Need for critical assessment

IEEE Transactions on Electron Devices

Volumn 43, Issue 10, 1996, Pages 1637-1639

  Landauer, Rolf ^a  

^a IBM T J WATSON RESEARCH CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

Mesoscopic devices; Optical logic; Quantum parallelism; Technology assessment

Indexed keywords

FERROELECTRIC DEVICES; FORMAL LOGIC; JOSEPHSON JUNCTION DEVICES; MICROWAVE DEVICES; OPTOELECTRONIC DEVICES; QUANTUM ELECTRONICS; TECHNOLOGICAL FORECASTING;

MESOSCOPIC DEVICES; OPTICAL LOGIC; QUANTUM PARALLELISM; TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT;

LOGIC DEVICES;

EID: 0030271054     PISSN: 00189383     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1109/16.536808     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. J. T. Wallmark and S. M. Marcus, in Pmc. IRE, 1962, vol. 50, pp. 286-298.
2. J. T. WallmarkBasic considerations in microelectronicsin Micro-electronics, F. Keonjian, ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1963, ch. 2., pp. 10-96.
3. [3J A. B. FowlerCoupled semiconductor injection laser devicesU.S. Patent 3303431, Feb. 7, 1967.
4. Quenching of gallium-arsenide injection lasersAppl. Phys. Lett., vol. 3, pp. 1-3, 1963.
5. Cooperative effect in GaAs lasers/ Appl. Phys., vol. 35, pp. 2275-2276, 1964.
6. G. J. Lasher and A. B. FowlerMutually quenched injection lasers as bistable devices." IBM J. Res. Dev. vol. 8, pp. 471-475, 1964.
7. A. B. Fowler and G. J. LasherBistable devicesU.S. Patent 3 509 384, Apr. 28, 1970.
8. G. J. LasherAnalysis of a proposed bistable injection laserSolid State Electron., vol. 7, pp. 707-716, 1964.
9. Multistablc device operating on the principle of stimulated emission of radiation." U.S. Patent 3 427 563, Feb. 11, 1969.
10. M. I. Nathan, J. C. Marinace, R. F. Rutz, A. E. Michel, and G. J. LasherGaAs injection laser with novel mode control and switching propertiesJ. Appl. Phys., vol. 36, pp. 473-480, 1965.
11. [11J W. F. KosonockyOptical system for performing digital logicU.S. Patent 3431437, Mar. 4, 1969.
12. O. A. Reimann and W. F. KosonockyProgress in optical computer researchIEEE Spectrum, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 181-195, 1965.
13. N. G. Basov, W. H. Culver, and B. Shah, in Laser Händbook, vol. 2, F. T. Arecchi and E. O. Schulz-DuBois, eds. Amsterdam: North Holland, 1972, pp. 1649-1694.
14. R. W. Kcycs and J. A. ArmstrongThermal limitations in optical logicAppl. Opt., vol. 8, pp. 2549-2552, 1969.
15. R. W. KeyesPower dissipaton in information processingScience, vol. 168, no. 3933. pp. 796-801, 1970.
16. R. LandauerOptical logic and optically accessed digital storagein Opt. Inform. Process., E. Nesterikhin, G. W. Stroke, W. E. Kock, eds. New York: Plenum, 1976, pp. 219-253.
17. D. Smith, and D. MillerComputing at the speed of lightThe New Scientist, vol. 85, no. 1195, pp. 554-556, 1980.
18. E. Abraham, C. T. Seaton, and D. SmithThe optical computerSei. Amer., vol. 248, pp. 85-93, Feb. 1983.
19. A. HuangArchitectural considerations involved in the design of an optical digital computerProc. IEEE, vol. 72, no. 7, pp. 780-786. 1984.
20. Optical digital computersin P we. Supercomputing '59. New York: ACM, 1989, pp. 446-449.
21. R. Landauer. "Advanced technology and truth in advertisingPhysica A, vol. 168, pp. 75-87, 1990.
22. T. E. BellOptical computing: A field in fluxIEEE Spectrum, vol 23. no. 8, pp. 34-57, 1986.
23. Issue on optical computing, Proc. IEEE, vol. 72, pp. 755-979, 1984.
24. J. von NeumannNon-linear capacitance or inductance switching, amplifying and memory organsU.S. Patent 2815488, Dec. 3, 1957.
25. E. GotoOn the application of parametrically excited non-linear resonators7. IECBJ, vol. 38. pp. 770-775, 1955.
26. R. W. KeyesWhat makes a good computer device?." Science, vol. 230, pp. 138-144, 1985.
27. J. F. ScottFerroelectric memoriesPhys. World, vol. 8. no. 2, pp. 46-50, 1995.
28. H. van HoutenPhysics, materials science, and trends in microelectronicsin Future Trends in Microelectronics, S. Luryi, J. Xu, and A. Zaslavsky, Eds. Dordrecht: Kluwcr, in press.,
29. C. W. J. Beenakker and II. von HoutenQuantum transport in semiconductor nanostructuresSolid State Phys., vol. 44, pp. 1-170, 1991.
30. S. Datta. Electronic Transport in Mesoscopic Systems. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1995.
31. Y. Imry, introduction to Mesoscopic Physics. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, in press.
32. R. LandauerCan we switch control of Q.M. transmission?Phys. Today, vol. 42, no. 10. pp. 119-121, 1989.
33. R. LandauerIs quantum mechanics useful?Philos. Trans. R. Soc. London A, 1995, vol. 353, pp. 367-376.
34. C. S. Lent, P. D. Tougaw, W. Porod, and G. H. BernsteinQuantum cellular automatatfanotechnology, vol. 4, pp. 49-57, 1993.
35. D. DeutschQuantum theory, the Church-Turing principle and the universal quantum computerProc. R. Soc. Lond. A, 1985, vol. 400, no. 4, pp. 97-117.
36. P. W. ShorAlgorithms for quantum computation décrète log and factoringin Proc. 35th Annual Symp. Foundation of Computer Science. Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Computer Society, 1994, p. 124-134.
37. New Scientist, vol. 143, no. 1944, p. 1, 1994.
38. S. LloydAlmost any quantum logic gate is universalPhys. Rev. Lett., vol. 75, no. 2, pp. 346-349, 1995.
39. D. DiVincenzoQuantum computationScience, vol. 270, p. 255-261, 1995.
40. R. LandauerIs quantum mechanically coherent computation useful?in Proc. Drexel4 Symfi. Quantum Nonintegrability-Quantum Classical Correspondence, D.H. Feng and B.L. Hu, eds. Boston: International, in press.
41. A. PeresReversible logic and quantum computersPhys. Rev. A, vol. 32, no. 6, pp. 3266-3276, 1985.
42. H. F. Chau and F. WilczekSimple realization of the Fredkin gate using a series of two-body operatorsPhys. Rev. Lett., vol. 75, no. 4, pp. 748-750, 1995.