|
|
|
|
![]() ![]() |
Jul 24 2006, 06:03 PM
Post
#11
|
|
|
Geek in-training Group: Members Posts: 301 Joined: 2-July 05 From: Washington State, USA, 3rd Rock from the Star Sol Member No.: 6,772 |
the exact specs on the laser platform that the US is testing for miltary use, I don't have. However from what I have been able to learn is that its rumored that the aircraft carries a small nuclear reactor to power it, but thats just rumor. As for a laser gun, the size of a side arm like a Barreta 9MM, lol, keep dreaming, thats still just for Sci-Fi.
|
|
|
|
Jul 24 2006, 11:12 PM
Post
#12
|
|
|
Newbie [ Level 2 ] Group: Members Posts: 19 Joined: 22-July 06 Member No.: 14,660 |
Although Laser guns sound very intresting and probably quite fun 2 own.
I don't see this ever being avaiable to the public. As much as I'd like to have 1 the likelyness(sp) of this is near impossilble. I'd also like 2 have a transporter much like the 1 from Star Trek. As 4 this monitor that's paper thin & as flexible as the Chinese Cirrcus. I've seen something that closely resembles this monitor. I think it was also on the Discovery Channel. They didn't get into the detail of this monitor but it was in fact very flexible. They also did fold it up & put in in a bag/carrier. No price was given. My guess woulb be that it would cost an arm & a leg 2 get 1 of these. |
|
|
|
Jul 25 2006, 05:56 PM
Post
#13
|
|
|
Techno-Necromancer Group: Members Posts: 1,018 Joined: 13-January 05 From: The Net Member No.: 2,127 |
I can't beleive no one caught this sooner:
QUOTE(nightfox) 1) Currently, processors are maxed at 3 GHz in speed (of course these are really expensive and mostly used in high-end servers currently. Smaller devices run slower. I don't think there is a hand held computer that doesn't go faster than 500 MHz (correct me if I'm wrong) Current processors are and were at the time this thread was started, maxxed at around 4GHz. It is very easy to find 3.2GHz processors, though not in dual cores because of the heat issue. Intel actually makes commercially a 3.9GHz processor, but it is very expensive and the efficiency of slower processors makes them a better choice. It is possible in mostly labe scenarios to go beyond 4GHz, but the amount of cooling required pretty much limits these chips to lab scenarios. In addition, processor companies are not working on faster processors. It is pointless to do so. On average in an application, at worst (from the processor's perspective) every 3rd instruction and at best (again from the processor's perspective) every 20th instruction requires data to be read from RAM or worse, and actual port. Because the fastest RAM at the moment runs at 667MHz, under 1GHz so at best 1/2 of most new processors, a faster processor would not have any noticeable difference. However, processor companies are working on more efficient processors that can retrieve and handle more data faster and can skip some data required steps until later. ~Viz |
|
|
|
![]() ![]() |
Similar Topics
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 5th December 2008 - 04:53 PM |