What are the Implications of Moore's Law?
108381
<Moore's law is a rule of thumb in the computer industry about the growth of computing power over time. Attributed to Gordon E. Moore[1] the co-founder of Intel, it states that the growth of computing power follows an empirical exponential law. Moore originally proposed a 12 month doubling and, later, a 24 month period. Due to the mathematical nature of doubling, this implies that within 30-50 years computers will become more intelligent than human beings.\n\nThis 'law' can be interpreted with varying degrees of rigor and frequently is. The least rigorous interpretation of Moore's law is that computing power per unit cost will continue to grow exponentially. In this form, "Moore's law" has a factual basis and has proven useful for planning purposes.\n\nThe most rigorous interpretation of Moore's law is that the total number of transistors on the cheapest CPU will grow exponentially at a constant rate and that this constant rate produces a doubling every 12 (or 18, or 24) months. This variant oversimplifies a complex history.\n\n\n\nMoore's law\n"The number of transistors and resistors on a chip doubles every 18 months." By Intel co-founder Gordon Moore regarding the pace of semiconductor technology. He made this famous comment in 1965 when there were approximately 60 devices on a chip. Proving Moore's law to be rather accurate, four decades later, Intel placed 1.7 billion transistors on its Itanium chip.\n\nIn 1975, Moore extended the 18 months to 24 months. More recently, he said that the cost of a semiconductor manufacturing plant doubles with each generation of microprocessor. \n\nMoore's Law\n\nAny one of several similar folk theorems that fit computing capacity or cost to a 2t exponential curve, with doubling time close to a year. The most common fits component density to such a curve (previous versions of this entry gave that form). Another variant asserts that the dollar cost of constant computing power decreases on the same curve. The original Moore's Law, first uttered in 1965 by semiconductor engineer Gordon Moore (who co-founded Intel four years later), spoke of the number of components on the lowest-cost silicon integrated circuits — but Moore's own formulation varied somewhat over the years, and reconstructing the meaning of the terminology he used in the original turns out to be fraught with difficulties. Further variants were spawned by Intel's PR department and various journalists.\n\nIt has been shown that none of the variants of Moore's Law actually fit the data very well (the price curves within DRAM generations perhaps come closest). Nevertheless, Moore's Law is constantly invoked to set up expectations about the next generation of computing technology.
794683
please visit\n\nhttp://w3.id.tue.nl/fileadmin/id/objects/E-Atelier/doc/Datasheets/Transistoren/BS170.pdf\n\nfor the detailed report on bs170, N channel EMOSFET
955641
Dude what your talking about doesn't really exist in the consumer market.  That's like A.I. recongnition electronics and it's still being built and tested.  You'll have to wait a while.
202333
try it... then you might want to go into details like integrated circuits ICs and transistors...\n\nhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microprocessor
210651
infact the circuitry is so designed that the total power consumption is very small and thats the reason behind making such ICs using the nano technology. these days an IC may comprise millions of transistors allowing u to make the designs smaller and smaller. along with low cost
263992
Here the concept is U'll decide the logic 1 nad 0 based on  spin of electrons...currently HP is working on it...if they come up with big result, it'll b a revolutionary change n da VLSI industry
425735
Well, your talking about 1966 so you would probably have copper or silver alloys for short distances and steel alloys for long distances.  Not much has changed due to the fact that prices keep things relatively constrained.  Now the amazing part is that because of the speed of modern day computers they have to do transmission line equations inside the chips to reduce reflection problems.  What used to be a problem for long spans of length in transmission lines now exists within a computer chip.  Pretty soon they will have to deal with quantum mechanical problems when wires within a chip become a few atoms wide.
118558
Advanced Micro Devices
796926
Read the paper...\nhttp://www.cs.cmu.edu/~phoenix/nsc1/paper/1-2.pdf
1020201
As regards future usefulness it is hard to beat Computing.\n\nBest of luck !
763502
Don't do it!  EMI - electromagnetic interferrance.  The data signals in the cat5 cables will be corrupted.
348603
It's a useful tool in electrical network analysis.\n\nAnother one is Kirchoff's law.
1011201
The biggest one and most interesting is future alternatives to standard CMOS process technology. CMOS is predicted to run out of steam in a few years, i.e. feature size and speed will hit a limit dictated by physics not technology. What are the alternatives ?
294797
hmmmm good qusetion by the way....\n\nWe are see now that every bit of tecnology is growing closer to gether, PDAs, laptops, phones, Home PCs, Home TV all have a lot in common like OS's, web, wireless etc. its looks like to me that the internet will spread as a funtion over new tecnolgy, allowing us to take our digtel lifes everywere. the internet will be the seemless movment of infomation of this new world, no longer confined to the dark rooms and offices, everything will be at our fingertips. as long as well keep the net open and free!
42116
Switching noise in synchronous digital circuits is directly related to both voltage and clock frequency.
116297
well unless the humna race dies out, I would think there will be major advancements in the field of computers.  Right now they are playing with Quantom computers, we should see thoughs in the home in about 20 odd years.  Right now the Dual-processor chips are coming to market, so things are changing already.
114871
i dont think there's any way for that to happen. All computers are, are our knowledge. all we do is program them. they cant think for themselves. all they are is a bunch of 1's and 0's.