Being able to switch at 1mhz and having to switch 1 million times in a second are different things. You can want a very fast switch but not to do it often.

That's the only way I can rescue these sentences which I agree are a bit confusing.

It's an odd combination of numbers. So if you use it for one second, it breaks?

Though I guess, 1 trillion switches is more than 1 million times too...

If you operate it constantly at it's max switching frequency, yes.

Existing transistors and physical switches etc. will also have silly short lifetimes if you do that math. In practice why would you be switching so much?

> Existing transistors and physical switches etc. will also have silly short lifetimes if you do that math

Power switching in PWM is often 10s of KHz switching speeds and these are expected to last years so not really true.

I mean silly compared to what they will actually be in practice, not that they would also be on the order of a second.

You don't go ok switch is good for 10M actuations, actuation force is x, so it takes this long to press, times by 10M.. switch will last 17.5 months (or whatever it might come to).

You run into those 10 million actuations really quickly on anything Logitech branded.

Not really. Transistors, especially in power electronics, will almost always be run at basically their max switching frequency continuously for almost the entirety of their power-on time. They certainly will not wear out after 1 second of use at their maximum frequency.

(This kind of thing is extremely common in MEMS, BTW: a lot of cool things you can fabricate mechanically in silicon will do something really cool but for a similarly short time period, and so they never leave the lab. All the actual uses of MEMS have much bigger constraints on what you can actually make)

Would there be any returns to pairing this approach with recent advances in laser cooling (and integrated photonics)?