Slashdot Log In
Ten Weirdest Types of Computers
Posted by
ScuttleMonkey
on Fri Apr 11, 2008 04:46 PM
from the fringe-computing dept.
from the fringe-computing dept.
An anonymous reader writes to mention that New Scientist has a quick round-up of what they consider to be the ten weirdest types of computers. The list includes everything from quantum computers, to slime molds, to pails of water. "Perhaps the most unlikely place to see computing power is in the ripples in a tank of water. Using a ripple tank and an overhead camera, Chrisantha Fernando and Sampsa Sojakka at the University of Sussex, used wave patterns to make a type of logic gate called an "exclusive OR gate", or XOR gate."
Related Stories
Firehose:Ten weirdest ways to make a computer by Anonymous Coward
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
It ain't ... (Score:5, Funny)
What about the weirdest computer of all? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:What about the weirdest computer of all? (Score:5, Interesting)
The singularity, as the man said, is near.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I realize that the only one written only by Anne McCaffrey was the original, "The Ship Who Sang", and the others were co-written by other authors. (Usually that means written by other authors using McCaffrey's univ
Re:What about the weirdest computer of all? (Score:5, Funny)
On the bright side, I hear collisions at relativistic velocities are rather painless....
Parent
Re:What about the weirdest computer of all? (Score:5, Insightful)
Your logic is faulty because there is no rule which states that extremely complex systems have to be created by even more complex systems. This is the same logical fallacy which creationists often advance in order to "prove" the existence of God: the idea that because humans are complex, there must be an even more complex being which created us. In reality, it is quite possible for complex systems to be created as a product of random chance, or natural selection.
As for humans being equipped with "the highest resolution video, audio, CPU/logic, etc", that's just plain silly. Computers can detect and display video at resolutions (and in light spectrums) which are undetectable by the human eye. They can detect and produce sounds which would be inaudible to us. And when it comes to raw number-crunching ability....well, don't be silly. I'd like to see you sit down and brute-force an NT LM hash in your head. Hell, I'll be generous and let you use a pen and paper!
BTW, the guy you were responding to was clearly making a joke. Lighten up.
Parent
Re:Random chance cannot create complex systems (Score:5, Funny)
Earth. Jupiter. Saturn. Alpha Geminorum. The Andromeda galaxy. The United States tax system.
Parent
Re:What about the weirdest computer of all? (Score:5, Insightful)
Human accomplishments, much like evolutionary progression, are cumulative. Our brains are basically simulation programs - they take data, feed it through a series of filters and rules, and then act on the output. However, since we're able to learn, each successive generation gets a different set of rules and filters, allowing us to work out new problems without first having to go back to basics. As such, it's wrong to say that the human mind created modern computers - rather, the human SPECIES created modern computers. There's a huge difference there. All of our accomplishments owe as much to natural selection and the passage of time as they do to the complexity of the human brain.
But yes, I'd agree that the human brain is an amazingly complex piece of machinery, which is impressively adaptive. If that's what he meant, then we are in 100% agreement.
Show me a human that can.
Even if we ignore the fact that judging masterpieces has nothing to do with resolution, your argument still makes no sense because the judgement of "masterpieces" is subjective. Show a Picasso to an African tribesman, and he'll probably use it for kindling. On the other hand, the artwork of his own people will doubtless hold great value to him, while being nearly worthless to the average westerner.
Parent
Wetware (Score:5, Informative)
No Conway's Life? (Score:5, Interesting)
Conway's Life is Turing complete. I guess, to a computer scientist, it's not really surprising that an automaton could be Turing complete, but it's still pretty damn awesome to think that little cells replicating on the screen are capable of carrying out any arbitrary computation -- as well as self-reproduction.
I wonder, with a large enough simulation, if self-reproducing, intelligent entities could evolve out of just a few simple rules (and it's really only one rule, if you code it a certain way).
Re:No Conway's Life? (Score:4, Interesting)
Sorry, due to a typo the link was lost in the previous post.
Parent
Pneumatic computer (Score:5, Interesting)
Personal favourites (Score:4, Interesting)
The one at Unseen University (Score:5, Funny)
Some better examples (Score:5, Interesting)
Some better examples:
The Game of Life is Turing Complete (Score:4, Interesting)
It is possible for gliders to interact with other objects in interesting ways. For example, if two gliders are shot at a block in just the right way, the block will move closer to the source of the gliders. If three gliders are shot in just the right way, the block will move farther away. This "sliding block memory" can be used to simulate a counter. It is possible to construct logic gates such as AND, OR and NOT using gliders. It is possible to build a pattern that acts like a finite state machine connected to two counters. This has the same computational power as a universal Turing machine, so the Game of Life is as powerful as any computer with unlimited memory: it is Turing complete. Furthermore, a pattern can contain a collection of guns that combine to construct new objects, including copies of the original pattern. A "universal constructor" can be built which contains a Turing complete computer, and which can build many types of complex objects, including more copies of itself.[4]
homebrew purely optical computer (Score:5, Interesting)
Want to build your own cheap, brilliantly visual set of logic gates to show kids how digital computing works? Nightlights. Each one is a NOT gate. You put two close to a third's sensor and you have a NOR. Put them some distance away with some blocking material around them (this is fussy) and you can get a NAND. A little bit of thinking and combinatorial logic and you can build anything else from those. I've built stacked, carrying half-adders this way, and it's pretty cool to watch small binary numbers get added.
Two nightlights, each with its bulb by the other's sensor, are a flip-flop. Now you have memory.
For extra credit, you can build a ring oscillator by putting an odd number of nightlights in a ring, so each is seeing the next one's sensor, and use that to clock your half-adders and flipflops.
If I had a lot of money and time, it'd be fun to see how far this could be extended (before I had to start hiring kids as tube runners to keep the whole works going.)
Weirdest storage. (Score:5, Interesting)
Mercury delay lines are a good one. Delay lines in general, actually. I recall readong once about a free-space delay line using a laser beam between Earth and a retroreflector on the moon.
CRT storage tubes are another.
What about stochastic computers ? Robust, cheap... (Score:4, Interesting)
Multiplication, always a problem with analog computers at the time, was very simply, quickly and cheaply done by an AND chip (one of the inputs had to be decorrelated of the other by a delay line to avoid parasitic correlations). The addition was a little more tricky, but getting (p1+p2)/2 could be achived with just three basic circuits, if I remember well. Of course you had to remember that the value was scaled, well, exactly the same king of caution you had to observe with analog synthetizers at the very same time.
Details here for whoever is interested... and knows somebody reading French ;-)
http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calculateur_stochastique [wikipedia.org] The complexity of keeping trace of scaling, decorrelations and the like could be taken away by monitoring them from an associated PC, now that I am thinking about it. Try it ! You will like it ;-)
Puzzle computers (Score:4, Interesting)
Many puzzles have been shown to effectively be nondeterministic computers. E.g., you can make a sliding-block puzzle that is solvable if and only if a given traditional computation succeeds.
Science News story:
http://www.sciencenews.org/articles/20020817/bob10.asp [sciencenews.org]
Personal plug:
Games, Puzzles, and Computation [mit.edu]
How about an old one? (Score:5, Interesting)
More Weirdness (Score:5, Interesting)
* a spaghetti powered sorting machine
* computing a convex hull using a board, nails and a rubber band
* finding the shortest path joining two nodes of a graph network using brass rings and string
* finding the minimum Steiner-tree for any number of nodes using pegs sandwiched between parallel sheets of plastic dipped in a soup solution
* a prime calculator using a pair of lasers and parallel mirrors
In the next chapter, Gadgets Revisited, he presents:
* a way to compute the best-fit trend of a graph using a board, nails, rubber bands, and a rod
* finding the longest path through a network of nodes using segments of string knotted together
* computing the forth power of a number based on the principle of elasticity and the deflection of a bar of aluminum
* or the third power of a number by using the same principle applied to a weight placed on the bar
* light refraction computed with soap film suspended between stepped surfaces
* optimal position for a refinery using a board with holes, string, a brass ring, and weights proportional to the cost of transportation for each source of raw material
* number averaging using interconnected graduated glass cylinders
* cubic polynomial solver using a water tank, a balance beam, two scalepans, and a variety of solids to represent terms of the equation: a cone for x, a paraboloid for x and cylinder for cx, and a sphere for d
Domino Digital Logic (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Why are these weird? (Score:4, Funny)
Weird is trademarked?
I'm in trouble.
Parent