SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Technology Stocks : Advanced Micro Devices - Moderated (AMD) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: jcholewa who wrote (48004)7/17/2001 2:02:50 PM
From: Pravin KamdarRespond to of 275872
 
JC (ot)

Hmm. I wonder when this sort of useless knowledge will start figuring in more deeply with process technology and all that.

I wouldn't really call it knowledge. We "know" very little. It's just an attempt to apply a field model to describe the inner construction of protons, neutrons, and associated particles, where the gluon is the exchange particle. Many of these models will be changed.

Pravin.



To: jcholewa who wrote (48004)7/17/2001 2:03:57 PM
From: jamok99Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 275872
 
jc,

ot-re:<<quarks - Hmm. I wonder when this sort of useless knowledge will start figuring in more deeply with process technology and all that>>

Such knowledge could be applied metaphorically right now to the stock price - AMD certainly seems to be a "bottom quark" since the CC - the only shoe left to drop is what the direction of the "spin" on INTC's quark is at this time ;-)

Jamok



To: jcholewa who wrote (48004)7/17/2001 2:10:04 PM
From: andreas_wonischRespond to of 275872
 
JC, Re: I wonder when this sort of useless knowledge will start figuring in more deeply with process technology and all that.

Quarks? Probably never. Even a theoretical quantum computer is working on a larger magnitude. Having heard some courses on elementary particles in university it's the most "esoteric" physical area I know of (and one of the most difficult, too). Even astrophysics is IMO more "concrete".

Andreas



To: jcholewa who wrote (48004)7/17/2001 3:10:35 PM
From: Joe NYCRead Replies (1) | Respond to of 275872
 
JC,

Hmm. I wonder when this sort of useless knowledge will start figuring in more deeply with process technology and all that.

I don't think it is in cards for several decades. We are still dealing with layers of several atoms, the next level will be the quantum level, dealing with orbits of electrons, and changes in energy levels as their orbits change.

Joe


HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News