Bitcoin Forum

So the idea is to take components that are often separate on a system – processors, main memory, networking and other peripherals – and etch them all onto chips and then stack them up in a 3D array, rather than solder them onto a motherboard and wire them together with metal stripes in a 2D array. By going 3D, the wires between components can not only be shortened - cutting the time those components need to exchange signals and potentially requiring less energy to send a signal.

"Today's chips, including those containing 3D transistors, are in fact 2D chips that are still very flat structures," explained Bernie Meyerson, a vice president of IBM Research, in a statement announcing the partnership between Big Blue and 3M.

"Our scientists are aiming to develop materials that will allow us to package tremendous amounts of computing power into a new form factor – a silicon skyscraper. We believe we can advance the state-of-art in packaging, and create a new class of semiconductors that offer more speed and capabilities while they keep power usage low – key requirements for many manufacturers, especially for makers of tablets and smartphones."

The initial plan is to come up with a way to stack up as many as 100 chips into a tower of computing power. Over the long haul IBM wants to be able to bond stacks of complete wafers together, bonding hundreds of processors at a time.

The plan, says the IBM source, is to get it into production around the end of 2013.

What if they used a different medium, do you remember the solder iron sold on TV infomercials, battery operated, instant heat, melts solder?
The tip was made out of a novel type of silicon that multiplies temperature. If you put that between the layers of the chips and apply cold temps, which would be multiplied by 10, you could get an effective thermoregulator.

Law of conservation of energy says "NO".  temp is merely a measure of thermal energy.  You can't multiply energy.  That would imply you created energy from nothing.

"Multiplier" implies an output greater than the sum of the inputs, which is impossible. Perhaps it is just a misnomer.

Nope, not a misnomer. Stellar radiation, upon striking aluminium, radiates 2-3x more than input. Nasa had an engine designed, for satellites and interplanetary observatories, that used a radiation multiplier propulsion engine (which produced 8x output), through stages I believe.

That's interesting. But what happens to the aluminium? Does it degrade over time as I expect the energy must come somewhere, ie. the chemical bonds or something.

Nope, not a misnomer. Stellar radiation, upon striking aluminium, radiates 2-3x more than input. Nasa had an engine designed, for satellites and interplanetary observatories, that used a radiation multiplier propulsion engine (which produced 8x output), through stages I believe.

It's not interesting, it's false.

Nope, not a misnomer. Stellar radiation, upon striking aluminium, radiates 2-3x more than input. Nasa had an engine designed, for satellites and interplanetary observatories, that used a radiation multiplier propulsion engine (which produced 8x output), through stages I believe.

IIRC The chip used for the Raspberry PI was built using a similar idea. It doesn't sound as advanced but generally similar. Broadcom mounted the dies for the GPU and RAM on top of the CPU in the same SoC package.

In interplanetary space, it is believed that thin aluminum shielding would have a negative net effect.

Spacecraft can be constructed out of hydrogen-rich plastics, rather than aluminum. Unfortunately, "Some 'galactic cosmic rays are so energetic that no reasonable amount of shielding can stop them,' cautions Frank Cucinotta, NASA's Chief Radiation Health Officer. 'All materials have this problem, including polyethylene.'"

...
I only brought it up as speculation for cooling the 3D CPU stack, maybe a bit tongue in cheek, but now I'm defending anomolous physics claims.  :o

...somewhat unconvincingly.

What keeps an electron in it's orbit around a proton? What prevents it's orbit from decaying or the electron flying off?

What keeps an electron in it's orbit around a proton? What prevents it's orbit from decaying or the electron flying off?

Energy in space was battering the atoms and effecting (the electrons orbital shifts) their movements

@AmpEater  - Maybe you and I should spend a little more time researching our statements before posting and we can limit the abuse of techtrolls.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_threat_from_cosmic_rays

It was a show on PBS, possibly Nova, involving space travel. It's not possible I confused it for solar sails, though it is possible, I would concede propulsion for long term electrical generation. I still claim multiplication via GCR interacting with aluminum.

There was a motor, a rotor/stator design built with permanent magnets, which doesn't produce heat while spinning, but produces cold instead. It was developed by a scientist from JPL and he was awarded a patent solely because of the novel effect it produced.

I only brought it up as speculation for cooling the 3D CPU stack, maybe a bit tongue in cheek, but now I'm defending anomolous physics claims.  :o

The people who suggest that "zero point energy" or somesuch might somehow be harvested should be very very afraid. Since that implies we are living in a false vacuum (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_vacuum).

@kjj -  ;D

It's probable the extra energy comes from Zero Point Energy.

According to Robert S. Mulliken in noting anomolies in the Red Shift

Max Plank, Albert Einstein, Otto Stern, Walther Nernst recognized that this pervasive (Zero Point) energy was a universal phenomena and intrinsic to space.

Werner Heisenberg understood that Planck's Constant was actually the measurement of the uncertainty in position of subatomic particles. By 1962, it was realized that this uncertainty of position was caused by the battering from "the Zero Point Energy".

In 1987, Hal Puthoff showed that electrons stayed in their orbits and did not go either spinning out or spinning in due to expended energy precisely because of the energy they received from the Zero Point Energy.

Zero Point Energy is 10^95 ergs/cm^3
It has Permattivity, Evo (Absolute dielectric constant); Permiability, Uva (absolute magnetic constant); Intrinsic impedance, Z = {Evo/Uva}^1/3

I have a motor like that in my house. It's called a refrigerator. Most if not all refrigerator designers are awarded patents for their inventions; that only means the design itself is novel, not the underlying physics. Although many different types of refrigerator exist, they all work by moving heat from where it's not wanted to somewhere where it's easier to manage. This process always requires energy and always results in a net gain of heat. It is impossible to make heat simply disappear.

Quantum mechanics predicts the existence of what are usually called ''zero-point'' energies for the strong, the weak and the electromagnetic interactions, where ''zero-point'' refers to the energy of the system at temperature T=0, or the lowest quantized energy level of a quantum mechanical system.

From this line of reasoning, quantum physics predicts that all of space must be filled with electromagnetic zero-point fluctuations (also called the zero-point field) creating a universal sea of zero-point energy.
...the zero-point energy density would be 110 orders of magnitude greater than the radiant energy at the center of the Sun.