If we're talking about security of cryptocurrency, no, energy consumption is a cost to be reduced. It's not a positive factor in any way. Computation with no power consumption is physically impossible, but minimizing energy consumption is a goal - not a metric getting gamed.
-
Even without the isolation, kT ~ 10^{-53} Joules is the scale of the energy fluctuations. The noise effects will be pretty small. I guess it's relevant and will require isolation on sufficient computational scale, but far beyond what happens on Earth today.
At a rough guess, all digital computations done by humanity to date are probably on the order of 10^35 operations, maybe 10^40. So you could (in principle) error-correct away all noise due to de Sitter radiation as a cost of < a picojoule.
-
-
Of course, for more serious computations - after converting, say, a galaxy to reversible computronium - the in-principle energy cost of computation absent isolation might be substantial.
-
Yes, for "everyday" Kardashev level I, II & III computation this is not much of a problem. When we get to estimates of the total computation ability of accessible universe, subyoctojoule costs start to pile up. Affects grand strategy for some utility functions a lot.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I think that is incorrect as a physics calculation.
-
It's not intended as a calculation, just a ballpark estimate. A detailed calculation will depend on quite a few things, especially the depth of the computation and the details of any error-correction (i.e., cooling) strategy.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.