h a l f b a k e r yThis ain't rocket surgery.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Please log in.
Before you can vote, you need to register.
Please log in or create an account.
|
It would seem impossible to make computers contain information much more densely than they already do. I have a solution to this problem. Rather than using just neutral and negative charges in computers, one could also use positive charges. 8 bits of binary could contain the same amount of information
as about 5 bits of trinary, increasing computer information density by a factor of approximately 1.6.
US Patent 5,432,735: Ternary storage dynamic RAM
http://patft.uspto....735&RS=PN/5,432,735
From 1993 - surprisingly recent. [jutta, Jun 26 2006]
[link]
|
| |
You may want to do a search on quantum computing |
|
| |
I've thought about this a few times in the couple of years that I've known about binary. |
|
| |
in howard taylor's schlock mercenary
trinary code is mentioned in an
annotation. the three possible states he
mentions are yes, no, and maybe. |
|
| |
i admit he makes no claims to his
authority in terms of computer programing
languages, as well as his other sciencey
claims. |
|
| |
Maybe the "maybe" could be random? |
|
| |
We have pondered this at great length before. |
|
| |
<pedant> ternary? </pedant> |
|
| |
So, would we be toggling not bits but -- |
|
| |
[jutta] taylor also mentioned how a whole
generation of computer programers didn't
procreate because of their use of tit in
talking about trinary code. |
|
| |
How do you titillate an ocelot? -- You oscillate its tits a lot |
|
| |
Why stop at three? If this is useful you could use a number of voltage states (four, five, six ...) to reduce the number of bits further. It's just a matter of how you interpret the voltage levels. |
|
| |
//Why stop at three// My computer science teaching guy proved to us that three states has a higher efficiency of data storage than four or five. In fact, e is the most efficient, but 2.7182 states is impractical. |
|
| |
Doesn't work. There are no "Positive Charges", just lack of negative ones. |
|
| |
Any bit of data storage is basically a bucket for electrons. It either has electrons in it, or it doesn't. On and off. 1 and 0. Binary. |
|
| |
Anything else is a complete, from scratch reinvention of computing. See "Quantum" |
|
| |
Dont confuse date storage algorithms and Computer processing language. Galbinus is dead on as far as the eficacy of this system. all the aforementioned points are useful only for storage of information(a .5 volt charge followed by a 1 V charge is the equivilent of 0110101010010101 01010001010101) thats doesnt mean you dont need the binary you just dont need to store it verbatim, still need to decode and run the binary for it to work) |
|
| |
In theory this sounds like a reasonable idea (if you assume three or more voltage levels, rather than a positive, neutral , negative)... |
|
| |
but in practice...I would guess that the storing, retrieving and the corresponding logic gates and buses would be more complex to implement and would take up more space. |
|
| |
Also - the more levels you have, the more chance you have of a value being 'mistaken' for another level |
|
| |