[xandos]

The initial quote was for limit on space-time volume per computation.

The limit on space-time volume per computation follows from this (that is, it follows from the limits of time per operation, set by the heisenberg uncertainty law). The logical operations must be performed on something that can hold at least one bit of data. Ignoring the size limitations on the device that implements the logical gates, the number of calculations that can be done per second is limited by the speed of a single operation and the maximum density of the physical implementation of the bits. If you want to use elementary particles as bits, the limit is set by how close you can get them together before they start being unable to hold their information (or you could take a more generous approach and just figure out how much you can fit in a limited box to figure out the minimum space-time volume per computation).

If you'd like to use masless particles for your computation (which in practice needs more space for processing information), there is a similar limit. The implementation of a logical gate on for example a photon must have an effective temperature much lower than the energy of the photon, or the logical operations will become very unreliable. The important thing here is that its not possible to perform a logical operation without having an interaction between your data-carrier and the device implementing the logical gate. The amount of masless particles per volume that can be allowed at the processor is therefore limited.

The limits here are overly generous. There are earlier limits to the amount of space-time volume required per compution, but it would require much more thought and a much longer post to go into the finer details.

---

Last edited by xandos; 03-08-2016 at 10:28 AM.

[falconeye]

what tickled my nerve was that you originally said
"And there fortunately is no law of physics which sets a lower limit for the space-time volume or energy required to do a computation"..the energy part (not the space-time part)

The limit on space-time volume per computation follows from this (that is, it follows from the limits of time per operation, set by the heisenberg uncertainty law).

To both statements. When I quoted energy and time in a single sentence, saying they are not limited, I have certainly misled people. Because e.g., time and energy combined (as in W/Flops) are limited indeed.

I did not intent to say that no such limit exists but I do concede my statement was a bit confusing. The Heisenberg uncertainty principle does indeed set a barrier on how small the time per computation with a given energy can become, because time and energy are complementary variables. But each variable alone isn't limited per se. My apologies for the confusion created.

[bxf]

To both statements. When I quoted energy and time in a single sentence, saying they are not limited, I have certainly misled people. Because e.g., time and energy combined (as in W/Flops) are limited indeed.

I did not intent to say that no such limit exists but I do concede my statement was a bit confusing. The Heisenberg uncertainty principle does indeed set a barrier on how small the time per computation with a given energy can become, because time and energy are complementary variables. But each variable alone isn't limited per se. My apologies for the confusion created.

Oh, now everything is perfectly clear, thank you

[Tad1952]

My first Pentax was I think a MX, which replaced a Petriflex which had limited lens availability. I graduated through various Pentax film SLRs. In 1996 my local photographic dealer advised me to switch to Nikon or Canon, as he said Pentax was finished, but I bought an LX, which was already dated, as I wanted a robust camera for polar trips to augment my MZ 5.

As digital came in, with no response from Pentax, I came to regret my decision to stick with Pentax, and I succumbed to the convenience of digital photography with a series of digital compact cameras, rarely using my Pentax film SLRs. Finally as reasonable Pentax DSLRs emerged I have progressed through K7, K5 to K3, and updated my array of lenses. 3 years or so ago on this forum I posted that I could not see why anyone would want FF. I now admit I was wrong. I want FF. I want better DR, I want to use my lenses at the focal lengths they were designed for, I want better control of depth of field, and I want better performance at high ISO.

Looking now at my images from earlyish digital compacts I realise just how much quality I lost in abandoning film so soon.

While we still await full tests, it is clear that the K1 is an awesome camera, in which Pentax has maintained its reputation for both innovation, and for robustness (WR harking back to the LX).

I want a K1.

Many thanks to the guys at Ricoh/Pentax for bringing this about, and to Adam for maintaining this forum.

---

Last edited by Tad1952; 03-09-2016 at 06:50 AM.

[ffking]

I want a K1.

Keeps coming back to that for me, somehow

[dcpropilot]

B&H just updated expected availability to Friday, April 29 2016. Previously it was April 22. This whole pre-order situation is not fun for the impatient like me.

Maybe I should take up yoga or basket weaving to hold me over.

[Erictator]

Keeps coming back to that for me, somehow

Yup me too. I mean, I have held off upgrading my K5 Classic for a long time because it's great sensor has kept me happy... but I really really want better autofocus and a bigger viewfinder.

I shoot mostly for fun these days, no more for hire work, but if I need to replace the K5 anyway, it might as well be with the K1.

I'm not much of a bird'er, so ultra long tele's aren't my thing.

Reviewing my digital archive, most of my pic's on crop sensor are either at the very wide end 17mm to 21mm, or around 70mm to 135mm, and a few at 200mm these days.

So, with my existing stash of FF digital A/F lenses, plus 1.4x TC, I think all I will add to my lens collection might be the new 15mm-30mm wide zoom or a UW prime and I am good to go.

This should be a fun ride.
Eric

[BigMackCam]

B&H just updated expected availability to Friday, April 29 2016. Previously it was April 22. This whole pre-order situation is not fun for the impatient like me.

Maybe I should take up yoga or basket weaving to hold me over.

I'd put your efforts into the study of time travel

[dcpropilot]

I'd put your efforts into the study of time travel

Lol

[Simen1]

How are the interval photo to 4K video function working? Is it a menu setting and what are the 4K fps options?

[jcdoss]

B&H just updated expected availability to Friday, April 29 2016. Previously it was April 22. This whole pre-order situation is not fun for the impatient like me.

Maybe I should take up yoga or basket weaving to hold me over.

Yoga or meditation probably won't work in this case. Pharmaceuticals are in order... try some valium.

[Pepe Guitarra]

B&H just updated expected availability to Friday, April 29 2016. Previously it was April 22. This whole pre-order situation is not fun for the impatient like me.

Maybe I should take up yoga or basket weaving to hold me over.

I assumed it is going to be June 21, 2016. Then, I feel good. If it comes before that, I will be happy.

[BigMackCam]

I assumed it is going to be June 21, 2016. Then, I feel good. If it comes before that, I will be happy.

Whatever the actual date is, those who have pre-ordered will at least know they'll be among the first to get the camera. The rest is down to (quite understandable) excitement and impatience. Kind of like going to bed on Christmas Eve as a kid and constantly thinking "Is it Christmas yet?!?!?!"

[falconeye]

those who have pre-ordered will at least know they'll be among the first to get the camera.

One never knows. Based on my experience (with other brands though), it is sometimes possible to grab a body from first shipment to B&M stores where nobody actually expects them.

Sometimes, the first images from a production camera emerging on the internet are from some guy who doesn't even know he's among the first

And sometimes, pre-ordering from, e.g., B&H is a good way to be among the last ones to receive the camera. Because their preorder lists can be terribly long and they won't tell you.

[BigMackCam]

One never knows. Based on my experience (with other brands though), it is sometimes possible to grab a body from first shipment to B&M stores where nobody actually expects them. Sometimes, the first images from a production camera emerging on the internet are from some guy who doesn't even know he's among the first

Wow! I stand corrected!