Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

Bitcoin uses far too much energy

Discussions about the economic and financial ramifications of PEAK OIL

Re: Bitcoin uses far too much energy

Unread postby EnergyUnlimited » Mon 15 Jan 2018, 03:54:08

Outcast_Searcher wrote:
EnergyUnlimited wrote:
Outcast_Searcher wrote:But getting to 5000 or 10000 in a few years or even ten years seems COMPLETELY contradictory to the most aggressive expectations I found of IBM selling 50 qubit quantum computers in a few or perhaps ten years, if things go well.

Moore law may be applicable and this can result in huge surprises, how fast number of q-bits grow.

I'm finding your claims re quantum computing less and less credible.

First, you said this upthread to me, re your opinion of where quantum computing is going on Friday 1/12/18:
EnergyUnlimited wrote:@Outcast Searcher
This would require 5000-10000 q-bits quantum computers. Few years in the future, 10 years at most if BAU last this long.

And now you're claiming Moore's Law "may" be applicable. Yeah, maybe. But it operates on the scale of decades to move from 20 or 50 to 5000 or 10000 of something. Not a few years.

2^10=1024
So if we double number of q-bits every year, we are going to have more than 20000 q-bits in 10 years (out of 20 now)
2^7=128
So if we double number of q-bits every 18 months (as we were averagely doing with density of transistors for decades, we will have 2560 q-bits in 10 years (out of 20 now)
So you may consider your position about impossibilty again and read more about the subject of Moore Law.

Then, down-thread, you admit to KJ that quantum computers are still toys in the lab and may or may not have practical sales outside the lab.

I am not a prophet to know future prospects of new tech for certain but if development of transistors is an indication of possible progress then outcome will be awsome within several years.
BTW, there was plenty of whiners in 1950-ties who were claiming that transistors or lasers are lab curiosity which will never make it to the commerce. First transistor had a volume of glass of water.

So you seem to be ALL OVER the map on this.

Not really.

Again, I'm seeing more of a rah-rah flavor than hard proof on the crypto-currency promises, generally. And again, since there are no existing seriously powerful quantum computers, such claims can't be tested.

These machines may be theoretically studied in detail and performance assesed with good accuracy.
The only question is about feasibility of building them.

The crypto-currency hacking problem, which you blithely dismiss as though it doesn't matter, is WAY more serious in my mind anyway, unless and until powerful quantum computers actually show signs of existing very soon. Today they don't.

Hacking problems are relevant only once you entrusted your coins to a third party like an exchange devoid of certain security features. In your private wallet bitcoins (and other coins) are safe from hackers and resistant to confiscation by government.
Btw, if you are playing on stock exchange, you are expected to take a risk. Hacking risk is not greater than a risk of a corpo in which you are invested going bankrupt or severely downsized.

(Visa losses, which you compared crypto hacking losses to, are limited to $50 as long as an individual reports problems to the issuing bank within 48 hours, last time I looked. Crypto-currencies have no such assurances. The benefits and the curse of supposed privacy.)

This is obviously a nonsense, you may go and argue your case to victim of bank bail-ins in Cyprus and elsewhere in Europe if you wish. So I will assert again: Your money in bank are NOT SAFE and plenty was already stolen from accounts in FIRST WORLD countries in recent years. EU wide anything in excess of Euro 100000 can be lawfully confiscated to facilitate bail-ins.

While deciding where you invest it is wise to consider average, common profits rather than rare incidences of losses (hacks of bitcoin exchanges, even if trumpeted widely are actually rare).
Doing otherwise will make you a loser.
Lets do a math:
Keeping $20000 in your bank will make you $100 of profit per year (you will actually lose purchasing power due to inflation).
Trading coins with the same initial capital made for my son more than a million within last few months.
Keping money in bank makes you a loser, exactly like mainstream system which you are glorifying wants. Winners are owners of the system in this case but you are not one of these.
User avatar
EnergyUnlimited
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 5161
Joined: Mon 15 May 2006, 02:00:00

Re: Bitcoin uses far too much energy

Unread postby EnergyUnlimited » Mon 15 Jan 2018, 10:01:41

Btw,
Apparently 50 q-bit quantum computer was made last year and it is tested in IBM labs:
https://www.technologyreview.com/s/6094 ... -computer/
https://www.engadget.com/2018/01/09/thi ... ooks-like/

KaiserJeep, you need upgrade to new version.
User avatar
EnergyUnlimited
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 5161
Joined: Mon 15 May 2006, 02:00:00

Re: Bitcoin uses far too much energy

Unread postby Outcast_Searcher » Mon 15 Jan 2018, 12:32:23

EnergyUnlimited wrote:Keping money in bank makes you a loser, exactly like mainstream system which you are glorifying wants. Winners are owners of the system in this case but you are not one of these.



So there it is. At the end of the day, resort to name-calling, like the ETP head "theorist", if you don't agree with someone. If FAITH made things true, the world would be a far different place.

Decide apriori on the winners and losers because you wish it were so.

Good luck with that.

I'd rather "kep" [sic] my money in dollars (actually well diversified into global markets) than risk watching it evaporate in a hack while it sits in an uninsured, unregulated source, or when the tulip-mania style bubble pops. But of course that can't possibly happen, because you don't think so. :roll:

Again, best of luck with that.
Given the track record of the perma-doomer blogs, I wouldn't bet a fast crash doomer's money on their predictions.
User avatar
Outcast_Searcher
COB
COB
 
Posts: 5129
Joined: Sat 27 Jun 2009, 20:26:42

Re: Bitcoin uses far too much energy

Unread postby EnergyUnlimited » Mon 15 Jan 2018, 12:57:24

Outcast_Searcher wrote:I'd rather "kep" [sic] my money in dollars (actually well diversified into global markets) than risk watching it evaporate in a hack while it sits in an uninsured, unregulated source, or when the tulip-mania style bubble pops. But of course that can't possibly happen, because you don't think so. :roll:

Again, best of luck with that.

...or watch it confiscated to facilitate banksters bail-ins while in regulated and insured custody or when approximately $1 quadrillion debt & derivatves bubble pops.
But of course that can't possibly happen, because you don't think so.

Again, best luck with that.

Btw, my son is a winner as per experimental evidence and certainly *not* a priori decided winner. He cannot possibly lose on crypto by any imaginable means, even if "tulip mania style bubble" have popped.
$20000 went in, more than $100000 already came out and is off crypto related risk and more than $1million still in crypto trade.
So he won... and very fast. :-D
User avatar
EnergyUnlimited
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 5161
Joined: Mon 15 May 2006, 02:00:00

Re: Bitcoin uses far too much energy

Unread postby Outcast_Searcher » Mon 15 Jan 2018, 13:48:56

EnergyUnlimited wrote:Btw, my son is a winner as per experimental evidence and certainly *not* a priori decided winner. He cannot possibly lose on crypto by any imaginable means, even if "tulip mania style bubble" have popped.
$20000 went in, more than $100000 already came out and is off crypto related risk and more than $1million still in crypto trade.
So he won... and very fast. :-D

And good for your son IF he's smart enough to keep the winnings off the table, and keep taking some rational percentage of future winnings (if prices keep increasing) off the table.

(Do you understand that I'm NOT criticizing you or your son? I'm pointing out the risks, while you seem to imply this is a sure thing).

NEVER CONFUSE GENIUS WITH A BULL MARKET.

I played that same game with stocks like Microsoft in the 90's. I was lucky enough to pick some good companies during a big market boom. The only smarts I'll take credit for was taking half off the table each and every stock split, once the numbers got big enough (amazingly quickly) to scare me, should the market collapse.

...

The problem is, everyone (and most likely even a majority) can't magically be like your son and get rich quick off the pyramid scheme operating today. There was an excellent editorial in the NYT, and lots of good comments about that yesterday.



https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/13/styl ... pe=article
Given the track record of the perma-doomer blogs, I wouldn't bet a fast crash doomer's money on their predictions.
User avatar
Outcast_Searcher
COB
COB
 
Posts: 5129
Joined: Sat 27 Jun 2009, 20:26:42

Re: Bitcoin uses far too much energy

Unread postby KaiserJeep » Mon 15 Jan 2018, 14:44:32

EnergyUnlimited wrote:Btw,
Apparently 50 q-bit quantum computer was made last year and it is tested in IBM labs:
https://www.technologyreview.com/s/6094 ... -computer/
https://www.engadget.com/2018/01/09/thi ... ooks-like/

KaiserJeep, you need upgrade to new version.


Look, you cannot be that silly. (I wanted to say "stupid", but thought better of it.) That "amazing" quantum computer operates for all of 90 microseconds, less than 1/10,000th of a second. That computer has the operating system built in (a necessity because it cannot operate long enough to boot up), and does not do anything useful, it's barely capable of running the benchmark test for computing speed. It is indeed the most advanced quantum computer made, and it's totally useless as anything but a laboratory toy.

The first cryogenic switches were demonstrated in the 1980s. It has taken an additional 30 years to construct a cryogenic computer that even can be aptly described as a computer, and even then it's not one capable of doing any actual work. I'll mention one more characteristic of cryogenic circuitry: it has to be submerged in a liquid coolant such as liquid nitrogen to function. This is what a cryogenic plant to produce liquid nitrogen looks like:
Image
...it's a whole room full of machinery that consumes a LOT of energy. But it does indeed enable the operation of microelectronic devices that themselves consume near zero power. I'll mention that the liquid helium generating plants that are necessary for quantum computing are constructed within liquid nitrogen tanks, and I could not find a suitable image, so imagine a liquid helium plant inside of one of the larger vessels above.

The "quantum computers" that are being simulated using standard technology computing systems are also fairly useless devices, whose only purpose is to model the new technology, running software that such machines would run if they actually existed, which they do not. They run at the much slower speeds of current technology, and the performance on quantum hardware is then calculated from the benchmarks by multiplying to account for the differences between a "real" and a "virtual" quantum computer.

These problems I am talking about are problems with basic materials science. When you run an electric current through a superconducting circuit, the electromagnetic field degrades the superconductor. Today's superconducting alloys are significantly better than those in the 1980s when a single circuit called a "flip-flop" was constructed, demonstrating the ability to store a single bit. Today we can build thousands of such devices that collectively function for almost 1/10,000th of a second. That is significant progress but far short of production-ready.

What is needed for quantum computing to reach the commercial market is room temperature superconductivity, plus a new fabrications technology that allows us to build dense microelectronic computer circuitry utilizing room temperature superconductive alloys. The good news is that R&D is being conducted on both fronts. Recently for example, organic semiconductors have been created. These are fundamentally different in nature from the existing silicon semiconductor devices. They are now entering production in consumer devices - the "OLED" (organic light emitting diodes) curved UHD (ultra high definition) televisions with curved screens that cost thousands of dollars, but really do outperform the conventional HDTVs they may some day replace if costs continue to decline. However these devices were demonstrated in laboratories 15+ years ago.

Invest your own money in quantum computers and cryptocurrencies if you wish. I'll not risk any of my own.
KaiserJeep 2.0, Neural Subnode 0010 0000 0001 0110 - 1001 0011 0011, Tertiary Adjunct to Unimatrix 0000 0000 0001

Resistance is Futile, YOU will be Assimilated.

Warning: Messages timestamped before April 1, 2016, 06:00 PST were posted by the unmodified human KaiserJeep 1.0
KaiserJeep
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 4904
Joined: Tue 06 Aug 2013, 16:16:32
Location: California's Silly Valley

Re: Bitcoin uses far too much energy

Unread postby pstarr » Mon 15 Jan 2018, 15:37:29

KJ, impressive post. I was going to ask how what an actual cpu register of qubits would look like, which direction on the bus they would move given that it would always be in two opposing states at the same time? 8-O [smilie=11.gif] :mrgreen: :oops:
If you are not a curmudgeon. . . you are not awake.
pstarr
NeoMaster
NeoMaster
 
Posts: 26992
Joined: Mon 27 Sep 2004, 02:00:00
Location: Behind the Redwood Curtain

Re: Bitcoin uses far too much energy

Unread postby EnergyUnlimited » Mon 15 Jan 2018, 17:01:09

@Kaiser Jeep,
Why to make looking difficult things which are actually simple?
Don't you think that it is rather stupid to build dedicated air/nitrogen liquification plants to run small cryogenic systems for low temperature circuitry, if liquid nitrogen is a plentiful waste from steel industry and can be purchased cheaply in Dewar like tanks in quantities between few liters to many thousands of cubic meters?
There are also dedicated liquid helium plants, so why to build your own?
Some time ago I was working with nuclear magnetic resonance equipment and both liquified gases were coming in once a month or two in handy 250L Dewar vessels on wheels.
Anyway why didn't you mention 3He/4He isotopic refrigeration step, which is certainly needed to go down from He-2 temperature to required 10mK? This bit considerably adds to expenses of running quantum computer, more than initial cooling steps.
Finally, why didn't you mention possibility that 3He/4He isotopic refrigeration system can be constructed in such a way that no additional cryogenic coolants (liquid N2 and liquid He) are needed and small compact machine can result?

Lets leave alone simulators of quantum computers. They are just simulators.

Said 90 microseconds is more of an issue but scientists working with Einstein-Bose condensates are getting quite crafty with keeping cold matter in coherrent state. I believe that there will be some spilloffs to quantum computing field rather sooner than later.

You do not need RT superconductivity to run quantum computer. That wouldn't wash in any case.
To prevent decoherence you need to go close to absolute zero anyway. Quantum computer *must* be a sophisticated cryogenic device. I do not claim that commercial quantum computer will be cheap and available to public from Walmart.
I suspect that cheapest versions will cost many millions and they will be deployed by military, large corporations (pharma will benefit a lot for drug modelling), government agencies and yes, few billionarie geeks.
And they will be deployed within few years from now on... and several years later they may be in position to intercept bitcoin payments in real time.
This is why wise encryptors will make their codes resistant to quantum assault *now* and stupid ones will ignore this technology only to find their secrets revealed within 10 years or so. Can be very embarassing.

Sorry, you still need upgrade to quantum version or you will be replaced.
Resistance is futile.
User avatar
EnergyUnlimited
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 5161
Joined: Mon 15 May 2006, 02:00:00

Re: Bitcoin uses far too much energy

Unread postby KaiserJeep » Mon 15 Jan 2018, 18:27:22

EU, I could be wrong about this, but I have you pegged as a science nerd and software type. That is of course just about the opposite viewpoint of a working engineer like myself (although I recently retired).

There are no quantum computers, there are no inexpensive small cryogenic plants that produce liquid helium, there are no room temperature superconductors either.

If you believe any of these things do exist, post a link to their online store where they can be purchased. Meanwhile, all the tech that one can actually buy is available and most of it can be bought at amazon.com.

Of course, anything you buy is - by definition - obsolete before you receive it. That's the rub, you can never be entirely current in technology. But you also can't build anything at all with near future tech either.

Remember that most of the good ideas never become products.
KaiserJeep 2.0, Neural Subnode 0010 0000 0001 0110 - 1001 0011 0011, Tertiary Adjunct to Unimatrix 0000 0000 0001

Resistance is Futile, YOU will be Assimilated.

Warning: Messages timestamped before April 1, 2016, 06:00 PST were posted by the unmodified human KaiserJeep 1.0
KaiserJeep
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 4904
Joined: Tue 06 Aug 2013, 16:16:32
Location: California's Silly Valley

Re: Bitcoin uses far too much energy

Unread postby Outcast_Searcher » Mon 15 Jan 2018, 19:41:07

KaiserJeep wrote:EU, I could be wrong about this, but I have you pegged as a science nerd and software type. That is of course just about the opposite viewpoint of a working engineer like myself (although I recently retired).

There are no quantum computers, there are no inexpensive small cryogenic plants that produce liquid helium, there are no room temperature superconductors either.

If you believe any of these things do exist, post a link to their online store where they can be purchased. Meanwhile, all the tech that one can actually buy is available and most of it can be bought at amazon.com.

But no problem. Moore's Law will likely resolve this within a few years, because he thinks so. He's so confident that on this very thread, he explained Moore's Law for us. :roll: As though building machines capable of handling more qubits resolves the physical obstacles you point out...

It's like trying to discuss the financial outlook for Tesla with a Tesla fanboi, or credible economic figures or trends with a die hard fast crash doomer. Facts don't seem to penetrate, regardless of how they're presented.
Given the track record of the perma-doomer blogs, I wouldn't bet a fast crash doomer's money on their predictions.
User avatar
Outcast_Searcher
COB
COB
 
Posts: 5129
Joined: Sat 27 Jun 2009, 20:26:42

Re: Bitcoin uses far too much energy

Unread postby pstarr » Mon 15 Jan 2018, 20:39:54

Or like trying to discuss net energy with an oil-industry intern lol
If you are not a curmudgeon. . . you are not awake.
pstarr
NeoMaster
NeoMaster
 
Posts: 26992
Joined: Mon 27 Sep 2004, 02:00:00
Location: Behind the Redwood Curtain

Re: Bitcoin uses far too much energy

Unread postby EnergyUnlimited » Tue 16 Jan 2018, 05:40:15

KaiserJeep wrote:There are no quantum computers, there are no inexpensive small cryogenic plants that produce liquid helium, there are no room temperature superconductors either.

1. First quantum computers are built in labs right now and under testing.
2. There are large liquid helium plants which are selling liquid hellium cheaply enough to use it in labs and hospitals around a world. You do not need to build a small one.
3. Room temperature superconductors are not needed to build quantum computer.

I would also note, that engineers working on construction of hand grenades are of little utility in works producing atomic bombs.

Shortly, you are rising strawman arguments:
1. you are stupidly insisting on constructing small liquid helium plants next room to your quantum computer, even if liquid helium is relatively cheap, commercially available commodity. I was working with tens of liters of it and nearest liquification plant was more than 500 miles away.
2. You are insisting on use of RT superconductors, which are not needed in working quantum computers and that is because at RT decoherrence would kill quantum computing on the spot, superconductor, or no superconductor. Quantum computer *must* be a sophisticated, cryogenic device.

If you believe any of these things do exist, post a link to their online store where they can be purchased. Meanwhile, all the tech that one can actually buy is available and most of it can be bought at amazon.com.

It is tedious and pointless to discuss with peoples who argue that items not available on amazon or in another store dont or cannot exist.

Summary:
You are in urgent need of upgrade. Your 4.77 MHz XT processor is obsolete and 128kb of RAM is insufficient.
You should also consider installing DOS 6.22. Your current version 2.0 is significantly underperforming.

Outcast_Searcher wrote:But no problem. Moore's Law will likely resolve this within a few years, because he thinks so. He's so confident that on this very thread, he explained Moore's Law for us. :roll: As though building machines capable of handling more qubits resolves the physical obstacles you point out.

Those who have nothing intelligent to say should keep quiet.
User avatar
EnergyUnlimited
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 5161
Joined: Mon 15 May 2006, 02:00:00

Re: Bitcoin uses far too much energy

Unread postby KaiserJeep » Tue 16 Jan 2018, 11:12:23

If you think quantum computers are real, in spite of links which say the best one at an IBM lab stays online for 90 microseconds and only executes a performance benchmark before going offline, then include the link where they can be bought. If they exist, then include links describing the operating systems in use. If they are real, who sells them?

Because I believe that cryogenic digital computing is in it's infancy and no such general purpose machines exist. Do not confuse a statement that a given Physics or Computing laboratory has a goal of constructing such a machine with it's existence. In fact, I know of no commercially available cryogenic circuitry either, none has ever been described in IEEE publications.

I didn't say that laboratory toys did not exist. However, we do not have cryogenic electronic devices that can remain online, or can do useful work, or that can be bought because they are in production because even at -452 degrees, superconductivity is a fleeting phenomenon, not one that persists more than a few microseconds.

I used to have a job designing hydrogen MASERs for one of my Astronomy professors. These were basic analog amplifiers that operated at cryogenic temperatures to increase the signal-to-noise ratio and thus enable the detection of weaker RF signals. The liquid gasses produced a lower noise threshold but the amplifiers were not superconducting. This was in the late 1970s and I maintain an interest in such tech and I recently retired from a 34 year career building new digital computers for HP. Many generations of designs have passed since I left this program, and one of the MASERs that grew out of the effort is the present master frequency standard at NIST. But even that does not contain superconducting digital circuitry, because such tech is not in production.
KaiserJeep 2.0, Neural Subnode 0010 0000 0001 0110 - 1001 0011 0011, Tertiary Adjunct to Unimatrix 0000 0000 0001

Resistance is Futile, YOU will be Assimilated.

Warning: Messages timestamped before April 1, 2016, 06:00 PST were posted by the unmodified human KaiserJeep 1.0
KaiserJeep
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 4904
Joined: Tue 06 Aug 2013, 16:16:32
Location: California's Silly Valley

Re: Bitcoin uses far too much energy

Unread postby Outcast_Searcher » Tue 16 Jan 2018, 11:28:57

EnergyUnlimited wrote:Those who have nothing intelligent to say should keep quiet.

So why are you still here again? :roll:

You're starting to sound like pstarr. Oh that's right, you're not all over the map on quantum computers due to your strong defense of "Not really." Brilliant.

And crypto is the ultimate investment because you think so. Mega-brilliant.
Given the track record of the perma-doomer blogs, I wouldn't bet a fast crash doomer's money on their predictions.
User avatar
Outcast_Searcher
COB
COB
 
Posts: 5129
Joined: Sat 27 Jun 2009, 20:26:42

Re: Bitcoin uses far too much energy

Unread postby Cog » Tue 16 Jan 2018, 11:34:30

pstarr wrote:Or like trying to discuss net energy with an oil-industry intern lol


Or discussing supply and demand with a hippie.
User avatar
Cog
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 10194
Joined: Sat 17 May 2008, 02:00:00
Location: Metro-East Illinois

Re: Bitcoin uses far too much energy

Unread postby EnergyUnlimited » Tue 16 Jan 2018, 12:32:43

KaiserJeep wrote:I didn't say that laboratory toys did not exist. However, we do not have cryogenic electronic devices that can remain online, or can do useful work, or that can be bought because they are in production because even at -452 degrees, superconductivity is a fleeting phenomenon, not one that persists more than a few microseconds.

At -452 degrees (presumably Fahrenheit degrees) superconductivity lasts for ever in suitable materials, lead is an example.
I begin to doubt that you have matriculation, let alone engineering degree.

Your version is beyond upgrade. Has to go to skip.

Outcast_Searcher wrote:You're starting to sound like pstarr. Oh that's right, you're not all over the map on quantum computers due to your strong defense of "Not really." Brilliant.

And crypto is the ultimate investment because you think so. Mega-brilliant.

On number of occassions I have tried to present my arguments in a way to make them easy to understand.
However with you it fails. You are just not sophisticated enough to pursue my case with you any further.
So keep on whining.
User avatar
EnergyUnlimited
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 5161
Joined: Mon 15 May 2006, 02:00:00

Re: Bitcoin uses far too much energy

Unread postby KaiserJeep » Tue 16 Jan 2018, 13:02:08

Look, I'm aware of the "floating" lead ring that supposedly has a current flowing around in it and will levitate in a magnetic field, presumably forever. I say "presumably" because anytime I have seen or heard about such a demonstration, they shut it off after a few hours, because they did not have an energy budget or a liquid gas budget that allowed the expense of maintaining those temperatures forever.

However, that lead ring is a parlor trick, and never did a useful lick of work. Are YOU aware of even one cryogenic flip-flop that can be bought from an engineering catalog? Or a CPU or gate array or an operational amplifier or a memory chip intended to operate at cryogenic temperatures?

You seem to have ZERO COMMON SENSE, and you are equating laboratory parlor tricks to usable technologies. That has never been true, and most of the fanciful descriptions of cicuitry are outright outrageous fabrications and exaggerations intended to invoke R&D funding, a form of fiction that is almost universal, as every scientist I ever saw in search of funding wrote about near term practical applications that didn't ever come about. Really, if you actually have a background in one of the hard sciences you would know this.

Now as they say, put up or shut up. Link me to an example of a working cryogenic computer. Or link me to any superconducting commercial products of any kind. Else admit that you are totally lacking in judgement in these matters.
KaiserJeep 2.0, Neural Subnode 0010 0000 0001 0110 - 1001 0011 0011, Tertiary Adjunct to Unimatrix 0000 0000 0001

Resistance is Futile, YOU will be Assimilated.

Warning: Messages timestamped before April 1, 2016, 06:00 PST were posted by the unmodified human KaiserJeep 1.0
KaiserJeep
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 4904
Joined: Tue 06 Aug 2013, 16:16:32
Location: California's Silly Valley

Re: Bitcoin uses far too much energy

Unread postby EnergyUnlimited » Tue 16 Jan 2018, 13:36:43

KaiserJeep wrote:Look, I'm aware of the "floating" lead ring that supposedly has a current flowing around in it and will levitate in a magnetic field, presumably forever. I say "presumably" because anytime I have seen or heard about such a demonstration, they shut it off after a few hours, because they did not have an energy budget or a liquid gas budget that allowed the expense of maintaining those temperatures forever.

Contrary to your experience I was working with superconducting magnets in NMR machines.
They was going on for years and about once a month I was topping up liquid He (and also more often liquid N2 into external, warmer blanket) to keep them working.
Coils of these magnets are made of niobium.

OK, you was watching for hours floating ring. How long would you like to watch it, to be happy that it is superconducting?
For a week? a year? how long? Does it make sense to run so long demonstration?

You seem to have ZERO COMMON SENSE, and you are equating laboratory parlor tricks to usable technologies. That has never been true, and most of the fanciful descriptions of cicuitry are outright outrageous fabrications and exaggerations intended to invoke R&D funding, a form of fiction that is almost universal, as every scientist I ever saw in search of funding wrote about near term practical applications that didn't ever come about. Really, if you actually have a background in one of the hard sciences you would know this.

Your stupidity is breathtaking. Superconductivity is widely applicable phenomenon and certainly not laboratory parlor trick.
Mainly used in superconducting coils of strong electromagnets applicable for NMR (chemistry and physics), MRI (medical diagnostics) etc.

Now as they say, put up or shut up. Link me to an example of a working cryogenic computer. Or link me to any superconducting commercial products of any kind. Else admit that you are totally lacking in judgement in these matters.

You may contact these peoples for superconducting coils:
https://www.thomasnet.com/products/supe ... 603-1.html
http://www.suptech.com/high_field_magnets_n.php
https://info.blockimaging.com/top-mri-m ... your-needs

Last link refers to selection of hospital MRI manufacturers. All of MRI setups are based on superconducting coils.
User avatar
EnergyUnlimited
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 5161
Joined: Mon 15 May 2006, 02:00:00

Re: Bitcoin uses far too much energy

Unread postby KaiserJeep » Tue 16 Jan 2018, 13:52:29

I don't doubt that superconductivity exists - one of my undergraduate professors was John Bardeen, who contributed the "B" in the original "BCS" theory of superconductivity.

But quantum computers are the stuff of imagination so far, unless you have a link for me.
KaiserJeep 2.0, Neural Subnode 0010 0000 0001 0110 - 1001 0011 0011, Tertiary Adjunct to Unimatrix 0000 0000 0001

Resistance is Futile, YOU will be Assimilated.

Warning: Messages timestamped before April 1, 2016, 06:00 PST were posted by the unmodified human KaiserJeep 1.0
KaiserJeep
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 4904
Joined: Tue 06 Aug 2013, 16:16:32
Location: California's Silly Valley

Re: Bitcoin uses far too much energy

Unread postby EnergyUnlimited » Tue 16 Jan 2018, 14:31:28

KaiserJeep wrote:I don't doubt that superconductivity exists - one of my undergraduate professors was John Bardeen, who contributed the "B" in the original "BCS" theory of superconductivity.

But quantum computers are the stuff of imagination so far, unless you have a link for me.

Quantum computers are now under development and right now tested in labs. However you have asked me to refer to *any* commercial superconducting device, so I did.
Mind you, quantum computer does NOT rely on superconductivity to work, albeit superconducting wiring is handy to use there to exclude unnecessary heating and that helps to maintain low temperatures required.
Quantum processor relies on set of atoms or particles or quasi-particles in so called *coherrent* state.
This in effect makes it working like a huge number of parallel processors, exponentially growing with number of q-bits.

Base on your overall performance in this discussion I have concluded that you are not an engineer or scientist.
Maybe electrician with A level? Maybe not even that one...
You are certainly lacking a necessary knowledge to run any intelligent conversation about superconductivity even on most basic level.
Look on catalog of contradictions from your last several posts to find out why.
User avatar
EnergyUnlimited
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 5161
Joined: Mon 15 May 2006, 02:00:00

PreviousNext

Return to Economics & Finance

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests