Simen Kvaal wrote:

> Quantuum-processors would reduce the rendering-time tremendously. Not only
> would they be fast, but they calculate implicit equations instantly, just
> like optimal angles between atoms in molecules are found instantly with
> quantuum-porcesses. Ray-object intersections could be calculated instatly
> for _any_ surface. Now _that_ would be something.
>
> I've heard that they now have constructed a simple quantuum-ciruit that does
> some simple calculations. Int the future ... blabla.
>
> Simen.
>
> John VanSickle skrev i meldingen <38B992D0.DF970A41@erols.com>...
> >Equiprawn wrote:
> >>
> >> Hmmm... there's an idea - would there be any way to get Povray to
> >> trace more than one ray at a time?
> >
> >On less than two processors, no.  If a processor is designed a
> >particular way, it is possible for it to trace two rays at once, but it
> >would be far more trouble than it's worth; the rendering engive would
> >almost certainly have to be rewritten directly in assembler, and I doubt
> >the POV team is interested in doing that.
> >
> >Regards,
> >John
> >--
> >ICQ: 46085459

The One and ONLY QUantum computer takes up an entire lab of MIT (I think) and
can only process only one program as of October of 1999 (it answers a series of
simple questions...)  there was an article on it in Discovery magazine a few
months back...  try looking it up in the library cause i may be wrong on the
Location, size and program types.....  but It is supposed to be at least 1000
times faster than the standard supercomputer ( is there really such a thing as
standard supercomputers??????   ).

Post a reply to this message