It's over

Just in time for PICs to become workable.

OP is a crazy anxious degenerate posting on Veeky Forums.

>artificial neurons
Just don't forget about solar energy.
Solar energy + artificial neurons = singularity

Most of modern AI and graphics is either DSP or is very close.

>DSP
w-what

I was doing my PhD in Computer Science. Thanks to OP's insight I quit, just before submitting my thesis. I feel much better for not wasting my time anymore.

>implying that quantum computers are useless and immediately mentions two of the most important fields

1. So if it's not good for Call of Duty it's useless?

and 2, How did you figure out quantum computer wouldn't be usable for games? if you can manipulate data, then you can make games, so what the actual fuck are you crying about?

Don't forget about crispr gene editing. You could encode trees to produce artificial neurons and create electricity.

crispr + solar energy + artificial neurons = avatar tree of souls

>180 picometers
The fuck? More on this.

You were wasting your time already if your computer science PhD had anything to do with actual computers and the singularity.

I tried to tell people about my idea for this years ago, but they all told me I was a stupid braindead shithead who ought to crawl off and die in some gutter if not more ideally kill myself on the spot.

It more or less involved a number of plants that would grow together and communicate to figure where and if it should extend or generate a given limb or root component, at a given time. They would serve as a self repairing, self maintaining, and self load balancing power and communications grid. No more cell phones, you'd just need a plant nearby. Radio and microwaves influence ion channels, and machinery could be designed to amplify and take advantage of this.

abc.net.au/science/articles/2012/02/20/3434739.htm

explain

what about sticking to being humans?

>10nm
To the trash

It's almost like we're getting to the end of the free ride and might actually have to start putting some effort in.

Just put more chips in that bitch obviously.

We don't need to get any further though by 2021 graphics on VR headsets will be pretty good and then we can just live in virtual worlds

>what is cloud computing
>what is AI-based program optimization
It's literally nothing.

That sounds incredibly impossible, though I'd love to see the logistics behind it, and research done if it's even mildly feasible.

make eywa great again

And yet my computer still lags, life is unfair

If we go to organic transistors we can approx. reach 0.3 nm or something in that order, with a fully conjugated polymer. That gives us maybe 4 halving's after 5nm

Good, maybe video game developers will start making good games instead of shit games with pretty graphics

You are a stupid braindead shithead who ought to crawl off and die in some gutter if not more ideally kill myself on the spot.

B-but I thought quantum computers could solve NP-complete problems in a reasonable amount of time, user-kun.

Dude, exclusion for dividing by zero does that too.

So what, who needs exponential technological growth?

Kurtzweil cultists on suicide watch

Funny thing is I used to have so much more fun playing awesome games with shitty graphics than vice versa.

How would solving the P=NP problem change anything?

I think people were upset because I included internal structures built with a spine of selenium and bioluminescent cells on an opposite side, to act as deliberately large mimicries of FETs. They were just for certain switching and hard gating mechanisms.

I think it's possible, especially with a model of decentralized energy production.

It is possible to build a spine of selenium and biolumiescent cells?

>1. So if it's not good for Call of Duty it's useless?
If it won't at least run Angry Birds, it doesn't belong in the same category as mainstream computers, at least not so far as relates to OP's post.

n == 1 || p == 0

omfg...

In chemistry its putting P on Pole, then doublebonding N from another then P still leaving the pressure of polarity, If N is actually doublebonded, it shouldnt happen to have P=N=P

The cellular machinery in the plant just needs to be aware of what structure it's generating, and signal accordingly to neighboring cells throughout the process.

The selenium spine would just be a narrow crystalline sheet on the outer surface of a small tendril (either properly insulated by something, or in a small hollow chamber) that would grow between the source and the drain. I'm not sure the exact composition it would need, or in what way the plant would synthesize and arrange it.

The bioluminescent cells would be triggered when the plant is undergoing a macro state change that has to do with routing, which would be tied to fault tolerance, growth, possibly logic for communications routing (this is better handled by actual switch stations).

Oh that's true, so that basically comes down to how the cells can replicate just the amount the instructions tell them to..

What kind of experiments could we do to find more information about that topic? It's very useful

You could make it so you have to hit them with sticks in a complicated rhythm to talk to them.

I encourage you, don't let stupid people like that let you down, ever. The world needs more people like you.

And I'd actually like to know more about that, maybe even to the point of co-operation.

The materials will change, the process will change, the design will change, etc. Just because silicon will cap out doesn't mean that an industry with billions of dollars behind it will simply decide "well, guess were finished."

Even money has to bow to reality.

>single core performance is the only measure of computer efficiency
Reee.

You need to stop posting here.

Too late. Better if it had stopped at 1 µm.

I need sources OP.

Good. You didn't had a passion for it.

The end of singularity?
What does this mean for AI?

youtube.com/watch?v=xcHcNyC6O84

post link to paper plz?

Tell that to Yellen and the Fed

>If something isn't improving at an exponential rate, it's obviously completely stagnant!

Someone's a Millenial, I see. Computers over the past 50-odd years are the *only* technology in history that has blown up like this, and in every other field for the entirety of human history it has been normal for technology to improve by punctuated equilibrium and gradual improvement.

There's actually a *lot* of potential avenues for improving computer technology - the breakneck research pace demanded by Moore's law has meant that research avenues that can't be trusted to deliver within a reliable timescale have been ignored, and with the technology iterating so quickly there's been very little time to learn to optimize it, or to specialize it. While business as usual was doubling every couple of years, other experimental technologies had no chance to catch up - so many diverse technologies delivered real improvement over silicon, but by the time they could be turned into products, silicon surpassed them and there was no need.

With the end of doubling, there will be a vast expansion *sideways*, in terms of diversity and specialisation. This isn't the extinction of computer technology, this is the dawn of its Permian explosion.

(That said, Intel and the like are going to go through turbulent times. The status quo is doomed. But the end of an era doesn't mean it's not the beginning of another one.)

>No more computational progression.
>Only 5 years left of progress.
language and logic are pretty much done for as well

>180 picometer transistor
>In 2012, a single-atom transistor was fabricated using a phosphorus atom bound to a silicon surface (between two significantly larger electrodes). This transistor could be said to be a 180 picometer transistor, the Van der Waals radius of a phosphorus atom; though its covalent radius bound to silicon is likely smaller.
Nothing too exciting yet.
abc.net.au/science/articles/2012/02/20/3434739.htm
nature.com/nnano/journal/v7/n4/full/nnano.2012.21.html

>but they all told me I was a stupid braindead shithead who ought to crawl off and die in some gutter if not more ideally kill myself on the spot.
They were right

> silicon is finished
> OMG COMPUTERS ARE FINISHED
Veeky Forums

3nm
2.7nm
2.5nm
2.4nm
2.2nm
2.1nm

You haven't seen robotics yet

Didn't we just go full circle with computers now? We started with Big Iron, worked our way to make all that shit smaller and smaller until the physics themselves are refusing to work with this. Now quantum computers are once again are only found in singular places around the world. I personally think quantum computers are gonna be huge once we start figuring out how they work as currently we're only scratching the surface. OP is just retarded.

bro have you tried to solve a fucking 20 by 20 sudoku board.

Who's this dude I'd fuck this dude

I think it's just a larger vulva.

Though I've been trying to figure what seems off about the hips and waist.

As much as I would love for computer to cease advancing and go no further, It just won't turn out that way.

Holy shit LMAO!

>semiconductor

God I hate thin people trying to show off their disgusting bodies.

digital signal processing, I think?

Sup

>Computer's are

>Even if we find a new material, it will last a decade or so before it reaches atom-level.

Even if we find a new paradigm, it will only give a 2^10 fold improvement before it reaches thermodynamical limits.

You're computer is misconfigured then. I have a PDA with a 500MHz arm CPU and 512MB of ram set up exactly the same way my laptop is and everything runs smoothly and pretty much the same (compiling takes longer of course). By 1990 high end desktops had enough abilities and computing power that the only reason people kept buying faster computers is so programmers could be lazy. (And for the better games)
Also, this.

*Your

We're just getting started. We still got pm.

>still no one said anything about treelinks.

And you're not helping, fggot

>ledamonsterbunny
>10 seconds to confirm image search

I thought Veeky Forums was the smart board or something

Aside from any radical novel new ways of computing I don't know of the only (relatively) near-term options within the realm of possibilty are different substrate materials, advanced fabrication techniques such as Gate-All-Around (to any silly anons, 3D logic chips aren't viable for high performance due to heat), and further out the possibility of optical interconnects. Optical is the most fascinating to me because we will always be constrained by signal propagation delay, though theoretically this would provide a "mere" 50% boost to signal speed.

Also that 10s of Ghz graphene chip was a single transistor. Simple bleeding-edge single transistor silicon devices can switch much faster than the typical 4-5Ghz as well. Again, signal propagation limits.

>No more computational progression

Avogadro's number is 6e23 - this is roughly the number of molecules you can stick into 12g.

Looking at this chart, you'll see eight different energy states. Each of the eight states will form layers in solution, so they can be pumped into a compartment, modified, and then siphoned and isolated based upon mass. By mixing them together, you get a complex structure of the eight states - freeze it into place to store date for long periods of time, or heat it up to write.

>No they're useless for anything other than encryption and quantum physics simulation

Their encryption is potentially perfect, and if you can model QM you can model everything in the universe at it's smallest level, and derive correct predictions of macroscopic behavior instantly.

They say that QE can't be used for FTL communication - but that's only true for information which wasn't shared before you created a distance greater than c between you and the person you're talking to. I can entangle two particles in terms of velocity and vector, and if I push one I push the other.

The thing is, I can entangle things backwards through time;

>arxiv.org/abs/1209.4191
>Using entanglement swapping between two temporally separated photon pairs we entangle one photon from the first pair with another photon from the second pair. The first photon was detected even before the other was created

So the person I'm talking to can actually hear me before I speak. Just wanting to talk to you and assuring I pick up the phone and dial your number in the near future makes you receive a phone call from me before I actually pick the phone up and call you.

So after you modelled a macroscopic object and tested your prediction against reality, you could give yourself the right answer.

If the possibility of being right exists at all, you'll get the right answer on the first shot.

This post is the perfect example of "not even wrong"

So than what about how this model predicts FTL sound in the macroscopic world;

>scitation.aip.org/content/aip/journal/apl/90/1/10.1063/1.2423240
>Sound beyond the speed of light: Measurement of negative group velocity in an acoustic loop filter

I'm sorry if you can't trust papers, accept logic or respect a man with more credentials than either of us, who was right while Stephen Hawking was wrong.

can't they just stack cores ontop of one another like pancakes? they did the same with harddisks, and now also with certain memory modules.

That'll be though certain materials.

La salsa por favor

It's posts like these that make me love Veeky Forums and come back yet again for more.

Some of you guys have an imagination worth my time. I have no idea if this idea is feasible, but then again, I'm a science-fiction writer so it doesn't really matter. Keep posting this good shit, my man.

Clearly you haven't read the paper you linked.

"It is now generally agreed that all of these superluminal phenomena do not violate special relativity or causality and, in particular, it has been shown that the speed of information transmission is subluminal."

According to the paper, FTL sound is all around us.

Quantum entanglement can be imagined as a perfectly ridged rod connecting two particles across time, not space - a clearer understanding is that the two entangled particles are actually one particle, smeared across space.

What defines distance? Susskind says it's quantum DISentanglement - that smear branches like a tree, and distance is the relative positions of two branches to one another. Everything is entangled to everything else, but the degree to which any two particles at any given time are entangled creates space.

In a closed timelike loop, this looks like a tree whose branches curl back toward the ground, and fuse with the roots. A dipole with no neighbors ejects photons from one pole, and absorbs them with the opposite pole.

Eternalism tells us that all future moments have already happened - this is why the future can effect the past. Through QE, particles can transfer quantum states FTL, and into the future and past. Time moves in more than one direction, and so does causality.

Hugh Everett said all this back in the 60's, and everyone else has been desperately trying to rescue free will from superdeterminism. There must be some organic difference, because I've never been attached to free will - you either understand the universe as a single, monist, self-aware object, or you see it as many dead objects and a few warm bodies against the IR blackness.

A closed timelike loop multiplies energy and matter, because it makes frame 1 and frame 100 identical - frame 1 and frame 100 share identical states. Since the ending state is identical to the beginning state, frame 99 has to transfer enough energy to frame 1/100 to start the cycle.

As you increase your E, you increase your distance. So, we'd expect to see the rest of the universe receeding from us, and we'd expect to see evidence of invisible energy and matter from points in the timeline we aren't in at the moment.

They just made a quantum logic gate that works with 99.9% precision.

>"It is now generally agreed that all of these superluminal phenomena do not violate special relativity or causality

Because it doesn't.

>and, in particular, it has been shown that the speed of information transmission is subluminal."

That statement is made under the presumption that FTL travel violates causality, and is made out a sincere desire to maintain logical consistancy. However, explainations exist which allow FTL motion without local FTL movement.

Note how in the paper, they speak of FTL group velocities. This is key, because what's happening is that within high energy space, c is X1.00, and within lower energy space, c is X0.01. Observed from either local position, c is 299,720,000m/s - observing high energy space from low energy space however makes high energy space appear to transfer states at FTL speeds.

When we look at the jets of blackholes such as M87, we observe superluminal motion. When 'corrected,' the jets are stated to have a velocity close to c - which is locally true. Blackholes are no longer thought to have a singularity, so the jet is caused by the blackhole backing up. We have evidence for such blackhole fountains;

>nasa.gov/feature/goddard/nasa-s-hubble-finds-evidence-of-galaxy-star-birth-regulated-by-black-hole-fountain

However, matter is still spaghettified. A perfectly ridged rod can be imagined as a single particle smeared across space - if it's longer than a LY and it moves, it'll seem as if a quantum state is transfering FTL.

In terms of practical application, this means that if you set yourself between two of these particle smears and push one the one behind you, what's happening is you're transfering your states into a region of space which is shorter than the space you're in.

Air pressure works the same way, with hotter, higher-volume air rising, and colder, lower-volume air falling. This can occur FTL - the universe is expanding faster than light.

What this means is that if you imagine two spheres, one inside the other, and expand the one sphere faster than the other, the lines connecting the geodesics of the two spheres will curve and elongate. These lines can elongate FTL.

If you imagine yourself within a sphere, which itself is in a meta-sphere, and imagine your sphere connected to another sphere within the meta-sphere by lines leading to and from the geodesics, the distance between you and the second sphere within the meta-sphere is the length of the lines.

If distance is defined as the number of quantum particles along a line, we can say that the larger the 'pixels,' the lower the resolution, and the lower the distance. Since quantum entanglement is defined as two particles sharing identical states, QE entails that the line is very low resolution.

Not all the lines coming from your geodesics to the same object are the same length - some can be shorter than others. QE is monogamous, in the sense that only two particles can be 100% entangled. Every line has to be different, or it'll be identical to another line.

Around blackholes, all the lines can become the same - blackholes are supposedly 'bald.' The lines fuse into a single vector, which forms a U-turn right back out of the blackhole. This means that all matter goes into a closed timelike loop.

You'd expect to see the history of the universe reflected in this smear, with the older, high metal stars nearer to the core and the younger, low metal stars towards the rim. This exactly what we see.

>Computers over the past 50-odd years are the *only* technology in history that has blown up like this, and in every other field for the entirety of human history it has been normal for technology to improve by punctuated equilibrium and gradual improvement.
Technically rockets did too. In my 1911 encyclopaedia rockets are fireworks, in my 1984 encyclopaedia rockets are moon ships.

Thats because in 1911 rockets hadn't put a man on the moon and in 1984 they had you fag

So what if we reach the limit.
It just means that I won't be buying a new PC every 2-3 years.
It also means programmers would start optimizing their code.

Quantum computers are shit, I agree. They are better in some very rare and special situations. And they will always be slower than conventional computers. Because regular computers don't need to calculate the same thing 1000 times, to be sure the answer is correct.
Computers are not finished, from now on they will always be with us. I's just Moore's law that's finished.