ternary logic

[Robert C Monsen]

"Dave Holford" <mylastname@.deletethis.sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:4046A828.667B376A@.deletethis.sympatico.ca...

hi there

i was just wondering that why despite of using the binary logic for 60
years now ( almost ) we are stilll stuck with that

i mean the way i see it 3^n is much greater than 2^n . i am talking
about the reduction in the size of equipments by a biblical factor
here

but the thing is if there could be implemented then how the hell do i
go about it

any info or links in this regard will be highly appreciated

thanx



I would think that a major objection would be that the digits would have
to be called "tits".

Dave

Another would be that disk drives would be sold in units of megatrites...

 

[Roger Gt]

"John Woodgate" wrote
: Roger Gt wrote

: >There is No need or reason to END binary, it is the simplest
system and
: >pervasive. There is no improvement provided by ternary which
can not be
: >achieved by binary logic.
:
: You have, of course, thoroughly investigated the matter and
published
: results that support your conclusion.

The 'overwhelming wealth' of published papers on the subject made
my modest contribution unnecessary. But you have no doubt read
all the scholarly papers on the subject.

Actually ternary and many other schemes have been used
occasionally for decades and have not found favor due to the
additional components and nano-acres of space these schemes
consume.

I would certainly be interested in reading your input on the
subject as well if you have personally written on the advantages
of ternary logic in ??? whatever application.

I am always seeking to learn more in my chosen field.

I first the scheme encountered in 1967 when the government
specified the use of ternary coding in a device I designed. It
used 25% percent more components and or space. The advantage was
that the coding had embedded errors imbedded in the pattern so
anyone not knowing the scheme well would attempt to break the
codes with a binary sequence which would be detected rather
quickly. But other than the security concerns I can see no
practical use for ternary logic systems in general use at all!

 

[Keith R. Williams]

In article <SoK1c.5926$UC7.1298@newssvr27.news.prodigy.com>,
not@here.net says...

"vipin kumar" wrote
: people I am not even talking about using a binary device to
realize
: ternary logic ( I can do that )
: so I really am not looking on for the Intel devices
:
: regarding 10^n its better than mine but due to my limited
energy and
: limited I.Q I think it would be better that I initially stick
out with the
: ternary one

Besides it has been done! Like the IBM1620 computer and several
others. NOT an efficient use of circuitry.

The 1620 user trinary logic?

No internal math, used look-up tables.

Yes, it was nick-named the CADET (Can't Add, Didn't Even Try).

--
Keith

 

[vipin kumar]

people before you pop in with your all too uncertain conclusions about
the subject you should atleast read the question again

i am not talking about comparators to be used in this

before someone pops in with a response regarding the incan mayan logic
of 30 base again

i am talking about a simple thing around here
no i am not asking for anyones help in the circuitary and definitely
not in the mathematical development of the subject

i am asking does anyone has any idea of three fundamental ternary
states

what has been done is regarding the same old semiconductors to realise
binary logic

now i want you people to give me the ideas of that kind of a crystal ,
or organin / inorganic molecule which can does the job

i dont want people like this Roger to come forward because certainl;y
in the first place youre atleast 60 years of age and have been using
binary circuitary using semconductors for around 40 years now
so i am of the opinion that youll not give up that mental picture
easily

EINSTEIN stopped prducing at that age , i dont think your opinions
will help

to the rest of you
i am all ears

vipin kumar
Indian Institute of Technology ,
Kanpur , INDIA

 

[R. Steve Walz]

vipin kumar wrote:

hi there

i was just wondering that why despite of using the binary logic for 60
years now ( almost ) we are stilll stuck with that

i mean the way i see it 3^n is much greater than 2^n . i am talking
about the reduction in the size of equipments by a biblical factor
here
-----------------------

The equipment required to detect differences between 3 states versus
2 states was long ago decided, both using deep theoretical analysis
and pragmatic cost analysis, to be much more crap than needed.

The absolutely unassailable virtue of binary is that it corresponds to
off/on, the very simplest of all possible states. The feature of 3^n
versus 2^n is simply not of greater benefit than the simplicity of
binary both in terms of the human factor in engineering, and the lesser
cost of computing hardware and equipment.

Also, binary logic has a foundation of quite fundamental logical math
around it, from Aristotle to Boole, and this is something that for
ternary (or trinary) has never been described or tersely formulated.

-Steve
--
-Steve Walz rstevew@armory.com ftp://ftp.armory.com/pub/user/rstevew
Electronics Site!! 1000's of Files and Dirs!! With Schematics Galore!!
http://www.armory.com/~rstevew or http://www.armory.com/~rstevew/Public

 

[R. Steve Walz]

vipin kumar wrote:

people before you pop in with your all too uncertain conclusions about
the subject you should atleast read the question again

i am not talking about comparators to be used in this

before someone pops in with a response regarding the incan mayan logic
of 30 base again

i am talking about a simple thing around here
no i am not asking for anyones help in the circuitary and definitely
not in the mathematical development of the subject

i am asking does anyone has any idea of three fundamental ternary
states

what has been done is regarding the same old semiconductors to realise
binary logic

now i want you people to give me the ideas of that kind of a crystal ,
or organin / inorganic molecule which can does the job

i dont want people like this Roger to come forward because certainl;y
in the first place youre atleast 60 years of age and have been using
binary circuitary using semconductors for around 40 years now
so i am of the opinion that youll not give up that mental picture
easily

EINSTEIN stopped prducing at that age , i dont think your opinions
will help

to the rest of you
i am all ears

vipin kumar
Indian Institute of Technology ,
Kanpur , INDIA
--------------------

You are approaching this subject from an attitude clearly based on
an insufficient background in electronic design. If this wasn't true
you wouldn't ask such a ridiculous question.

And P.S., all such ridiculous persons also suffer the delusion that
they have discovered something brand new, when they haven't, and when
they are grossly unaware of how well, in fact, their crank notion has
actually been researched and proved lacking, and they will, inevitably,
then refuse to go and find this out by efforts, undoubtedly out of fear
of having to lose their crank pet idea, and so they will then try to
propagate their frustration and their very characteristically immature
anomisity upon the Usenet newsgroup, and they'll be told that by many
knowledgable folks that they are stupid and an ass. Only after much
yelling and screaming will they finally nip off and shoot themselves
or go bother someone else, or something.

See Feerguy et alia.
-Steve
--
-Steve Walz rstevew@armory.com ftp://ftp.armory.com/pub/user/rstevew
Electronics Site!! 1000's of Files and Dirs!! With Schematics Galore!!
http://www.armory.com/~rstevew or http://www.armory.com/~rstevew/Public

 

[Ian Buckner]

"R. Steve Walz" <rstevew@armory.com> wrote in message
news:4048184C.3B86@armory.com...

vipin kumar wrote:
snip
Also, binary logic has a foundation of quite fundamental logical
math
around it, from Aristotle to Boole, and this is something that for
ternary (or trinary) has never been described or tersely formulated.

-Steve

The fundamental precepts of ternary have been studied by accountants,
who describe the three states as "Yes", "No", and "What answer do you
want?".

Regards
Ian

(Substitute your favo(u)rite alternative for "accountant")

 

[vipin kumar]

well after all sort of crap on this group i finally did meet some one
useful

as clearly stated out by this fellow
i lack the experience === ( still b tech student after all )
i have a crankshaft notion == well thats true again , i realise it
before anyone among you does
and definitely i am afraid to be vanquished as is everyone else

but this is something i already know , what i will like to know from
you guys is are you aware of the fact that when semiconductors were
introduced the idea was met with utmost resistance from certain
sections when vaccum tubes were about to be thrown out or when the
basis of quantum physics was to be laid out how every one was against
it There were failed attemps before that

so for once can you people stop rumbling on and on about the failed
attempts before this one and start a fresh
i dont need the exact thing from you because you certainly dont have
it
i just want to know the craziest idea that pops into your head ( which
has not been proven to be incorrect already ) so that i can work on
that

i cant make my notion more clear than this

vipin kumar

 

[Jim Thompson]

On 4 Mar 2004 20:45:32 -0800, kvipin@iitk.ac.in (vipin kumar) wrote:

[snip]

i dont want people like this Roger to come forward because certainl;y
in the first place youre atleast 60 years of age and have been using
binary circuitary using semconductors for around 40 years now
so i am of the opinion that youll not give up that mental picture
easily

[snip]

vipin kumar
Indian Institute of Technology ,
Kanpur , INDIA

Now that you've pissed off all the knowledgable contributors on this
group... PLONK, permanent... hasta la vista, baby ;-)

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona Voice480)460-2350 | |
| E-mail Address at Website Fax480)460-2142 | Brass Rat |
| http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

Will you still need me, will you still feed me, when I'm sixty-four?

 

[vic]

Please .....

Don't compare yourself with the physicists who invented the transistor
or came up with the theory of quantum physics. They actually had
something to show.

You're just a presomptuous student who seems to do his best to piss
people off. You don't even have ideas, you come here and demand answers.

I'd certainly feel insulted if I were 60 and told I should stop thinking
because I'm useless, like you did ...

So do some work on your ideas, learn to respect other people and their
opinions, and maybe we can talk.

vic

 

[Roger Gt]

"vic" wrote
: Please .....
: Don't compare yourself with the physicists who invented the
transistor
: or came up with the theory of quantum physics. They actually had
: something to show.
: You're just a presumptuous student who seems to do his best to
piss
: people off. You don't even have ideas, you come here and demand
answers.
: I'd certainly feel insulted if I were 60 and told I should stop
thinking
: because I'm useless, like you did ...
: So do some work on your ideas, learn to respect other people and
their
: opinions, and maybe we can talk.
: vic

Thanks Vic, he needed a taste of reality.
I actually thought he was asking a serious question. He hasn't
looked up the topic (for which there is some literature under
'encryption) and is NOT an engineer nor a Scientist. He's also
likely a poor researcher since he wants others to do the heavy
lifting.

Reading what he wrote I realize he slipped through the cracks on
capitalization and punctuation. I can over look those on the
internet, many get sloppy here, but the lack of reason ... No!
He needs to go back to the farm team!

 

[Roger Gt]

"Keith R. Williams" wrote
: > "vipin kumar" wrote
: > : people I am not even talking about using a binary device to
realize
: > : ternary logic ( I can do that )
: > : so I really am not looking on for the Intel devices
: > :
: > : regarding 10^n its better than mine but due to my limited
energy and
: > : limited I.Q I think it would be better that I initially
stick out with the
: > : ternary one
: >
: > Besides it has been done! Like the IBM1620 computer and
several
: > others. NOT an efficient use of circuitry.
:
: The 1620 user trinary logic?

No it used decimal logic sort of.....

: > No internal math, used look-up tables.
: Yes, it was nick-named the CADET (Can't Add, Didn't Even Try).

Worked with only 16K of memory and lots of paper tape and magnetic
tape peripherals too.
Didn't you love the Keypunch machines?

 

[John Woodgate]

I read in sci.electronics.design that vipin kumar <kvipin@iitk.ac.in>
wrote (in <3bf9d8c3.0403050631.17e782b2@posting.google.com&gt about
'ternary logic', on Fri, 5 Mar 2004:

i cant make my notion more clear than this

You will not get anywhere by insulting your elders. Go away and work out
your hypotheses for yourself. When you have actually achieved something,
then you are qualified to criticize.

I can't make my motion more clear than that.

--
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only.
The good news is that nothing is compulsory.
The bad news is that everything is prohibited.
http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Also see http://www.isce.org.uk

 

[John Fields]

On 4 Mar 2004 20:45:32 -0800, kvipin@iitk.ac.in (vipin kumar) wrote:

people before you pop in with your all too uncertain conclusions about
the subject you should atleast read the question again

i am not talking about comparators to be used in this

before someone pops in with a response regarding the incan mayan logic
of 30 base again

i am talking about a simple thing around here
no i am not asking for anyones help in the circuitary and definitely
not in the mathematical development of the subject

i am asking does anyone has any idea of three fundamental ternary
states

what has been done is regarding the same old semiconductors to realise
binary logic

now i want you people to give me the ideas of that kind of a crystal ,
or organin / inorganic molecule which can does the job

i dont want people like this Roger to come forward because certainl;y
in the first place youre atleast 60 years of age and have been using
binary circuitary using semconductors for around 40 years now
so i am of the opinion that youll not give up that mental picture
easily

EINSTEIN stopped prducing at that age , i dont think your opinions
will help

to the rest of you
i am all ears

---
No, you're all mouth, and you will come to regret it if you discount the
contributions of those wiser than you if you discriminate against them
because of their age.

In the second place, you're very rude and your refusal to extend the
common courtesy of the use of "please" and "thank you" will, if it
hasn't already, get you into a lot of trouble.

In the third place, that passive-aggressive cutesy affectation of using
a lower case 'i' when you know full well you should be using 'I' is
annoying. If you plan to communicate, in an intelligent way, with
people whose primary language is English, then have the courtesy to do
it properly or, at the very least learn how to do it in a non-offensive
manner.

As far as the technical aspects of a trinary system go, there is no up
side to it. Just because you learned to count by three on each finger
doesn't mean that's a good system to try to adapt everything else to.

If you don't believe me, take a look at the effects of noise on a binary
and trinary system resolving the same quantities.

--
John Fields

 

[John Woodgate]

I read in sci.electronics.design that John Fields <jfields@austininstrum
ents.com> wrote (in <9njh40drfqec5qpakkghfap9s5m3c3g45b@4ax.com&gt about
'ternary logic', on Fri, 5 Mar 2004:

If you don't believe me, take a look at the effects of noise on a binary
and trinary system resolving the same quantities.

For bipolar ternary, the noise margins are the same as for unipolar
binary.
--
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only.
The good news is that nothing is compulsory.
The bad news is that everything is prohibited.
http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Also see http://www.isce.org.uk

 

[N. Thornton]

kvipin@iitk.ac.in (vipin kumar) wrote in message news:<3bf9d8c3.0403030656.70085ae8@posting.google.com>...

hi there

i was just wondering that why despite of using the binary logic for 60
years now ( almost ) we are stilll stuck with that

i mean the way i see it 3^n is much greater than 2^n . i am talking
about the reduction in the size of equipments by a biblical factor
here

Why not go all the way and have base 1,000,000 logic? Also known as
analogue. Analogue computing is practical, and has been used a long
old time.

An additional analogue processing unit in PCs could handle some calcs
that are easy to do in analogue, and relatively hard to do in digital,
and where slight errors arent a problem. Thus leaving the main CPU
with less to handle.

And yes, ternary has been well covered before. Listen to those with
the knowledge.


Regards, NT

 

[John Larkin]

On 5 Mar 2004 15:59:30 -0800, bigcat@meeow.co.uk (N. Thornton) wrote:

kvipin@iitk.ac.in (vipin kumar) wrote in message news:<3bf9d8c3.0403030656.70085ae8@posting.google.com>...
hi there

i was just wondering that why despite of using the binary logic for 60
years now ( almost ) we are stilll stuck with that

i mean the way i see it 3^n is much greater than 2^n . i am talking
about the reduction in the size of equipments by a biblical factor
here

Why not go all the way and have base 1,000,000 logic? Also known as
analogue. Analogue computing is practical, and has been used a long
old time.

An additional analogue processing unit in PCs could handle some calcs
that are easy to do in analogue, and relatively hard to do in digital,
and where slight errors arent a problem. Thus leaving the main CPU
with less to handle.

And yes, ternary has been well covered before. Listen to those with
the knowledge.


Regards, NT

Some types of flash memory store multiple bits per cell, using
multilevel logic. They get 2 or 3 bits, I think, by using 4 or 8
charge levels. People once discussed using DRAM this way, but I don't
think it's being done at present.

Some fast serial local bus protocols use multilevel logic, too.

John

 

[Chaos Master]

Fred Bartoli posted in sci.electronics.design , in article
<4046e4f6$0$21677$636a15ce@news.free.fr>, at Thu, 4 Mar 2004 09:12:01 +0100:

No! The world run on yes/no and hmmm.

What about the world running on Yes, No, Maybe?

[]s!


--
Chaos MasterŽ - Porto Alegre, Brazil!
IRC #XLinuxNews or #POA of irc.brasnet.org , nick Wizard_of_Yendor .
Powered by NetHack (www.nethack.org) , Slackware 9.1 (Linux User #327480 - at
work)
CygWin, GnuWin32, and so on..

 

[Chaos Master]

Ian Buckner posted in sci.electronics.design , in article
<1078481961.997962@cswreg.cos.agilent.com>, at Fri, 5 Mar 2004 10:19:20 -0000:

The fundamental precepts of ternary have been studied by accountants,
who describe the three states as "Yes", "No", and "What answer do you
want?".

What about "Yes", "No", "Well... I don't know!"?

[]s!

--
Chaos MasterŽ - Porto Alegre, Brazil!
IRC #XLinuxNews or #POA of irc.brasnet.org , nick Wizard_of_Yendor .
Powered by NetHack (www.nethack.org) , Slackware 9.1 (Linux User #327480 - at
work)
CygWin, GnuWin32, and so on..

 

[Keith R. Williams]

In article <7%32c.34117$UV3.25279@newssvr25.news.prodigy.com>,
not@here.net says...

"Keith R. Williams" wrote
: > "vipin kumar" wrote
: > : people I am not even talking about using a binary device to
realize
: > : ternary logic ( I can do that )
: > : so I really am not looking on for the Intel devices
: > :
: > : regarding 10^n its better than mine but due to my limited
energy and
: > : limited I.Q I think it would be better that I initially
stick out with the
: > : ternary one
:
: > Besides it has been done! Like the IBM1620 computer and
several
: > others. NOT an efficient use of circuitry.
:
: The 1620 user trinary logic?

No it used decimal logic sort of.....

Ok, BCD. That's what I thought. BCD is still binary, sort of. ;-)

: > No internal math, used look-up tables.
: Yes, it was nick-named the CADET (Can't Add, Didn't Even Try).

Worked with only 16K of memory and lots of paper tape and magnetic
tape peripherals too.
Didn't you love the Keypunch machines?

I used 029s occasionally up until the mid '80s. It was easier than
using the bloody Fairchild editor.

--
Keith