[oclug] KWeather

[Frank Stratton - VE3YY]

This is a true story!
At one time believe it or not, a computer manufacturer I worked for, was
looking into having a piece of memory represent three states, zero, one and
not (zero or one). Memory was so expensive when I was first around computers
that it made sense.  Basically it would have been the ternary system.  0, 1,
2.  So two bits could be combined to represent 6 states instead of four.
Arithmetic got a little hairy. So you had to revert to the standard binary
system.  However computer commands could use the not 0 or 1 as modifiers.
It meant that a computer would have more commands with less logic.

They set one fellow off to see if he could design a computer system to use
this numbering system.  The company went belly up before he completed the
project.  I believe this was a fitting end to the idea because I think they
were going to send him to the funny farm.  I've often wondered what would
have happened if he had succeeded.

I guess we would have continued that until we had multiple states like not
zero but close and not one but pretty close.  Maybe computers would have
then been able to decide between Frosted flakes and Puffed Wheat in the
morning.

Cheers,
Frank

-----Original Message-----
From: oclug-bounces at lists.oclug.on.ca
[mailto:oclug-bounces at lists.oclug.on.ca]On Behalf Of Patrick Smith
Sent: March 20, 2005 9:42 PM
To: General Membership Discussion List
Subject: Re: [oclug] KWeather


>>[GR]  But why does it make sense to count in hexadecimal?
>
> Repeatedly multiplying or dividing by two keeps the same number of
> significant digits.

That's true in binary, not in hexadecimal.  E.g. 2 times F is 1E.

Anybody for duodecimal (dozens, gross)?  :-)
--
OCLUG general discussion list
OCLUG at lists.oclug.on.ca
http://www.oclug.on.ca/mailman/listinfo/oclug