Alt-BEAM Archive
Message #03984
To: beam@sgiblab.sgi.com
From: Dennison dennlill@buffnet.net
Date: Sun, 30 May 1999 10:54:43 -0400
Subject: [alt-beam] Re: Table ScrapsUnicore BeamAnt schematic!
I kinda actually agree with both sides here. I think in general, (there are
many exceptions) the BEAMers seem wedded to MArk T and his accomplishments.
We sort of sit by the table like loyal puppies waiting for scrapes. As some
of you may be feeling, there is a definite disadvantage to this position.
Sure we all like it when we find out more about Mark t's Working and robots,
but we have unwittinglly structured outselves like a fan club, and not
roboticists of equal innovation. This would be all fine and dandy, except we
don't really hear much from Mark T. The stuff we're mostly working on is a
few years old. We only really get the stuff that leaks out of the Lab. Other
have come up with Unique independent works, but not many bots have been
built with them. People are building Microcore walkers, and no offense to
microcore walkers (I build them myself) but the microcore is OLD. People
still want to build their own five motor WalkMan robot. But has anyone
considered something? The original WalkMan was stolen awhile ago, but as far
as I know, Mark T hasn't bothered to build another one. All these robots
that many of us think are 'sweet' and we all want to build, Mark T gave up
on a while ago. So I think we build to much in the wake of Mark T. As
hobbyest's were almost below him on the hiearchy. If you look at CPU
robotics, there are amatures building robots AS COMPLICATED as the ones MIT
professors get Millions to research. BEAM robotics should do the same. We
should not nessesarilly base our work around Mark T, we should innovate in
our own directions of research.
Dennison
>Dear Sean ,
>
>Usually this list doesn't agree with what I have to say and I have a strong
>feeling this is going to be one of those times . Reading this reply and
>others regarding MarkT seems to imply that the collective " we " just can't
>make it without MarkT's assistance and "god-like " input to this list . I
>dissagree with this attitude and the limitations this puts on those of you
>that truly beleive this hype . Thats like saying that , god forbid , if
>something happened to MarkT , car accident , heart problems , etc ., this
>list would come to a grinding halt !! I don't think so . If you read some
>of the earlier circuit books , these circuits have been around for some
>time . MarkT DID come up with new ideas about how to impliment , refine ,
>and use these circuits in his particular area of research , namely , in the
>beginning , solar powered bots . We now have , thankfully , others adding
>to this knoweledge base , Dave , Steven Bolt ,Wilf and many others . ( I
>once asked Steven Bolt if he would adopt me , he has such neat ideas and an
>easy way of explaining some of my newbe questions ) You also remarked about
>not re-inventing the wheel ( been there , done that ) . Maybe you are right
>, but I have learned much going back and taking a fresh look at some of the
>"old" circuits , usually finding ways to upgrade or refine them . Its like
>re-reading an old book , I usually see something I missed the first time
>around . I think you give this list , and the people on it , to little
>credit . I , for one , will continue on at my work bench , with or without
>any of these "gods" you so fondly talk about .
>
>Ed Jones
>sargon@gte.net
>
>
>----------
>> From: Sean Rigter
>> To: beam@sgiblab.sgi.com
>> Subject: Re: Unicore BeamAnt schematic!
>> Date: Saturday, May 29, 1999 9:50 PM
>>
>> Dear Jean,
>>
>> You are not alone!
>>
>> There have been a few instances when after spending time to
>> independently design, test and post Beam like circuits, I am reminded by
>> one of the inner circle that Mark's been there, done that ie. the XOR
>> design recently discussed here in the context of the BeamAnt. In some
>> respect the Beam genome project was an attempt to build up the
>> foundation of the known Beam universe to speed up future developments,
>> to promote learning but avoid wasteful spinning wheels caused by
>> re-inventing them over and over. There appears to be a significant
>> firewall to keep information on current Beam developments locked in.
>>
>> I was however somewhat prepared for this as I explained to Mark in my
>> first email to him (attached) back in Dec 98. In retrospect, some of my
>> early expectations have not been not realized. It is perhaps not for the
>> lack of the masters guiding hand as much as the vacuum that has taken
>> it's place. My own reaction has been to fill it with creative ideas,
>> circuits, background links, and philosophy. I enjoy the technical and
>> communication challenge of doing this and my reward is the appreciation
>> expressed by others. Despite my somewhat abrasive humour, I very much
>> respect the work of Mark and others too numerous to name. I closely
>> identify with and share the common goals and interests, creativity,
>> excitement, surprise, "sky is the limit" and if necessary, a healthy
>> dose of scepticism, of Beam ideas on this list providing useful tools
>> for any future endeavours.
>>
>> In some sense the Beam list, which is after all dedicated to the art and
>> technology of Mark Tilden (as we are often reminded), would seem to be
>> at times somewhat distorted and arrested in it's development. It's a
>> complicated matter obviously loaded with events from the past. I would
>> have liked to have been there for the long and interesting discussions
>> with early Mark Tilden.
>>
>> I would recommend that Mark makes a regular appearance on this list to
>> help us "interpret" his words of wisdom.
>>
>> So friend jab, no deadly silence from me, I hope you don't get flamed ,
>> and most of all I hope you don't get in trouble over this request to
>> clarify communication between Mark and his most ardent supporters in
>> this group.
>>
>> So here to fill a bit of the vacuum is an old (my first) email to markt.
>>
>> Dear Mark,
>>
>> I am delighted to hear from you and thank you for your note of
>> appreciation!
>>
>> I am quite excited about making some more contributions to BEAM
>> technology (and perhaps philosophy). Forgive me if I frequently cover
>> old ground as I am partially avoiding contact with prior literature. I
>> like to think it was Marshall McLuhan's suggestion of only reading every
>> other page to extrapolate or synthesize the missing information to
>> uncover new connections or at least show existing ideas from a new
>> perspective. In truth, I am a walking "solution looking for a problem"
>> by nature and I enjoy the moment when I can compare my ideas with those
>> of others (whether I get blown out of the water or not 8^).
>>
>> In contrast with taming uA leakage currents , I also apply my talents in
>> research and testing of electrical equipment under high power conditions
>> (ie 100,000A @ 10,000V for seconds). Talk about the scale invariance of
>> ideas! Speaking of which, how well does circuit modelling software
>> predict the behaviour of these circuits? Of course software simulations
>> are only metaphors for reality and as much as I enjoyed seeing the web
>> videos of photovores (from Greg Benford's Great Sky River I presume), I
>> was not prepared for the small and delicate thing I held in my hands
>> yesterday and immediately fell in love with. There is a quality about
>> objects on this scale reminiscent of "tribbles" that conjures up ideas
>> of self replication, and emergent behaviour without the
>> feeling of threat, unlike the common reaction to the same ideas at
>> macro and nano scales.
>>
>> Anyway thanks again and I will keep in touch!
>>
>> regards
>>
>> wilf
>>
>> Mark W. Tilden wrote:
>>
>> > > Speaking of feedback : is this information and/or format, useful to
>> > this group?
>> >
>> > Can't speak for others but I think it's very valuable, and the ascii
>artwork
>> > is appreciated especially.
>> >
>> > markt.
>>
>>
>> Jean auBois wrote:
>> >
>> > At 03:48 PM 5/28/99 , you wrote:
>> > >I bet you can't guess what I have. If you guessed that I have the
>> > >schematic for a Unicore BeamAnt you get the grand prize!
>> >
>> > In fact, this is one of my major BEAM sadnesses just now.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
eGroups.com home: http://www.egroups.com/group/alt-beam
http://www.egroups.com
- Simplifying group communications
Home