Theoretical physicist Michio Kaku this week has discussed in a short video why Moore’s Law will collapse “in about 10 years or so.” In this video presented by Big Think, the law created by Gordon E. Moore is not debunked, but is instead explained as having a limit – you can’t keep getting smaller forever. Moore’s Law says, for those of you unfamiliar, that the number of transistors placed (inexpensively) on an integrated circuit will double every two years. Since Moore’s law was first established, it’s pretty much been proven true – but it’s all about to end: imagine that!
What you’ll find here is that of course, Moore’s Law can’t go on forever. There is a time when there’s nowhere to go but to different materials of course, and you can’t make computing power on no matter at all. The limits of silicon are about to be reached as we reach the limits of Moore’s Law as well. Kaku explains in the video below that once we get to processes that are 5nm, we’ve got nowhere to go with silicon as anything smaller will overheat much too quickly.
You’ll also year Kaku speak about what we’re probably going to end up working with in the future. There’s protein computers, computers that work with DNA, and molecular computers. Don’t forget quantum computers, just one of many radical ideas that have not yet come to fruition because we’ve not yet exhausted what we’ve got on the silicon tip. Kaku notes that we’ll almost certainly start seeing the following:
“If I were to put money on the table, I would say that in the next ten years we’ll simply tweak Moore’s Law a bit with chip-like computers in three dimensions, but beyond that we may have to go to molecular computers and perhaps late in the 21st century quantum computers.” – Kaku
What do you think, folks? Will we be moving away from this limited factory process sooner than 10 years or will we stick with it even with its given limits? Where does the current process end? And will we continue to need more processing power into the future, or will we simply become satisfied at some point? I think you know the answer to that last question right here and now, no doubt!
[via Big Think]