EdEarl

Maybe: Manycore Processor with On-Chip Optical Network Engineering a Bandwidth-Scalable Optical Layer for a 3D Multi-core Processor with Awareness of Layout Constraints ATAC: A 1000-Core Cache-Coherent Processor with On-Chip Optical Network

Artificial neurons and networks of them are far simpler than their biological counterparts, and brainpower is more distributed and complex than previously thought. It also suggests that at least some single cell organisms may have some computing power, as well as individual cells within multicellular organisms.

Optical interconnects may have some advantages for interconnecting cores on a microprocessor, for example less power dissipation and less area used. A single fiber may carry several different frequencies of light with little heat generated. And, light carrying fibers may be insulators between traces that carry electricity. Thus, it may be possible to make parallel optical interconnects, without increasing microprocessor size.

Limits or asymptotes?

To me it is simple, the US is a Republic with a democratic voting system, not merely an economy in which economists decide the laws; the people do have some say in running the government.

As far as I am aware the HP Integrity NonStop System (Originally Tandem Computers) is a commercial system with the greatest interconnect, which supports 6,320 cores per server node interconnecting up to 256 nodes via a proprietary "Expand" high speed network. In effect, all 256 nodes are a single fault tolerant server, with Intel Itanium® 9500 series processors. The interconnect network for NonStop systems has changed many times over the years. I do not know if any part of it is optical or not. There are layers of interconnect starting with the eight core microprocessor, then interconnects among blades in a node, and finally interconnects among nodes. Nodes do have optical gigabit Ethernet ports.

The problems says f(0) is insolvable. How do you manage that?

Do you know the definition of the domain and range of a function, and do you know how to graph a function?

This is not a reference, it is more speculation. Are you the only one making this claim, or have you read something, if you have read something, provide a reference, a link, or citation of which book you got it from.

The oscillating universe was one of the two expectations during most of the twentieth century, but since we learned that the expansion of the universe is accelerating, few scientists accept it as a possibility. Many believe in an infinite multiverse of which we know nothing, from which our Universe expanded about 13.8 Ga ago in an event known as the Big Bang (a misnomer). Some believe there are infinitely other universes similar to ours, perhaps with different laws of physics, that populate the multiverse. Since the expansion of our universe is accelerating, as far as we know it will do so forever, which means the multiverse must be infinite and our universe will forever stretch towards infinity, forever cooling. As far as we know, space-time is contained within our Universe, and we cannot say with any certainty that anything exists outside our universe, or that an outside exists. There is inconclusive evidence that another universe touched ours at one time in the past, when the Universe was young, from the latest Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation map made by the Planck satellite.

I have no personal knowledge about Arab Spring. I am a pacifist, who is willing to defend himself and neighbors. I believe the US has in recent years been overly willing to wage war, and I believe we should not be so bold. Perhaps social media has become a community hall which engenders community responsibility, perhaps not. In some ways it seems to serve that purpose. It also provides feedback to politicians, and does affect some political decisions. However, I think the math of analyzing social media is not developed enough to replace opinion polls. I agree. Except I fear people whose passions trump reason, which seems to be the majority. However, I continue to hope for the best. It seems as if future shock has created as perpetual panic in which we continually react to fight or flight passions, and do not have time to reason. I keep hoping that people will acclimatize so they are no longer in shock and reacting to fight or flight, and again take the time to reason. SFN is a place where reason flourishes, and perhaps other social media sites are too. I hope so.

The power of social networking is democratic. It allows individuals to express their opinions and observations, and to be read by other people. If your words are powerful, then they will nurture ideas that spread widely and affect other people who vote. In more extreme cases, when democracy is not an option, words can incite a revolution.

Perhaps the day will come when the Earth stands still, and we get an ultimatum from intelligent robots that police the Galaxy.

Reference?

Welcome to SFN, Kowalski.

Laws against child abuse probably focus on physical abuse, because it is easier to prove than psychological abuse. But, telling a child they are worthless and stupid, and withholding approval and love is also damaging, but difficult to prosecute, even if there are laws against such behavior. Thus, I think teaching about child abuse in addition to increased vigilance and prosecution is important. However, the unloved unappreciated child has needs that are unlikely to be fulfilled; moreover, they are likely to remain in their environment. Consequently, being trapped in a bad environment is likely affect their psyche poorly, especially if they have been taught to realize their condition and understand there is no hope of authorities helping them.

In my lifetime, since 1945, the first electronic computer and first computer language were developed, ENIAC (1946), assembler language, and Fortran (1950). When I was studying for my degree, it seemed possible that I could learn everything about computers, except developments continued faster that I could learn. Now, there is more to know about computers than I could learn in 100 lifetimes. The acceleration of computer science is not unique, the knowledge in all sciences are increasing faster and faster. Radioactivity was discovered in 1896, and all of nuclear physics has been learned since then. Edwin Hubble discovered galaxies outside the Milky Way in 1922–1923, and since then the cosmos has grown to over 100,000 million galaxies, which was discovered by the Hubble space telescope when it captured the image known as the Hubble Deep Field in December, 1995, and refined by the Hubble Extreme Deep Field in September, 2012. We now know that we can only see about 5% of the Universe, because 95% neither emits or reflects light. And, we know that the Standard Model of subatomic particles is not the Holy Grail of particle physics; there is much more to learn. In fact, I'm reasonably sure that most scientists would agree that we know some things, but more things are unknown than known. And, that would apply to the Earth, which is a planet we know most about. However, we know almost noting of other planets in our solar system, much less about other solar systems, our galaxy, and the remainder of the universe.

I agree with Moontanman. In addition, I'd like to add that space is filled with electromagnetic energy with frequencies from near zero to greater than 1019Hz. If there is harmony, there must be many and the cacophony sounds like noise. Look into space at stars, nebula, galaxy clusters, x-ray jets from quasars, etc.; these structures suggest harmonies. Thus, the question is open; we do not know.

Control of the market is a struggle that is part of the evolutionary process. Everyone and all organizations struggle to control some part of the economy, whether it is through begging, negotiation, intimidation, or legislation. Control by various power centers change over time. It is the nature of a free market economy. Expecting otherwise is naive. In a democracy, a person can try to persuade voters, but the majority are supposed to have their way.

Biological space travelers might not want to be contaminated by our biology. Presumably intelligent robots would all come to the same conclusion, because great minds think alike, and biological travelers would be privy to the same ethos. Because of long duration comets, there must be more in the ort cloud than small lumps of ice, and the population density must be quite small, if there are any. I'm merely suggesting an alternative to all civilizations self exterminate or are exterminated by cosmic events.

too-open-minded and Tridimity, I think both your ideas are good ones. A child who is abused from an early age does not have a comparison for abuse vs being treated good; thus, abuse will seem normal. When I was about 12, a scout master tried to explain to me that my stepfather was a bad person, but at the time it made me feel bad as if he had criticized me. Thus, teaching children about abuse will probably be full of booby traps that have unintended consequences. I hope the teachers are well trained and the material is prepared by experts.

Change is one of the few things that is inevitable in the Universe. People who oppose change are doomed to grow older; thus, they change, and they change in other ways too. I believe opposition to change is often Future Shock or Culture Shock.

The recent trip of Curiosity discovered the radiation between Earth and Mars is very high, and will require significant shielding, which will be difficult to build and transport between planets to keep people safe. I think we will be unable to make significant progress in space until we discover the singularity. may change the spacescape a bit. And, the singularity may change our perspective completely. Intelligent robots can travel through space, but large biological species find the environment challenging. Whatever does inhabit interstellar space in habitats ignoring planets will have great technology, including telescopes better than Hubble. Thus, they can observe from a distance that does not allow us to detect them, yet they can know much about us. An intelligent robot would have no need for our assistance, and no reason to make contact. The same would be true of a biological species. Until we can roam interstellar space, there is no reason they would want to make contact with us.

This research is consistent with my belief (speculation) that abiogenesis is inevitable because chemicals will self assemble and create life. And, if the chemicals still exist in the right conditions, abiogenesis continues. But, whatever spontaneous life is created will have little chance of survival, because evolved forms are be much more capable of surviving and thriving.