4 ms·
Have slower ticks. A planet size CPU that runs at .5 hz but can work on impossibly large numbers.
by willcipriano 3y ago
Have slower ticks. A planet size CPU that runs at .5 hz but can work on impossibly large numbers.
- gameshot911 3y agoThat's actually a really fascinating science fiction idea!
- willcipriano 3y agoIt's sort of the plot of the Douglas Adam's books. https://hitchhikers.fandom.com/wiki/Earth https://hitchhikers.fandom.com/wiki/Earth
- com2kid 3y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matrioshka_brain https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matrioshka_brain :-D It's a topic that has been explored quite a bit in science fiction literature.
- karmakaze 3y agoRelated to the fallacy of comparing what's slow in our world with what's computable in a simulation of it--there's no requirement for time to tick similarly.
- volemo 3y agoAnd 27.7% [1] of the planet's crust is silicon already! [1] Britannica: Silicon
- Dylan16807 3y ago> Have slower ticks. Yes, this solves the stated issue about huge lookup tables. > A planet size CPU that runs at .5 hz but can work on impossibly large numbers. This doesn't make much sense to me, though. If your goal is "any algorithm", you'll often have to go a lot slower than .5Hz. A hash-calculating circuit that's built out of a single mountain of silicon could have a critical path that's light-years long. But if your goal is just "work on impossibly large numbers", but it's okay to take multiple ticks, then there's no reason to drag the frequency down that low. You can run a planet-scale CPU at 1GHz. CPUs have no need for signals to go all the way across inside a single tick.
- Vecr 3y agoYou'd need way better clocks and synchronization circuits than exist now though, but I don't see any pure physical barriers.
- Dylan16807 3y agoThe whole thing doesn't need to be on the same clock domain. You can put clock crossings every inch.
- brudgers 3y agoimpossibly large numbers Forty-two for example?