So the volume of one atom can be calculated using, c. 30 dp. of pi -- +3 so that errors do not compound. So we need 30 bits/atom to store the volume, for 10^30

So the volume of one atom can be calculated using, c. 30 dp. of pi -- +3 so that errors do not compound. So we need 30 bits/atom to store the volume, for 10^30 atoms -- this is 10^15 petabytes. Suppose we're trying to estimate the shape of the table using the relevant state vector for each atom (ie., radius, coordinate, EM-shell, etc.). Ie., how these atoms interact to produce a structure. Then we need perhaps 10 numbers/atom, so 10^16 petabytes. And consider the computation. The issue is that macroscopic structuring effects, ie., that the table has its tabular shape also exert a top-down effect constraining the structure of the atoms. We'd have to solve that problem through iteration. Ie., we compute a shape from local effects only, then iteratively recompute until increasing orders of scale are included. Suppose we perform 1 operation/atom to compute an interaction, that's 10^30 operations. At 1ns/op, we have 10^21 seconds -- optimistically. That's one scale, now we need to iterate; given the orders of effects are 1nm...1m that's c. 10 scales, say. We're now at 10^22 seconds with 10^16 petabytes of data. And also, since we're running a 10-fold iteration we need more than 10^30 precision, as errors will compound. This is for a table!. As I said, choose your scale, eg., atom to star, and the storage requirments have an essentially physically impossible mass.