH>

/morz law/ The observation, made in 1965 by [33]Intel co-founder
[34]Gordon Moore while preparing a speech, that each new memory
[35]integrated circuit contained roughly twice as much capacity as
its predecessor, and each chip was released within 18-24 months of
the previous chip.

Note that that has nothing to do with how small things we can manipulate
are.

-Robin

• Next message: lcs Mixmaster Remailer: "Re: Universal Quantum Computers"
• Previous message: Ben Laurie: "Re: Continuation attacks"
• In reply to: Mike Rosing: "Re: Universal Quantum Computers"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b27 : Thu Dec 02 1999 - 14:09:44 CST