Alt-BEAM Archive

Message #08466



To: beam@sgiblab.sgi.com
From: Senior kyled@cruzers.com
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 23:36:33 -0700
Subject: [alt-beam] Re: Lets Hypothesise...


:)
Yes. You need to measure whether you know it/like it or not. Otherwise,
you could not co-ordinate your hands with what your eyes see! Exactly as
the experiment shows. Back to BEAM...

Yes I think bots would need to know their position with regards to
eachother. You don't walk around with your friends and wander around,
not knowing where your friends are! I got a "wee-bot" family today, for
Christmas (I didn't know the time-difference was that much! ;) ), and
they're basically a group of three 'bots':
A mom and two babies. It seems like the babies have a compass inside
them because they orientate to face the exact same way. So I was
thinking, hey, we could use a compass! Anyway...

Kyle

Darrell Johnson wrote:
>
> Ok, here's a little experiment to try:
>
> Place an object on your desk.
> Look at it.
> Look away.
> While looking away, reach out and grab it.
>
> Gee, how did you accomplish that, if you don't measure
> distances? (you were able to reach out and grab it
> right?)
>
> -darrell
>
> --- Richard Caudle wrote:
>
> > The way we navigate through our world is what I call
> > the "Second star to the
> > right, and straight on 'till morning" system. We
> > pay little attention to
> > distances and such things. We see something
> > interesting, we go that way
> > until we see it better. There's no real measurement
> > involved. That's why
> > we need maps and such things.
> >
>
> =====
> ____________________________________
> BICOREEOS... They're BEAMtastic!!
> http://www.geocities.com/beamtastic/
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. All in one place.
> Yahoo! Shopping: http://shopping.yahoo.com



8467 Mon, 20 Dec 1999 00:28:45 -0800 (PST) [alt-beam] Re: Lets Hypothesise... beam@sgiblab.sgi.com "Travis D."

--- Gadagada@aol.com wrote:
> In a message dated 12/19/99 11:30:26 PM Eastern
> Standard Time,
> richard@cqc.com writes:
>
> << When you hear a noise, you can't make
> an accurate assessment of it's distance from you.
> You're lucky if you can
> even tell the direction it's really coming from.
> We make no distance
> measurements when we hear things. I don't really
> think that we make any
> visual measurements unless we're specifically
> trying to do so.
>
> The way we navigate through our world is what I
> call the "Second star to the
> right, and straight on 'till morning" system. We
> pay little attention to
> distances and such things. We see something
> interesting, we go that way
> until we see it better. There's no real
> measurement involved. That's why
> we need maps and such things.
> >>
>
> If any of this was true, then we would all have one
> eye and one ear. The
> truth is that distance is quite an important factor
> in navigating our world.
> We have two eyes and two ears so we can triangulate
> distances.
>
>
> Gary
>


It's called parallax....and it's how they measure the
distance between stars. They take a measurement of
"distance" from one point in the Earth's revolution
then another in a half a year. You take the two and
use trig or calculus to determine a more accurate
distance. Just set up two separate sensors and
compare the results. That's basically what the PSH
does and that is what your eyes and ears do!

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. All in one place.
Yahoo! Shopping: http://shopping.yahoo.com



8468 Monday, 20 December 1999 3:33 Re: Lets Hypothesise... beam@sgiblab.sgi.com Richard Caudle
>You know, the biggest question that I have on my mind is "Why worry about
>the real distance between objects?" When you hear a noise, you can't make
>an accurate assessment of it's distance from you. You're lucky if you can
>even tell the direction it's really coming from. We make no distance
>measurements when we hear things. I don't really think that we make any
>visual measurements unless we're specifically trying to do so.
>
>The way we navigate through our world is what I call the "Second star to
the
>right, and straight on 'till morning" system. We pay little attention to
>distances and such things. We see something interesting, we go that way
>until we see it better. There's no real measurement involved. That's why
>we need maps and such things.
>
>As far as media go, air and water are the real world situations that
>99.99999999999% of our robots will face. Sound works well in air and even
>better in water. It's relativly easy to do this with a piezo. (T.A.)Wilf
>Rigter has posted a couple of circuits for chirping. RF is obviously the
>solution for space.
>
>The thing that I'll be concentrating on this week (vacation!!) is
developing
>a Uiversal Com-munications Device. Bruce Robinson brought this up and it
>makes the most sense. Make an add-on device that will allow any BEAM bot'
>to join the herd. It's my belief that if we can get them to talk to each
>other, we can get them to _DO SOMETHING_ (other than looking really cool)!
>I also have some thoughts on collective intelligence that I want to test,
>and this would be a good way to do just that!
>

Home