I am curious why we limit computers to a binary format.
Is it because the 1 0 base 2 form is so readily understood?

I realize that digital computing won out over analog computing years ago,
but there is another alternative I have been wondering about.

We have had (for several years) devices that don't just register on/off for processing.
They are the trinary devices, or those devices that register a negative or positive voltage, and they also exhibit an indeterminate state somewhere between the two. They are also used as bi-directional buffer devices.

Would this not be an appropriate device to use for AI (Adaptive Intelligence) research?

I certainly don't have any proposals nor do I have any idea of how to design useful circuits that register yes, no or indeterminate results, but wouldn't this provide an interesting platform for research?

Certainly binary provides everything we need now, so why would we want to try anything else? I don't know, just asking.

Here is why I ask...

When I was working as a programmer for a computer company, we needed to add function to a circuit card.

A hardware engineer said that there was no spare logic on the landscape of the chipset on the circuit card, but a microcode programmer said they could do it in the firmware. The hardware group then said, wait, we just figured out how we can do it, and they did.

So, in the next production run, we had our function in hardware. I suspect the hardware was nanoseconds faster than the firmware.

Is this the case here? Since we can do yes, no, maybe function in software, it isn't necessary in hardware?

Thanks for your kind consideration.

rob

_________________
Who said it would be easy? If it was easy, somebody else would have been given the assignment.

It seems like if our brains can do it (whatever "it" is), then eventually computers could do it. Isn't that concept, of computing like physical brains do (although they are really emulating nonphysical Consciousness) behind quantum cloud computing?
Love
Bette

_________________
All That Is
what is?
Consciousness.

binary is based on the transistor switch as being on or off, though the control is a third line. Seems redundant on the surface, turn on a signal to turn on a switch, but there is a logic to it at a greater number of transistors used. Digital Electronics

On ternary you might find interest in:
http://www.americanscientist.org/issues ... issue.aspx

What, and each transister is in charge of one of the eight bits in a byte?
Love
Bette

_________________
All That Is
what is?
Consciousness.

Yes, Bette, one transistor one bit.
Which is better than the older computers - one vacuum tube or relay, one bit.

Actually each byte can also have a parity bit and a write storage protect bit and several other bits such as read only etc. Even though those are not part of the data, they are sometimes present in a memory chip, depending on the manufacturer.

IBM had parity bits as standard until the IBM/PC proved that data integrity was secondary to cost, and nobody pays attention anyway. (What does a dropped bit matter anyway?) Most fixed word length IBM Computers used odd parity. (add the bits, if they were an odd number, the data was considered good, if an even number, the data was bad, and flagged with a parity check). When initially writing the word, the parity bit was turned on or off to make the word odd parity. A word here being two bytes.

Storage protect was a very powerful concept in that you wrote a word of data, then turned on the storage protect bit. If, at any time during program execution, a program attempted to write to that location, a storage protect violation was raised, and either execution was halted, or some other appropriate action could be taken.
That would certainly make it difficult for worms and viruses to infiltrate - wouldn't it?
Too bad we got away from that idea.

Of course this relates to the old "core" storage devices of the computational dark ages as well - the 1940s '50s and '60s.

_________________
Who said it would be easy? If it was easy, somebody else would have been given the assignment.

What do we do now for storage protection, rc? This is very interesting, thank you.
Love
Bette

_________________
All That Is
what is?
Consciousness.

Parity is still used.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAID_5#RAID_5

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAM_parity

Mr. Cray was famously known to have said "Parity is for farmers", but later changed his mind saying "Farmers buy computers", or something like that.

I don't know if parity is used by TBC, but would tend to doubt it since most errors are due to physical deterioration or other physical errors.

Thank you Moji.
Love
Bette

_________________
All That Is
what is?
Consciousness.

Thanks for the information Moji,
To expand slightly on the historical note, the technique for error correction by IBM - usually in the early tape drives (Model 2400 etc.) was the CRC. (or Cyclic Redundancy Check) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyclic_redundancy_check

You can read about the type of storage protection currently in use here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Storage_protection
in which (varying sized) protected blocks of storage may be implemented in the hardware or the software of the using system.

Now the question, does TBC use protection or parity or error correction?

I don't "think" so. We will probably learn more when we figure out how holographic memory storage works. I suspect it has more to do with filtering out the "noise" inherent in any data transmission.
If we consider data errors as noise, that is.

And while we are discussing error correction, remember the tech reps favorite mantra? Always back up your files!

Does TBC have a back up?

rob

_________________
Who said it would be easy? If it was easy, somebody else would have been given the assignment.

Rob,

There is no backup for reality. The system is not perfect but functions and developed as it is. To have backups, one must have something outside the system. A computer system has a CD or DVD drive to which media the computer may be backed up by means of the operator going through the motions of creating the back up. Or perhaps it backs up over the network to some alternative storage, effectively in either case to another reality, a meta reality. There is no meta reality relative to our existence within and part of the ultimate reality [as we know it] of Consciousness Space to which CS and the VRs generated within it could be backed up. As Tom has pointed out, if there is something outside of CS as AUM, we have no way to be aware of it. Unless you choose to postulate the existence of some greater such system containing CS/AUM and within it one or more beings capable of taking that backup media and rebooting the CS again, then there is no backup. Any such could only be a matter of faith or belief. Is it not fortunate that our reality is the most reliable 'thing' that exists?

Ted

No, I'd say it is fortunate. :)
Thank you Ted, as always.
Love
Bette

_________________
All That Is
what is?
Consciousness.

I don't know about off-site back up but there could be something like restore points in the system. For instance, say we do something to render Earth uninhabitable. TBC could go back along the history thread to where it was still a workable PMR learning lab and start the simulation over from there.

Ramon

Ramon,

It is in the nature of CS as a digital reality that everything is recorded. You can think of it as a 3 dimensional cellular automaton with two dimensions as a grid of cells which interact and store the data and do all of the calculations. Some regions are data bases while other regions are us as IUOCs interconnected by the RWW. Some regions are the VRs as they are the probability fields being projected as the VR. Some regions amount to TBC and so forth. Then the third dimension is as the 'past' as it extends back to t=0 for all of the CS delta t's. Also the 'future' as it is projected ahead. The one 'layer' which represents t= 'now' is special as that is the 2D layer of cells where free will of IUOCs and AUM are applied, the place where the action is and where what will become fixed as the past is generated. The past layers are fixed as a record of what has happened. The future layers are projections and subject to change depending on what happens in the 'now' layer where free will is applied.

So yes, the past history of the probability fields of the VR could be tapped and moved ahead to the present CS state space and that 'time' probability state plane be used to restart the simulation of the VR. How this would redirect history away from bad choices is not clear to me unless there were significant change of parameters in some way. Either as the entropy level of the participants or some tweaking of system parameters. That information is above my pay grade level. Likely above Tom's as well. From what I see and little I know from PMR, we don't get to ring the bell or make the whistle blow. I think that we are more likely just the guys that clean up the mess if the engine jumps the tracks or try to keep it from doing so. Being part of a massive NPMR operation to do just that, keeping the engine from jumping the tracks, seems to be Tom's role at present. The CS being pro active rather than having to restart the simulation over from an earlier point seems a much more desirable situation. I think this has gone on throughout history and can be sensed if not directly observed in the past.

Ted