Using photonics for real-time processing.

[krw]

and wireless networks? are they all wireless?

Absolutely! They have less wires.

 

[Don Bowey]

On May 27, 8:35 pm, Sjouke Burry
[....]
Radium invented trolling.
(Oh and he also invented questions with a maximum
stupidity content).

Trolling was around long before Radium. His ideas may be a waste of
time but he doesn't seem to be causing trouble on purpose. He also
doesn't interject into others peoples conversions. I have yet to see
him attempt to insult anyone.

Notice that the only people I "insulted" were those that insulted him,
and that was damned near everyone that responded to him.

Oh, and this is USENET. There are no "other people's conversations".

Nice try though, and thanks for not being yet another idiot on the
"lets beat up Radium" bandwagon, even though you do appear to be running
along side the "lets call Jack a troll" bandwagon.

Now I'm a little worried - does telling him, "build one and show us how
it's done - so far, everyone thinks it's impossible" constitute picking
on him?

Thanks,
Rich

Were I you, I wouldn't wouldn't give a thought to what DarkTard thinks.

 

[Michael A. Terrell]

and wireless networks? are they all wireless?

No. some need coax.


--
Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
prove it.
Member of DAV #85.

Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida

 

[Bob Myers]

Well, this PC I describe is as photonic [with lasers and no LEDs] as
practical. Maybe not purely-optical, but as laser-based as it can be
and still be efficient.

If we're going to bring efficiency and practicality into our
list of concerns...then how about "none" in terms of the
"photonics" content?

Yes. By the same token, let's say there are two laser-circuited chips
of the same capacity [let's say 4 GB]. Chip A uses 780nm lasers, while
chip B uses 400nm lasers. Chip B can be made smaller than chip A,
because B uses shorter wavelength, and hence can be use smaller
structures for the same amount of data.

Sorry, not the same thing. Your original interest in short-wavelength
light was based on a notion about the "bandwidth" (data rate)
available with, say, blue vs. red. If you are SOLELY concerned
about storage capacity, then the blue-light special MAY give you
greater capacity (or it may not - it would depend on the specific
storage mechanism and the limits imposed by other practical
concerns). The point is that comparing a CD to a Blu-Ray disc
may not be all that appropriate in terms of selecting your light for
a system like this, IF it were practical in the first place.

Bob M.

 

[Bob Myers]

There are already segments of optical network links that are all
optical.

And now our friend Jack will work on his reading
comprehension, specifically the distinctions implied in
the phrases "purely optical system" vs. "segments of
optical network links."

Bob M.

 

[Radium]

Well, this PC I describe is as photonic [with lasers and no LEDs] as
practical. Maybe not purely-optical, but as laser-based as it can be
and still be efficient.

If we're going to bring efficiency and practicality into our
list of concerns...then how about "none" in terms of the
"photonics" content?

How is photonics impractical and inefficient?

Yes. By the same token, let's say there are two laser-circuited chips
of the same capacity [let's say 4 GB]. Chip A uses 780nm lasers, while
chip B uses 400nm lasers. Chip B can be made smaller than chip A,
because B uses shorter wavelength, and hence can be use smaller
structures for the same amount of data.

Sorry, not the same thing. Your original interest in short-wavelength
light was based on a notion about the "bandwidth" (data rate)
available with, say, blue vs. red. If you are SOLELY concerned
about storage capacity, then the blue-light special MAY give you
greater capacity (or it may not - it would depend on the specific
storage mechanism and the limits imposed by other practical
concerns). The point is that comparing a CD to a Blu-Ray disc
may not be all that appropriate in terms of selecting your light for
a system like this, IF it were practical in the first place.

I just like 400nm because it's the sweetspot between highest frequency
and non-ionizing radiation. Generally, shorter-wavelengths make for
faster computing. Also, a laser with a shorter wavelength might
require less thickness than a laser with a longer wavelength.

Moreover, the reason, I brought up photonics, is because it can
perform more operations per second and more complicated computations
rapidly without requiring fans.

If I want a fast system that does not rely much on ROM and at the same
time, does not need a cooling system, then photonics is one way to
solve [or at least mitigate] this problem.

 

[Bob Myers]

How is photonics impractical and inefficient?

See pretty much every response you've had in this thread
to date. Starting with the "impractical" aspect first, you
will, to create a "photonic" system such as you describe,
require the purely optical equivalent of the transistor. The
moment you can describe in detail how one of those would
work, please get back to us.

Bob M.

 

[JackShephard]

No shit? Who wudda ever thunk that optical networks would be
optical. Dimmy, you're the dumbest.

Yet another boat which you completely missed, as usual.

 

[JackShephard]

On May 27, 8:35 pm, Sjouke Burry
[....]
Radium invented trolling.
(Oh and he also invented questions with a maximum
stupidity content).

Trolling was around long before Radium. His ideas may be a waste of
time but he doesn't seem to be causing trouble on purpose. He also
doesn't interject into others peoples conversions. I have yet to see
him attempt to insult anyone.

Notice that the only people I "insulted" were those that insulted him,
and that was damned near everyone that responded to him.

Oh, and this is USENET. There are no "other people's conversations".

Nice try though, and thanks for not being yet another idiot on the
"lets beat up Radium" bandwagon, even though you do appear to be running
along side the "lets call Jack a troll" bandwagon.

Now I'm a little worried - does telling him, "build one and show us how
it's done - so far, everyone thinks it's impossible" constitute picking
on him?

You obviously didn't read the thread. He was jumped on so hard that he
has tire tracks all over him.

Though there may not be any optical computers, there are certainly
optical nets, and things are moving toward less and less electronics and
more and more optical gear in network links., and yes, I meant ALL
optical.

 

[JackShephard]

Were I you, I wouldn't wouldn't give a thought to what DarkTard thinks.

I guess that makes you the trolling, stalking bastard.

 

[krw]

Yet another boat which you completely missed, as usual.

No Dimbulb, I'm not the one who's all wet.

 

[Lionel]

On Sat, 26 May 2007 20:51:24 -0700, JackShepherd
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Do these people know that you're forging their 'SOMEPLACEINTIME.ORG'
domain, Prongy?

---
whois Someplaceintime.org
[Querying whois.publicinterestregistry.net]
[whois.publicinterestregistry.net]
NOTICE: Access to .ORG WHOIS information is provided to assist persons
in
determining the contents of a domain name registration record in the
Public Interest Registry
registry database. The data in this record is provided by Public
Interest Registry
for informational purposes only, and Public Interest Registry does not
guarantee its
accuracy. This service is intended only for query-based access. You
agree
that you will use this data only for lawful purposes and that, under
no
circumstances will you use this data to: (a) allow, enable, or
otherwise
support the transmission by e-mail, telephone, or facsimile of mass
unsolicited, commercial advertising or solicitations to entities other
than
the data recipient's own existing customers; or (b) enable high
volume,
automated, electronic processes that send queries or data to the
systems of
Registry Operator or any ICANN-Accredited Registrar, except as
reasonably
necessary to register domain names or modify existing registrations.
All
rights reserved. Public Interest Registry reserves the right to modify
these terms at any
time. By submitting this query, you agree to abide by this policy.

Domain ID146352098-LROR
Domain Name:SOMEPLACEINTIME.ORG
Created On:19-May-2007 05:33:07 UTC
Last Updated On:19-May-2007 05:33:09 UTC
Expiration Date:19-May-2009 05:33:07 UTC
Sponsoring Registrar:Go Daddy Software, Inc. (R91-LROR)
Status:CLIENT DELETE PROHIBITED
Status:CLIENT RENEW PROHIBITED
Status:CLIENT TRANSFER PROHIBITED
Status:CLIENT UPDATE PROHIBITED
Status:TRANSFER PROHIBITED
Registrant ID:GODA-031753197
Registrant Name:JUDITH P MAGGIORE
Registrant Street1:25940 North 115th Place
Registrant Street2:
Registrant Street3:
Registrant City:Scottsdale
Registrant State/Province:Arizona
Registrant Postal Code:85255-5771
Registrant Country:US
Registrant Phone:+1.4805857372
Registrant Phone Ext.:
Registrant FAX:
Registrant FAX Ext.:
Registrant Email:[email protected]
Admin ID:GODA-231753197
Admin Name:JUDITH P MAGGIORE
Admin Street1:25940 North 115th Place
Admin Street2:
Admin Street3:
Admin City:Scottsdale
Admin State/Province:Arizona
Admin Postal Code:85255-5771
Admin Country:US
Admin Phone:+1.4805857372

 

[purpurroterwald]

On Sat, 26 May 2007 20:51:24 -0700, JackShepherd
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Do these people know that you're forging their 'SOMEPLACEINTIME.ORG'
domain, Prongy?

You mean the prongtard didn't bother to check to see if his "fake" email
domain might actually be *real* before he used it? I am shocked that such
a brilliant man could be so sloppy.

 

[Lionel]

On 30 May 2007 04:11:08 GMT, purpurroterwald <[email protected]>

You mean the prongtard didn't bother to check to see if his "fake" email
domain might actually be *real* before he used it? I am shocked that such
a brilliant man could be so sloppy.

I, too, am shocked & dismayed by this unexpected development.

--
\___ Proud Cog #1 in the AUK Hate Machine
_(AUK)====:: Do *you* think that you have the Right Stuff?
/='='='='-, Apply TODAY by addressing a gratuitously cruel
(O+O+O+O+O) flame to: "Uncle Fester", C/O soc.singles & AUK.
~^^^^^^^^^~~~^~^^~'~~^'^~~~"~~'"~^~'"~~^~"~'~^'^~^~^^~^~"~^~"'~'"~^~~

 

[JackShephard]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Do these people know that you're forging their 'SOMEPLACEINTIME.ORG'
domain, Prongy?

Doesn't even exist, dumbass.

 

[JackShephard]

You mean the prongtard didn't bother to check to see if his "fake" email
domain might actually be *real* before he used it? I am shocked that such
a brilliant man could be so sloppy.

My first post was before they established, idiot.

 

[Lamey The Cable guy]

My first post was before they established, idiot.

Bwahahahahahaha!!!! That lame excuse is worse then any I made up.

--
Usenet lits score:

GIT-R-DONE!
alt.usenet.legends.lamey
http://blu05.port5.com
AUK Offishal Tinfoil Sombrero award 05/07
#20 Usenet asshole
#6 Lits Slut
#9 Cog in the AUK Hate Machine
<approved by Lionel>
#11 Most posting trolls/hunters/flonkers 2007
#1 Disenfranchised AUK Kookologist.
#1 AUK Galactic Killfile Award

Oh fer fucksakes. Welcome to my killfile you annoying little gnat.

<working on one of them specheel AUK awards>

 

[Lionel]

On Wed, 30 May 2007 12:47:49 GMT, Lamey The Cable guy boggled at how

Bwahahahahahaha!!!! That lame excuse is worse then any I made up.

Now you know why everyone calls him "Prongtard".

--
\___ Proud Cog #1 in the AUK Hate Machine
_(AUK)====:: Do *you* think that you have the Right Stuff?
/='='='='-, Apply TODAY by addressing a gratuitously cruel
(O+O+O+O+O) flame to: "Uncle Fester", C/O soc.singles & AUK.
~^^^^^^^^^~~~^~^^~'~~^'^~~~"~~'"~^~'"~~^~"~'~^'^~^~^^~^~"~^~"'~'"~^~~

 

[Lionel]

On Wed, 30 May 2007 04:31:49 -0700, JackShephard
<[email protected]> boggled at how lame the

My first post was before they established, idiot.

You really are an incorrigible net-abuser, Prongtard. I hope you're
grateful for the fact that we're not the kind of netkopping cowards
who'd report your multiple, unrepentant forgeries of the
"Someplaceintime.org" domain to the owners of that domain, & to
[email protected].

--
\___ Proud Cog #1 in the AUK Hate Machine
_(AUK)====:: Do *you* think that you have the Right Stuff?
/='='='='-, Apply TODAY by addressing a gratuitously cruel
(O+O+O+O+O) flame to: "Uncle Fester", C/O soc.singles & AUK.
~^^^^^^^^^~~~^~^^~'~~^'^~~~"~~'"~^~'"~~^~"~'~^'^~^~^^~^~"~^~"'~'"~^~~

 

[Lamey The Cable guy]

On Wed, 30 May 2007 04:31:49 -0700, JackShephard
<[email protected]> boggled at how lame the


You really are an incorrigible net-abuser, Prongtard. I hope you're
grateful for the fact that we're not the kind of netkopping cowards
who'd report your multiple, unrepentant forgeries of the
"Someplaceintime.org" domain to the owners of that domain, & to
[email protected].

I might, He netkopped me to Caputo, even though Chris laffed@him. My
turn?

--
Usenet lits score:

GIT-R-DONE!
alt.usenet.legends.lamey
http://blu05.port5.com
AUK Offishal Tinfoil Sombrero award 05/07
#20 Usenet asshole
#6 Lits Slut
#9 Cog in the AUK Hate Machine
<approved by Lionel>
#11 Most posting trolls/hunters/flonkers 2007
#1 Disenfranchised AUK Kookologist.
#1 AUK Galactic Killfile Award

Oh fer fucksakes. Welcome to my killfile you annoying little gnat.

<working on one of them specheel AUK awards>