5 ms·
The arguments from the abstract of this paper have been refuted by Attojoule Optoelectronics for Low-Energy Information Processing and Communications: a Tutoria
by morphle 3y ago
The arguments from the abstract of this paper have been refuted by Attojoule Optoelectronics for Low-Energy Information Processing and Communications: a Tutorial Review [1] and several other papers.
[1] https://arxiv.org/abs/1609.05510 https://arxiv.org/abs/1609.05510
- n3rv 3y agoHello Morphle, I tried to email you regarding the post you replied to a good while back about an ISP-related post. It got bounced from the ziggo.nl address. Have an updated contact point? I have updated my contact info if you still want to chat.
- morphle 3y agoYou can try morphle73 at gmail dot com. Email servers do reject messages quite often, for example when they look like spam.
- morphle 3y agoOf course the arguments of [15] in the paper are the main refutation. Paraphrasing: Optical transistors will need to match all these criteria before they can compete with bulk CMOS. They don't and physics predicts they won't anytime soon. We will replace wires with optics though [1]. This discussion started in 1959 when Feynman pointed out we eventually will create things at atomic sizes with elementary particles [2]. [2] There is Plenty of Room at the Bottom -Richard P. Feynman (Dated: Dec. 1959). https://cdn1.richplanet.net/pdf/0099.pdf https://cdn1.richplanet.net/pdf/0099.pdf [15] D. A. B. Miller, “Are optical transistors the logical next step?” Nature Photonics, vol. 4, pp. 3–5, 2010. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/David-Miller-65/publication/40764874_Are_optical_transistors_the_logical_next_step/links/0fcfd5072ec68dae82000000/Are-optical-transistors-the-logical-next-step.pdf?origin=journalDetail&_tp=eyJwYWdlIjoiam91cm5hbERldGFpbCJ9 https://www.researchgate.net/profile/David-Miller-65/publica...