20200129, 09:25  #12  
Bamboozled!
May 2003
Down not across
2^{2}·2,549 Posts 
Quote:
Anyway, if you are hypothesizing computers on that scale you would probably be better off using not atomic but nuclear matter. Clock speeds would be thousands to millions of times faster. 

20200129, 19:41  #13  
∂^{2}ω=0
Sep 2002
República de California
11,423 Posts 
Quote:
o I used 1 bit per H atom in my estimate, but H is in fact likely bad because it wants to form molecules. So perhaps a noblegas like He will prove more suitable. Also, cleverer people than us will likely figure out how to coherently store multiple bits per atom at some point. Sure, such heavier elements have larger atoms, but the atomic radius increases much more slowly than the atomic complexity, i.e. the potential bitness of the atoms; o We've said nothing about taking advantage of quantum behavior, which is likely going to prove crucial to realizing such an atomic processor. Note that quantum entanglement doesn't allow us to make the processor arbitrarily fast  even "spooky action at distance" must obey the speedoflight limit on net *information* transmittal, and a convolution is all about transmitting information about the state of each point  whether that be a point in spacetime or a data element in a discrete convolution  to all of the other points. But quantum effects might be used to manipulate such an atomic array in a coherent fashion so as to effect a desired computation. BoseEinstein condensates have already proved very promising in this regard, no reason they couldn't move well beyond simple atomic clocks to more interesting behavior. And quite possibly by the point where humankind has developed the ability to coherentle manipulate the requisite number of quantum data elements, it'll be just as easy, or easier, to just completely factor MM61 than to perform a dinosaurian nonfactorial primality test, with its endlessly frustrating (in the case of compositeness, which is the overwhelmingly likely outcome for numbers the size of MM61) "I can tell you whether this number is prime or not, but I can tell you nothing about its prime factors except whether they be 1 or more than 1 in number" aspect. We shall see  let's meet up here again in 136 years, ok? Last fiddled with by ewmayer on 20200129 at 19:47 

20200129, 19:55  #14  
Undefined
"The unspeakable one"
Jun 2006
My evil lair
1010111111110_{2} Posts 
Quote:


20200129, 20:35  #15 
Bamboozled!
May 2003
Down not across
2^{2}×2,549 Posts 
I refer the right honourable gentleman to the answer I gave a moment ago
Similarly, I have already explained how it is possible, in principle, to store an arbitrarily large number of bits in a single hydrogen atom. For those here with a limited attention span, remember that the principal quantum number in a Rydberg atom is an unbounded integer. 
Thread Tools  
Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
A Theoretical (vs. Proficient/Practical) Deterministic Primality Test  a1call  Miscellaneous Math  194  20180319 05:54 
Primality testing nonMersennes  lukerichards  Software  8  20180124 22:30 
Testing an expression for primality  1260  Software  17  20150828 01:35 
a new Deterministic primality testing  wsc812  Computer Science & Computational Number Theory  36  20130304 06:25 
a new primality testing method  jasong  Math  1  20071106 21:46 