15 Apr 13
3 edits
Physics / computer question - i know clock speed is key to computers and its hard engineering wise to make a very accurate one.
Superconductors can spin with almost no resistance if cooled . has anyone tried to make a spinning clock out of one of these (drill holes round the edge and shine a light through something like that) I ask as I guess theres no limit to the speed of such a device.... possible ?? 😕
16 Apr 13
Originally posted by e4chris15 days too late
Physics / computer question - i know clock speed is key to computers and its hard engineering wise to make a very accurate one.
Superconductors can spin with almost no resistance if cooled . has anyone tried to make a spinning clock out of one of these (drill holes round the edge and shine a light through something like that) I ask as I guess theres no limit to the speed of such a device.... possible ?? 😕
16 Apr 13
Originally posted by e4chrisActually, no, computers do not require accurate clocks. Computers require co-ordination, not regularity. So long as every part goes through each cycle together, it doesn't really matter much if the cycles are faster or slower.
Physics / computer question - i know clock speed is key to computers and its hard engineering wise to make a very accurate one.
In fact, almost all computer components are quite happy with significant changes in clock speed. Generally though faster clock speeds require higher voltages and produce more heat, so if you want to overclock a component beyond its design specs you need to give it more power and keep it cool, but that doesn't seem to stop enthusiasts from achieving remarkably high clock speeds.
Superconductors can spin with almost no resistance if cooled . has anyone tried to make a spinning clock out of one of these (drill holes round the edge and shine a light through something like that) I ask as I guess theres no limit to the speed of such a device.... possible ??
What keeps it at a constant speed, and how is the required speed set?
16 Apr 13
Originally posted by twhiteheadThe only thing I see is the need to keep the thing cool for extended periods of time. That means a constant input of energy for the cooling system. That goes down, so much for a timekeeper. BTW, the most accurate of the accurate is now soon to be an accuracy of one second in about 300 billion years. 1/20th of a second in the entire age of the universe!:
Actually, no, computers do not require accurate clocks. Computers require co-ordination, not regularity. So long as every part goes through each cycle together, it doesn't really matter much if the cycles are faster or slower.
In fact, almost all computer components are quite happy with significant changes in clock speed. Generally though faster clock sp ...[text shortened]... ce.... possible ??
What keeps it at a constant speed, and how is the required speed set?[/b]
http://www.gizmag.com/nuclear-clock/21835/
16 Apr 13
Originally posted by sonhouseHowever, that is just an estimate. There is only one accurate Timekeeper.
The only thing I see is the need to keep the thing cool for extended periods of time. That means a constant input of energy for the cooling system. That goes down, so much for a timekeeper. BTW, the most accurate of the accurate is now soon to be an accuracy of one second in about 300 billion years. 1/20th of a second in the entire age of the universe!:
http://www.gizmag.com/nuclear-clock/21835/
17 Apr 13
Originally posted by RJHindsI don't even know how to answer your latest line of BS. Do you even realize how much our technologies depend on accurate clocks? We really don't need your implied or explicit references to religion, especially here in the science forum.
However, that is just an estimate. There is only one accurate Timekeeper.
18 Apr 13
1 edit
Originally posted by sonhouseJesus loves you 🙂
I don't even know how to answer your latest line of BS. Do you even realize how much our technologies depend on accurate clocks? We really don't need your implied or explicit references to religion, especially here in the science forum.
I have made a spinning clock and my laptop now has the power of hal 9000 🙂
18 Apr 13
Originally posted by e4chrisAccurate clocks are not the limiting factor in computer processing.
I have made a spinning clock and my laptop now has the power of hal 9000 🙂
To make processors faster, one needs to:
1. make the parts smaller so as to reduce overall resistance and thus produce less heat.
2. make more parts on the chip so as to achieve both parallel processing and more processing per clock cycle.
One can also make specialized processors that do specific tasks much faster.
27 May 13
Originally posted by sonhousewas thinking about this and actually its a very bad idea - if you made a 'spinning clock' - basically an electric motor where the spinning section is a superconductor - and there was no friction - made it well - it could be dangerous? if it spins to fast? general relativity?
The only thing I see is the need to keep the thing cool for extended periods of time. That means a constant input of energy for the cooling system. That goes down, so much for a timekeeper. BTW, the most accurate of the accurate is now soon to be an accuracy of one second in about 300 billion years. 1/20th of a second in the entire age of the universe!:
http://www.gizmag.com/nuclear-clock/21835/