Three-State System Failed attempt to create 3 state system.

	Three-State System - Failed attempt to create 3 state system.
	Discussion by infamousflame with 14 Replies. Last Update: June 20, 2005, 3:26 pm

infamousflame

Did you know Russia (I think) once tried to create a three-state computer system?

All computer systems currently operate as two-state systems, working based on the principle that if there is 5 volts going throug a wire, it is considered "one" and that if there is no voltage it is considered "zero". This allows for the working of the binary system.

However, Russia (I think) once tried to create a three-state system by having 0 volts, x volts and 5 volts (I don't know how many volts the other one was). However, this failed, because there was not a distinct enough difference between the different voltages, resulting in mistakes within the computer.

I hope I posted this in the right area, moderators should please feel free to move it if it is not in the right place.

Sun Jun 12, 2005 Reply New Discussion

jpod999

What would be the difference between a 2 and 3 state computer? Would it be more powerful or would it just be longer battery life in laptops? Why is a 3 state better than a 2 state?

Sun Jun 12, 2005 Reply New Discussion

shihchiun

Yeah, why bother? Are there any very, very, good advantages that three-state systems have over binary systems? Wouldn't everything have to be rewritten?

Sun Jun 12, 2005 Reply New Discussion

vizskywalker

Here's a reason (I've been toying eith the idea of a trinary computer myself). Most AI programs work on boolean logic. Something either is or isn't, true or false. People work on the system of it is, it isn't, or it might be, true, false and maybe. In binary systems, to crate a maybe option calls for wasted bits (two bits per status instead of 1) which quickly runs demands for memory over current capabilities. Microchips would also be larger and slower because a 64 bit chip would really only be able to handle 32 pieces of data. In a trinary system the third state takes the place of the maybe option, which allows for better user interfaces and AI programs. That's just one of the benefits.

~Viz

Sun Jun 12, 2005 Reply New Discussion

Rudy

It is interesting though and I can see the logic in a three state system. For example I could see a persuasion to artificial intelligence if the third state had an �if then� representation.

It�s like in the case of options. More states mean more possibility.

Tue Jun 14, 2005 Reply New Discussion

vizskywalker

One of the hardest pieces of design is actually not the voltage situation. Powerful computers have been designed and tested with a three state system, with 0 to 10 volts being a 0, 50 to 60 volts being a 1, and 100 to 110 volts being a 2, or some large difference like that. THe problem is the logic tables. here they are as far as I have deduced. (T = true, F = false, P = possible)

AND:
--|T | F |P
--+--+--+--
T | T | F | P
--+--+--+--
F | F | F | P
--+--+--+--
P | P | P | P

OR:
--|T | F |P
--+--+--+--
T | T | T | P
--+--+--+--
F | T | F | P
--+--+--+--
P | P | P | P

XOR:
--|T | F |P
--+--+--+--
T | F | T | P
--+--+--+--
F | T | F | P
--+--+--+--
P | P | P | P

NOT:
T|F
F|T
P|P

As you can see, it is impossible to lose a possible. The only conceived remedy is to make P XOR P = F, but most people who have designed trinary systems (as far as I can tell) frown on that. A four state system is preferred, where possible is broken into two types: PT, possibly true, and PF possibly false. THis allows for better interaction and even more AI capability. Of course, the mother of all systems currently looks like the quantum computer which as designed will be a 64 state system.

~Viz

Wed Jun 15, 2005 Reply New Discussion

madcrow

Yeah a 3-state computer might be interesting, but it's still just an enhancement of the traditional binary computer. Quantum computers will be much more flexible, should they ever actually move beyond the realm of the theorhetical.

Wed Jun 15, 2005 Reply New Discussion

Sadas

For simple people like me and most of you it's more than enought 2 states computers.
3, 4 or even 64 states systems coulb be usefull in science, like space explorering. If 64 states computers will ever come to life, they will not fit in room I think (again

)
We'll see what will happen with computers when we'll get old. Maybe virtual reality will aproach to true reality and there woun't be any differences... We'll see. Ok back on topic

So any ideas how to use 64 states!?

Wed Jun 15, 2005 Reply New Discussion

vizskywalker

Actually, because the 64 state computers are based on the 64 different quantum states, they would theoreticaly be tiny, only molecules big. The only part that would take up any size would be the monitor. And really, boolean logic could still be applied to any power of 2 state system, the tables would just have to be extended, so the computers could be used for all aspects, even gaming.

~Viz

Wed Jun 15, 2005 Reply New Discussion

m3ch4

QUOTE (vizskywalker)

[post="39583"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Extending those tables to include 64 states seems kind of...illogical doesn't it? I mean, with a 2 state system you have true/false, with a 3 state system you have true/false/possible, but with a 64 state system, even with 64 quantum states, what would they be? simply varying states or combinations of possible and true/false?

Mon Jun 20, 2005 Reply New Discussion

vizskywalker

That's not the kind of extended I meant. If you look at a four state boolean system it has these states (f = four state, b = binary):
0f = 00b
1f = 01b
2f = 10b
3f = 11b

So an extended BOOLEAN (Boolean only has true false) table for this four state system would look something like this:

AND:
0f AND 0f = 0f = false false (00b AND 00b = 00b)
0f AND 1f = 0f = false false (00b AND 01b = 00b)
0f AND 2f = 0f = false false (00b AND 10b = 00b)
0f AND 3f = 0f = false false (00b AND 11b = 00b)

1f AND 0f = 0f = false false (01b AND 00b = 00b)
1f AND 1f = 1f = false true (01b AND 01b = 01b)
1f AND 2f = 0f = false false (01b AND 10b = 00b)
1f AND 3f = 1f = false true (01b AND 11b = 01b)

2f AND 0f = 0f = false false (10b AND 00b = 00b)
2f AND 1f = 0f = false false (10b AND 01b = 00b)
2f AND 2f = 2f = true false (10b AND 10b = 10b)
2f AND 3f = 2f = true false (10b AND 11b = 10b)

3f AND 0f = 0f = false false (11b AND 00b = 00b)
3f AND 1f = 1f = false true (11b AND 01b = 01b)
3f AND 2f = 2f = true false (11b AND 10b = 10b)
3f AND 3f = 3f = true true (11b AND 11b = 11b)

For a 64 state system it would be that kind of thing only a lot more of it. That's if we wanted to keep boolean logic. Any power of two state system can emulate with a large truth table a two state system by simply extending a boolean logic table to deal with the multiple states as large binary numbers.

~Viz

Mon Jun 20, 2005 Reply New Discussion

m3ch4

QUOTE (vizskywalker)

For a 64 state system it would be that kind of thing only a lot more of it. That's if we wanted to keep boolean logic. Any power of two state system can emulate with a large truth table a two state system by simply extending a boolean logic table to deal with the multiple states as large binary numbers.

~Viz

[post="40307"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

alright, that makes sense.

What exactely is the advantage to using a 64 state system? better ai and ui, but it was mentioned a couple posts up that it would use bigger chips and stuff.

and programs are written on and for two-state systems, how difficult would it be to program in a 64 state system or would there even be a switch? (considering a 64 state system could emulate a 2 state system, allowing programs written for 2 state systems to run on a64 state system)

Mon Jun 20, 2005 Reply New Discussion

vizskywalker

One of the main reason people are looking at quantum computers (the only theoretical 64 state computers because of the 64 quantum states) is because of it would be so much smaller than modern day chips. The additional states allow for mainly supercomputer aspects more so than personal computing aspcts, but personal computing would eventually switch.

One reason is for medical technology. Imag an MRI which takes images of little slivers of a person. Assume that each sliver is one cubic millimeter. That is a lot of little pictures to be taken and encoded into a lot of ones and zeros. With a 64 state system, 64 bits could theoretically be encoded in one base 64 byte, because it would be either the presence or absence of a quanta as each bit. That drastically reduces the amount of data units that would be needed fr storage.

Also, supercoputers are usually just a lot of processors running at the same time with a central processor to keep everything in sync, like the SETI@home program. One of the problems wit designing supercomputers is that the more processors are added for more power, the more the distance between them grows, which slows down the data transfer between the processors. Distance has a large effect on how well computers work, which is why 100ft ethernet cables are so rare. Because quantum computers would be so tiny, each bit would be the size of an atom, if that, and the whole processor wold just be a large molecule, you could connect thousands of processors without having to worry about distance.

~Viz

Mon Jun 20, 2005 Reply New Discussion

m3ch4

whoa..sounds sexy, mini pcs here we come =D

Mon Jun 20, 2005 Reply New Discussion

vizskywalker

Not mini, micro, so smll you couldn'y see it, cooling, if the temperature stays the same as processors today, wopuld be no problem, water cooling system = 99% of the case, processor, graphics card, everyting else = 1%. The entire computer inside the monitor would become king, even with lcd panels :lol: