Ultimate physical limits to computation

Maybe read https://arxiv.org/pdf/quant-ph/9908043.pdf before you think about computers operating on 2*140 objects and try to be less aggressive in your comments.

adrianNOct 9, 2022View on HNParent context

I'd be curious if anyone with understanding of memory transistor density has an idea of what sort of physical footprint and power requirements 128-bit addressable memory would look like, because I'm having a hard time picturing even a distributed, shared virtual memory space…

reincarnate0x14Feb 23, 2022View on HNParent context

In the Perfect Imperfection by Jacek Dukaj [0] has something called "Remy's curve" [1]. On the curve you can find: - Ultimate Computer is the computer using the best hardware as allowed by the physical constants of our universe. See also physics of computation. - Inclusions are…

IsinlorJun 7, 2021View on HNParent context

We have some upper bounds on what is physically possible: https://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/9908043

adrianNJan 12, 2021View on HNParent context

An interesting paper in somewhat the opposite direction, but still building on Landauer's work is "Ultimate physical limits to computation": https://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/9908043 The end of the abstract: > [...] quantitative bounds are put to the computational power of an…

messeJun 25, 2020View on HNParent context

It seems likely that Moore’s Law will someday be resurrected, perhaps in a weaker form, but I wouldn't bet heavily on any particular invention being the one that resurrects it. I say it seems likely because Landauer's limit works out to about 0.003 attojoules per bit erasure at…

kragenJul 29, 2019View on HNParent context

A very famous and popular paper that's often cited when debating the simulation hypothesis. I'm squarely in the "not a simulation" camp for a few reasons. 1) Limits of computation. First, we need to find out whether or not the universe is computable. To me, it doesn't seem like…

dvtJan 24, 2018View on HNParent context

http://arxiv.org/pdf/quant-ph/9908043.pdf

tambourine_manAug 16, 2016View on HNParent context

see also: "Ultimate physical limits to computation" http://arxiv.org/pdf/quant-ph/9908043v3.pdf "Limits on fundamental limits to computation" http://arxiv.org/pdf/1408.3821v2 "The physics of information processing superobjects: daily life among the Jupiter brains"…

kanzureJun 16, 2016View on HNParent context

This is an entertaining read: Ultimate Limits to Computation http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/9908043

sevenlessApr 22, 2016View on HNParent context

I've always found the idea of the universe being a simulation rather silly. There are estimated to be 10^80 particles in the observable universe. Assuming our universe is being simulated on an earth sized computer (this is mind bogglingly ridiculous to me) and that the…

jereApr 22, 2016View on HNParent context

I liked Seth Lloyd's earlier paper better: http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/9908043

scottlocklinJun 28, 2015View on HNParent context

A note -- if you're linking to arXiv, it's better to link to the abstract (http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/9908043, or http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/9908043v3 for this particular version) rather than directly to the PDF. From the abstract, one can easily click through to the PDF…

SniffnoyMay 31, 2015View on HNParent context

There is another more fundamental limit, credited to Margolus and Levitin [1], which puts the maximum speed of a (quantum) gate at 2E / h operations per second for a system of energy E and Planck constant h. Given the energy of the sun quoted in the article, this puts the upper…

pbsdMay 26, 2014View on HNParent context

Read this in the past and there's a few things that bother me * It's impossible to simulate a universe of our current resolution, because it would take more matter than the original universe. * You can't just simulate 'observable areas'. Everything needs to be simulated. * An…

achilleFeb 20, 2014View on HNParent context

http://arxiv.org/pdf/quant-ph/9908043.pdf

tobiasuJun 14, 2013View on HNParent context

Programming the Universe by Seth Lloyd (physics professor at MIT who likes to call himself a "quantum mechanic"). Here's a relevant paper by Lloyd titled "Ultimate physical limits to computation": http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/9908043v3

anateusOct 15, 2012View on HNParent context

It uses energy to do so— just like a heat pump can heat your home with greater output than electrical input, but not no electrical input. The more exciting detail is that computation itself doesn't increase entropy, at least not if reversible computing is use. Only errors or…

nullcMar 11, 2012View on HNParent context

> Suppose that there is a network that is never partitioned, and machines connected to that network that never fail. In that case consistency and availability should be perfect. You mean, in that case tolerance to partition and availability should be perfect. > Perhaps someday…

sigilApr 25, 2011View on HNParent context

The Ultimate Physical Limits of Computation: http://arxiv.org/pdf/quant-ph/9908043

adrianNFeb 26, 2011View on HNParent context

Hm. It appears Blogspot ate my comments. So I guess I'll just paste it here. --- > The "for a time" bit is crucial. There is as Feynman said "plenty of room at the bottom" but it is by no means infinite given actually demonstrated physics. That means all growth curves that look…

gwernJan 18, 2011View on HNParent context

Agreed. Unfortunately the Nature article is behind a paywall but the original paper is available on arxiv: http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/9908043

dschobelNov 20, 2010View on HNParent context