= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
jacob_cannell comments on Exploitation and cooperation in ecology, government, business, and AI - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (43)
The general idea is that because of the speed of light limitation, a computer's maximum speed and communication efficiency is always inversely proportional to its size.
The ultimate computer is thus necessarily dense to the point of gravitational collapse. See seth lloyd's limits of computation paper for the details.
Any old hum-dum really big computer wouldn't have to collapse into a big hole - but any ultimate computer would have to. In fact, the size of the computer isn't even an issue. The ultimate configuration of any matter (in theory) for computation must have ultimately high density to maximum speed and minimize inter-component delay.
What about the uncertainty principle as component size decreases?
look up seth lloyd and on his wikipedia page the 1st link down there is "ultimate physical limits of computation"
the uncertainty principle limits the maximum information storage per gram of mass and the maximum computation rate in terms of bit ops per energy unit, he discusses all that.
However, the uncertainty principle is only really a limitation for classical computers. A quantum computer doesn't have that issue (he discusses classical only, an ultimate quantum computer would be enormously more powerful)