4 ms·

Start date is April 1 but other sections were written later, so I'm not sure if this is serious. The main problem I see, unaddressed in my skimming, is the ana

Start date is April 1 but other sections were written later, so I'm not sure if this is serious. The main problem I see, unaddressed in my skimming, is the analog level: you need to replace the transistor with something more sophisticated, or possibly two different types of transistors. Worth noting: SSDs do store data in multi-level cells (generally with much more than 3 levels) to get better density out, but they can get away with this because the performance requirements are much lower than those of a CPU and it's not doing any actual logic, just translation.

bayindirh 6y ago
The manifesto clearly states that > While this work began as something of a joke, there are some very serious reasons that ternary logic may have value. So, it's semi-serious.
retrac 6y ago
The author (Doug Jones) has a bit of a taste for projections of questionable utility but high didactic value. (I can sympathize!) See his instruction set designs that'll never be implemented, but which offer interesting ideas. This would be a project in that vein. It's very serious. But it's not. Building a ternary computer requires you to think completely outside the box. You even have to pick which kind of ternary "Boolean" logic you'll use, as there's no consensus on how 3VL should work. Then fill out all the 3^9 possible basic logical operations and pick a few logically universal ones as building blocks. And then you have to design circuits to implement them. And none of your existing bit-twiddling logic designs -- or algorithms -- will work. It's total re-invention of the wheel, really. But it's mostly a thought experiment. While there are theoretical advantages, ternary machines are, in honesty, unlikely to ever offer any real advantage over binary ones. More electronic complexity for something you can trivially simulate on a binary machine. But it does make you think.
rini17 6y ago
I think problem in high frequency ternary isn't primarily transistors but interconnection. When using voltage levels like -1, 0, 1 on one wire, switching from -1 to 1 goes through 0 briefly and you need to guard against that. Binary does not have this problem. Using two wires (which take up 2x space) introduces intermediate states instead by timing differences between individual wires. This case is ubiquitous problem also in binary, called hazards. There are various solutions, like gray code (only one wire changes at a time) but they increase complexity. Perhaaaaps if we had photonics with polarization signalling in 3 axes....
- drran 6y ago
  Maybe we should use phase instead of voltage level. For terahertz computations we will need completely different physics anyway. For example, p-p-p can encode 0, p--p-p — +1, p-p--p — -1, where p is pulse.
  - sitkack 6y ago
    I believe Japan produced some computers that ran on phase. Late 50s-60s. Please correct me.
    - sitkack 6y ago
      You are correct, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parametron https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parametron http://museum.ipsj.or.jp/en/computer/dawn/0007.html http://museum.ipsj.or.jp/en/computer/dawn/0007.html
      - drran 6y ago
        Looks too good to be true: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rapid_single_flux_quantum https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rapid_single_flux_quantum

bayindirh 6y ago

The manifesto clearly states that > While this work began as something of a joke, there are some very serious reasons that ternary logic may have value. So, it's semi-serious.

retrac 6y ago

The author (Doug Jones) has a bit of a taste for projections of questionable utility but high didactic value. (I can sympathize!) See his instruction set designs that'll never be implemented, but which offer interesting ideas. This would be a project in that vein. It's very serious. But it's not. Building a ternary computer requires you to think completely outside the box. You even have to pick which kind of ternary "Boolean" logic you'll use, as there's no consensus on how 3VL should work. Then fill out all the 3^9 possible basic logical operations and pick a few logically universal ones as building blocks. And then you have to design circuits to implement them. And none of your existing bit-twiddling logic designs -- or algorithms -- will work. It's total re-invention of the wheel, really. But it's mostly a thought experiment. While there are theoretical advantages, ternary machines are, in honesty, unlikely to ever offer any real advantage over binary ones. More electronic complexity for something you can trivially simulate on a binary machine. But it does make you think.

rini17 6y ago

I think problem in high frequency ternary isn't primarily transistors but interconnection. When using voltage levels like -1, 0, 1 on one wire, switching from -1 to 1 goes through 0 briefly and you need to guard against that. Binary does not have this problem. Using two wires (which take up 2x space) introduces intermediate states instead by timing differences between individual wires. This case is ubiquitous problem also in binary, called hazards. There are various solutions, like gray code (only one wire changes at a time) but they increase complexity. Perhaaaaps if we had photonics with polarization signalling in 3 axes....

drran 6y ago
Maybe we should use phase instead of voltage level. For terahertz computations we will need completely different physics anyway. For example, p-p-p can encode 0, p--p-p — +1, p-p--p — -1, where p is pulse.
- sitkack 6y ago
  I believe Japan produced some computers that ran on phase. Late 50s-60s. Please correct me.
  - sitkack 6y ago
    You are correct, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parametron https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parametron http://museum.ipsj.or.jp/en/computer/dawn/0007.html http://museum.ipsj.or.jp/en/computer/dawn/0007.html
    - drran 6y ago
      Looks too good to be true: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rapid_single_flux_quantum https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rapid_single_flux_quantum