|
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, May 26 2013 @ 02:18 PM EDT |
The only real thing having better code proves is that the previous code could
have been better. The machine itself has not changed. Only the code has. To
argue that the machine has improved is an illusion from where the real work
occurred. The real improvement occurred in the abstract!
You want to
improve on the computer? The computer is the non-abstract.
Here's an
idea (which someone else may have had) that I would agree would be patentable
subject matter (pass basic 101 requirement).
Using nanotech and the concept
of carbon nanotubes: you create a fiber core of conductive material
You
want to aim for a combination of high temp resistance and low electrical
resistance.
Surround that core with a nanotube of non-conductive
material
You want to aim for a combination of high temp resistance (with
regards it's melting point) as well as high temperature transfer. This will
allow the drawing of the energy away from the core so the core stays cooler and
can conduct electricity better.
Looks like Intel might be working with
that already. Apparently the i7 Core has a .022 micron manufacturing process,
that's 22 nanometers.
There you go, a change to a non-abstract item. You
can touch (although not consciously be aware of such touch) the item.
RAS[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|