On TechRepublic: Worst movie of the year?
BNET Business Network:
BNET
TechRepublic
ZDNet
TalkBack 25 of 31:
Next »
« Previous
Brain Speed
Actually the human brain is processing at an extremely high rate of speed. May be on the order of 60,000,000,000,000,000 operations per second or higher. But all of those processes are not focused on a single task. Constant processing of billions of inputs from the skin, eyes, ears, nose and tounge; matching those inputs to sense memory, monitoring and adjusting hormone levels, respiration, and heartrate, etc.

We can design single task devices which, for that single task, outperform the human mind, but we cannot design a device which can even come close to the multi-tasking performance.

Name one processor that could even attempt to keep up with storing the inundation of information processed by the human mind. Put a number on it. Then remember that the human mind analyses and interprets that data; correlates it with past memories, while storing! Also that the human mind can create new, abstract associations from the data!

It will be a very long time indeed before technology catches up with biology.
Posted by: medezark   Posted on: 04/26/04 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use
Reply to Story Reply to Message

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

Moore's Law and Intel  cbradshaw@... | 12/01/03
An much more fundamental limit...  Jomo_z | 12/01/03
... Exactly Correct, and also the masses do not need more CPU Power.  Gizmo_z | 12/02/03
The Itanium is not a consumer CPU.  balsover | 12/02/03
3rd dimension ?  Goulu | 12/01/03
2008  Peter Komisar | 12/01/03
And how much do you want to pay?  Gizmo_z | 12/02/03
Sorry, it doesn't work that way  HalcyonSeven | 12/02/03
Intel scientists running out of tricks  MarcB_z | 12/01/03
Re: Re: Intel scientists running out of tricks  issthatso | 12/01/03
Get a clue  Prognosticator | 12/01/03
Got a clue, do you?  MarcB_z | 12/01/03
They both  rkadowns | 12/01/03
True  MarcB_z | 12/01/03
Haven't heard much about Quantum processors lately  voska | 12/01/03
They are meant to be developing  quantumstate | 06/12/06
RE: valence orbit  JCitizen | 04/27/04
Are you paying attention?  balsover | 12/02/03
RISC development Cycle is still robust  MarcB_z | 12/02/03
Light Cubes  tomr1yarbrough | 12/01/03
Very true and I agree, this is the next step.  rkadowns | 12/01/03
They will find a way.  DonnieBoy | 12/01/03
Brain Speed  Nullifidian | 12/01/03
Brain speed....not!  Jomo_z | 12/01/03
Brain Speed  medezark | 04/26/04
Speed of Light and Speed of design-to-market  michael-t | 12/01/03
IA64 Not going to happen for Desktop  Gizmo_z | 12/02/03
64 bit computing is on the desktop NOW  MarcB_z | 12/02/03
Electrons are never destroyed - it's against the laws of physics!  CobraA1 | 06/12/06
Yes it is badly worded  quantumstate | 06/12/06
The whole moores law thing is getting ridiculous  quantumstate | 06/12/06

What do you think?

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

advertisement

SmartPlanet

Click Here