On Wed, 23 Oct 2002 14:27:25 -0400 (petru.lauric@rcn.com) wrote:
> Huh? Okay, this OT discussion is going way beyond the limits of the
> absurd.
>
> Tony, please stop this thread ...
I have so far hinted gently. Please, chaps, if you want to divert into
discussing arcane geek sh*t like...
> > As I said: 2^64 = 18446744073709551616. That's how much RAM can be
> > directly addressed using 64-bit address registers. Compare this to
> > roughly 10^23 silicon atoms in a large die like a CPU or RAM
> > chip. That is the bulk silicon, only the surface of which is used, so
> > more realistically, only 10^17 silicon atoms are actually involved in
> > the electronic device at all. You would have multiple bits per silicon
> > atom -- that just isn't going to happen.
PLEASE don't inflict it on 1,500 innocent bystanders, take it offlist to
personal mail.
Regards
Tony Sleep - http://www.halftone.co.uk
Online portfolio & exhibit + film scanner info & comparisons
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe
filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or
body