On 1/27/2012 11:58 PM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 27.01.2012 23:46 Russell Standish said the following:
On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 08:27:31PM +0100, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 26.01.2012 12:00 Russell Standish said the following:
If you included these two bits, the thermodynamic entropy is two
bits less, = 4.15 x 10^{-24} J/K less

This is so many orders of magnitude less than the entropy due to
the material, its probably not worth including, but it is there.

I do not believe that effects below the experimental noise are
important for empirical science. You probably mean then some other
science, it would be good if you define what science you mean.


For one thing, it indicates to storing just two bits of information
on these physical substrates is grossly inefficient!

Well, you could contact governments then and try to convince them that coins in use are highly inefficient. It would be a good chance to have funding.

By the way, at what temperature there will be possible to save more information, at higher or at lower one. Brent and John are talking about the entropy and the higher temperature the higher the entropy. From an engineering viewpoint it looks a bit strange.

At a higher temperature there are more microstates accessible and hence more uncertainty as to which state is actually realized. But if you're storing information, which you want to retrieve, this uncertainty is noise and you have to use larger increments of energy to reliably switch states. So for storage it is more efficient (takes less energy per bit) to be colder.




You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to