Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!ut-sally!husc6!panda!genrad!decvax!tektronix!tekig!tekig5!waynekn
From: waynekn@tekig5.UUCP (Wayne Knapp)
Newsgroups: net.arch
Subject: Re: VERY LARGE main memories: crypt
Message-ID: <1124@tekig5.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 11-Sep-86 12:46:33 EDT
Article-I.D.: tekig5.1124
Posted: Thu Sep 11 12:46:33 1986
Date-Received: Fri, 12-Sep-86 22:40:53 EDT
References: <1178@bu-cs.bu-cs.BU.EDU> <1087@ihwpt.UUCP> <553@astroatc.UUCP> <2431@phri.UUCP>
Organization: Tektronix, Inc., Beaverton, OR
Lines: 21

In article <2431@phri.UUCP>, roy@phri.UUCP (Roy Smith) writes:
> In article <553@astroatc.UUCP> philm@astroatc.UUCP (Phil Mason) writes:
> > Isn't 10^200 more like it? I didn't think those physicists used base two
> > very often!
> 
> 	No, physicists don't usually think in binary, and no, I didn't mean
> 10^200th.  A physicist would say there are about 10^40 electrons and a
> computer scientist would call that about 2^200 because it's more useful
> that way.  And please, no nitpicking from people claiming these numbers are
> off by an order of magnitude or two.
> -- 
> Roy Smith, {allegra,philabs}!phri!roy
> System Administrator, Public Health Research Institute
> 455 First Avenue, New York, NY 10016


     Try 10^40 electrons in 100 qubic kilometers of water.  You can do the
math.  Sorry to nitpick but I think you are only  by a hunderd or two hunderd
orders of magnitude.  You must think the universe is a very small place! 

                             Wayne Knapp