Yes, there is a point where the doubling has to stop, but what I'm taking issue with is that people tend to point to current physical limitations as evidence th

Yes, there is a point where the doubling has to stop, but what I'm taking issue with is that people tend to point to current physical limitations as evidence that Moore's law is already over, or nearly dead. And at any given time in the history of computers, you could look at the fastest processors and say "they're bumping up against limit X". But until X is Bremmermann's limit[1], that is not an indication that progress will slow. Incidentally, if Moore's law were to continue and it were as simple as "speed per mass doubles every 18 months", it would still take somewhere on the order of 300 years for us to approach Bremmermann's limit. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bremermann%27s_limit http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bremermann%27s_limit