From: Henry Baker
Subject: Re: Switching (was: Will Java VM kill Lisp? How to fight it.)
Date:
Message-ID: <hbaker-0904972321510001@10.0.2.1>
In article <·············@BellAtlantic.net>, ·····@BellAtlantic.net wrote:
> Robert Harley wrote:
> > ······@netcom.com (Henry Baker) writes:
> > > [...]
> > > The current assumption is that fast necessarily means 'hot' (in
> > > temperature and dissipation), although I can find nothing in my
> > > physics books that even remotely implies this connection.
>
> As Rob says, "take a closer look at your physics books."
> Computation is currently achieved by moving physical objects
> from one place to another as a means of symbolizing information.
> Moving these symbols around takes WORK since the symbols are
> physical things (beads, cams, relay contacts, electrons) and
> that work generates heat due to friction (see the first and
> second laws of thermodynamics).
Of course this is complete hogwash. You won't find anything in any of
your physics books that says that moving 'symbols' of 'information' requires
WORK. In fact, one of the major failures of physics in the 20th century
is its complete inability to integrate any theory of 'information' with
physics at all. Yes, I know that some of the best and brightest are working
on this exact problem (Feynmann, Wheeler, Hawking, etc.), but they haven't
done it yet.
BTW, this ignorance holds for both classical and quantum physics. In some
sense, the classical situation is hopeless, because it seems to imply that
it is possible to store and detect an infinite amount of information in a
finite amount of space-time, energy-momentum, or whatever. Since few people
actually believe this, it actually is another argument for quanta.
From: Paul DeMone
Subject: Re: Switching (was: Will Java VM kill Lisp? How to fight it.)
Date:
Message-ID: <334C9644.77C9@EasyInternet.net>
Henry Baker wrote:
[snip]
> Of course this is complete hogwash. You won't find anything in any of
> your physics books that says that moving 'symbols' of 'information' requires
> WORK. In fact, one of the major failures of physics in the 20th century
> is its complete inability to integrate any theory of 'information' with
> physics at all. Yes, I know that some of the best and brightest are working
> on this exact problem (Feynmann, Wheeler, Hawking, etc.), but they haven't
> done it yet.
I doubt Feynmann will solve it anytime soon :-(
[snip]
--
Paul W. DeMone The 801 experiment SPARCed an ARMs race
Kanata, Ontario to put more PRECISION and POWER into
······@mosaid.com architectures with MIPSed results but
··········@EasyInternet.net ALPHA's well that ends well.
Henry Baker wrote:
>
>In article <·············@BellAtlantic.net>, ·····@BellAtlantic.net wrote:
>>Robert Harley wrote:
>>>······@netcom.com (Henry Baker) writes:
>>>>[...]
>>>>The current assumption is that fast necessarily means 'hot' (in
>>>>temperature and dissipation), although I can find nothing in my
>>>>physics books that even remotely implies this connection.
>>
>>As Rob says, "take a closer look at your physics books."
>>Computation is currently achieved by moving physical objects
>>from one place to another as a means of symbolizing information.
>>Moving these symbols around takes WORK since the symbols are
>>physical things (beads, cams, relay contacts, electrons) and
>>that work generates heat due to friction (see the first and
>>second laws of thermodynamics).
>
>Of course this is complete hogwash. You won't find anything in any of
>your physics books that says that moving 'symbols' of 'information' requires
>WORK.
Hogwash is as hogwash does, and IMHO you need to keep your pigs cleaner.
The post said you couldn't compute without moving [...] electrons from
place to place, thus generating heat each time. Moving "symbols" OTOH
may not generate heat, I grant you - other than your or my hot breath
;-)
[...]
Joe H
From: Henry Baker
Subject: Re: Switching (was: Will Java VM kill Lisp? How to fight it.)
Date:
Message-ID: <hbaker-1304971204130001@10.0.2.1>
In article <·············@churchill.columbiasc.ncr.com>, Joe Hinrichs
<········@churchill.columbiasc.ncr.com> wrote:
> The post said you couldn't compute without moving [...] electrons from
> place to place, thus generating heat each time. Moving "symbols" OTOH
> may not generate heat.
Well, maybe it's time to stop moving electrons around to transfer information.
Photons don't seem to generate any heat, at least until you 'detect' them.
You probably can't do nonlinear operations that way, but there are lots of
linear operations being done inside computers -- fft's, pseudorandom
number generation, lots of physics simulations. So maybe a computer
will be built in which linear ops go fast, and nonlinear ops cost heat,
time, & money.