3 ms·

> I wonder how developers of computers came to idea to use binary numbers? Essentially a logical consequence of electronics and the equipment they were working

> I wonder how developers of computers came to idea to use binary numbers? Essentially a logical consequence of electronics and the equipment they were working with at the time. That 0 and 1 are not pure zero-volts and 5-voltsⁱ. There is a lower range that will definitely be ready as 0 and an upper range that will be read as 1, and hopefully the signal doesn't spend long between them. Also switching isn't absolutely instant, switches bounceʲ, debouncing methods smooth that but drag out the time to transition from 0->1 or 1->0. All of this is try for multi-level electronics but even more so, making it easier and more reliable to work in binary than 3, 4, or more levels per bit. Ternary (base 3) computers did exist, some using -1/0/+1ʰ and some using 0/1/2, and multi-level logic is used for some storage methods today, so binary isn't the be-all and end-all it is just most usually the most reliable & convenient tool for the job. ---- [i] or 3.3 or whatever other logic levels you are using [j] a lot less of a problem with microscopic transistors but think back to old chunky relays & tubes [h] not sure if that is just notation or there were negative voltages involved - I last read about these things properly at Uni ~2.5 decades ago

codedokode 3y ago
> All of this is try for multi-level electronics but even more so, making it easier and more reliable to work in binary than 3, 4, or more levels per bit. You don't need many levels. IBM's tabulators used pulses to represent numbers in decimal (e.g. 6 pulses to transmit digit 6). That's why it is surprising that computer developers didn't reuse existing technology and went with a new system.
- dspillett 3y ago
  Above certain speeds, pulses based systems have timing issues. How many pulses can you cram in before they start to merge due to signal noise? Assuming serial communication transmitting 9 pulses is more than the 4 needed to represent 9 in binary (assuming 0 is represented by no pulse, not a single pulse with no signal at all indicating an error condition). If you allow variable length transmissions pure pulses become more efficient overall, but synchronising multiple signals potentially becomes more difficult. So you fix the signal merging issue found in multi-level signals, but introduce other similar difficulties. Both sets of issues get more problematic as signalling speed increases.

codedokode 3y ago

> All of this is try for multi-level electronics but even more so, making it easier and more reliable to work in binary than 3, 4, or more levels per bit. You don't need many levels. IBM's tabulators used pulses to represent numbers in decimal (e.g. 6 pulses to transmit digit 6). That's why it is surprising that computer developers didn't reuse existing technology and went with a new system.

dspillett 3y ago
Above certain speeds, pulses based systems have timing issues. How many pulses can you cram in before they start to merge due to signal noise? Assuming serial communication transmitting 9 pulses is more than the 4 needed to represent 9 in binary (assuming 0 is represented by no pulse, not a single pulse with no signal at all indicating an error condition). If you allow variable length transmissions pure pulses become more efficient overall, but synchronising multiple signals potentially becomes more difficult. So you fix the signal merging issue found in multi-level signals, but introduce other similar difficulties. Both sets of issues get more problematic as signalling speed increases.