Alt-BEAM Archive
Message #10862
To: beam@sgiblab.sgi.com
From: BUDSCOTT@aol.com
Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2000 16:10:41 EST
Subject: [alt-beam] Re: shack caps
i did not know that about radio shack. i just have never been all to pleased
with anything I buy there. it just seems to not live up to par in some cases.
it's just really a matter of having to substitute parts because you cn't get
very specific parts there.
-Spencer
10863 Fri, 25 Feb 2000 16:18:35 EST [alt-beam] Re: Walker Legs/bicore question beam@sgiblab.sgi.com BUDSCOTT@aol.com I now put the legs on the walker, via a really nifty part that my father made
when he was 'busy' at work (he's an EE, slow business in Rockford right now).
the somewhat resemble a T, the lower part of the T attaches to the motor, and
the sides of the T fit in legs, pretty cool! it measures about 9in x 6in x
4in pretty big lookin. i just need to cut my perf board circuit and hook up
all the connection (it worked! my solder didn't fail me!!!). by the by, how
exactly does a bicore work, what is going through the chips mind when it
walks, does it actually recieve motor input? Thanks for the help!
-Spencer
10864 Fri, 25 Feb 2000 13:28:22 -0800 (PST) [alt-beam] Re: BEAM: Tendency toward miniaturization beam@sgiblab.sgi.com BotDoc >Robert Morris
>
>P.S. The quantum experiment I talked about is real,
I'll see if I can
>find the article if you
>would like.
Yes, that experiment that you mentioned is quite real.
It is a different interpretation of quantum theory
than the collapsing wave function (What Penrose says
microtubules do). The collapsing wave function view
basically says that the moon exists in a superposition
of states until it is observed, the wave function then
collapses into what is seen as the moon. (the moon
only exists when you look at it). The view held by
the physicists who did the experiment is referred to
as decoherence. In a nut shell what that view tells
us is that there is no collapse of the wave function,
instead that quantum fuzziness gives way to the
tangible by means of interactions of one system
causing the superposition of another system to become
"unglued"... Think about that, it is possible the
world in which we live is nothing more than a phase
difference in possibilities. Maybe the thing we
experience as mind is simply a negative entropy
feedback loop into this phase difference. Maybe, just
maybe, our BEAM creations are already "alive" but we
are to arrogant to see it.
heh, some brain food for the weekend
Justin
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://im.yahoo.com
10865 Fri, 25 Feb 2000 16:34:52 -0500 [alt-beam] Turning off robots beam@sgiblab.sgi.com Pete McCarthy Hello everyone,
I was just wondering...why doesn't anyone put off switches on their
robots to save motor life?
-Pete
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://im.yahoo.com
10866 Fri, 25 Feb 2000 15:37:57 -0600 [alt-beam] Videos going online BEAM Richard Piotter I'm working to get some of my videos online. They can be seen by signing
in as a guest at http://www.idrive.com
under the user name richfiles.
I'm still uploading them. I keep having problems with it. Stupid thing
doesn't like the larger files!
--
Richard Piotter The Richfiles Robotics & TI web page:
richfile@rconnect.com http://richfiles.calc.org
-- Make Money by Simply Surfing the Net or responding to E-Mail!!!
-- Click below!!!
http://www.alladvantage.com/go.asp?refid=ATL147
http://www.spedia.net/cgi-bin/dir/tz.cgi?run=show_svc&fl=8&vid=329630
10867 14th century [alt-beam] Eloquence beam@sgiblab.sgi.com "Timothy Flytch"
______________________________________________________
10868 Fri, 25 Feb 2000 15:59:09 -0600 [alt-beam] Re: printer caps? alt-beam@egroups.com Ben A Micklin Thier perfect!
~ben~
On Fri, 25 Feb 2000 16:13:58 -0500 walkau writes:
> another newbie question:
>
> i opened up an old dot matrix printer and found some 4700uF (63v)
> caps.
>
> would these be BEAM-able or is the voltage rating far too high?
>
> thanks
> niels walkau
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
> GET A NEXTCARD VISA, in 30 seconds! Get rates as low as 0.0%
> Intro or 9.9% Fixed APR and no hidden fees. Apply NOW!
> http://click.egroups.com/1/911/5/_/5594/_/951512988/
>
> -- 20 megs of disk space in your group's Document Vault
> -- http://www.egroups.com/docvault/alt-beam/?m=1
>
>
________________________________________________________________
YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET!
Juno now offers FREE Internet Access!
Try it today - there's no risk! For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.
10869 Fri, 25 Feb 2000 14:06:59 -0800 [alt-beam] Re: BEAM: Tendency toward miniaturization beam@sgiblab.sgi.com Bruce Robinson "Phillip A. Ryals" wrote:
>
> Well... you're making an awfully big assumption there. When have
> scientists made an electronic equivilent to a biologic neuron?
Actually, the Nv and Nu neurons in BEAM are remarkably close to
biological neurons in their behaviour AND their gross phsyical
characteristics. We just haven't learned to use them that way.
> ... the neurons in the brain react to many many signals from other
> neurons ...
As do Nu neurons (and Nv neurons to a much lesser extent).
> ... and transmit many many other signals out ...
Actually, they don't. The output signals can branch out to many
locations, of course, but there is only one type of output for any given
neuron.
> How many electronic circuits have the ability to do this at
> biologic speeds?
Not too many ... we really have to slow down those electronic circuits
to reach bilogic equivalents. There are two speed ranges in human
neurons (depending on whether or not the axons are covered with a myelin
sheath) ... 6 to 10 m/s, and 60 to 100 m/s. Compare that to electronic
speeds of 300 km/s which are several thousand times faster.
> And do we *really* know everything about neurons?
Nope. But that isn't what's really important.
> This circuit could appear to react correctly, but we may be
> skipping over many important details that we don't even know yet.
Yes! We don't know enough about the connections! That is the most
important part of any complex system ... not the elements that are in
the system, but the way they are connected.
> And how would one go about 'scaling' this down? One thing we've
> learned is that many mechanisms don't work right if they're scaled
> up or down.
Only because we BEAMers don't analyze the scaling method sufficiently.
Builders of ships and aircraft didn't do very well with precise
modelling until they went beyond physical scaling and started to analyze
the forces. Then they "discovered" a number of dimensionless scaling
constants, such as the Mach number, the Reynolds number, etc. These
numbers have allowed for very precise scaling. We don't have the
equivalent in BEAM (yet).
> ... So what is the likelyhood that an electronic circuit could be
> scaled down to the size of a neuron(!) and still work at the same
> speed.
The high speed of electronics is definitely a problem. Too fast can be
just as bad as too slow. We can perhaps compensate for this by inserting
simple Nv neurons in our connections to delay the propogation of pulses.
That, of course, would double the volume of our hypothetical brain.
----------------------------------
Having made those comments, here's why I think Phillip's scepticism is
well founded. Partake of another little thought experiment with me.
View the brain as a complex system of neurons, with an absolutely huge
number of connections between them. That's essentially what it is. Put
aside for now the definitions of "intelligence" or "the soul". Forget
that we are talking about neurons specifically. Reduce this to a
hypthetical system made up of elements with predictable behaviours all
connected in countless ways.
Now consider a large business. It's also a complex system, made up of
many elements (people, machines, buildings, vehicles, procedures, etc.)
Again, the elements are connected in countless ways (a few "official"
ones, a great many more unofficial and social ones). They business is
not as complex as the brain, by a long shot.
Now consider Windows 95. Again, a complex system made up of many
elements (modules, subroutines, etc). Again, the elements are connected
in many ways, probably countable this time, if we really WANTED to.
These connections are much better defined than the social ones in a
business, or the neural connections in a brain.
SO ... how is it that Windows still locks up due to "fatal errors"? How
is it that programs running under Windows produce "illegal operation"
errors and shut themselves down? This isn't a very complicated system,
relatively speaking.
How is it that so many, many companies run so badly? (WARNING: beware of
the stock excuses offered by the management of those companies. None of
the excuses stand up to close scrutiny.) You don't think most companies
are badly run? What's one test of a well run company? Satisfied
customers. What's another? Satisfied employees. How many businesses do
you deal with that leave you completely satisfied with their
performance? How many people do you know that are really satisfied with
the company they work for? Does your reply extend to all the customers
and employees of those businesses?
The fact is, the large number of people at MicroSoft can't get its
software to work with adequate reliability (you call having to push the
reset button reliable?) Thousands of executives and managers cannot make
their companies run effectively. So how on earth can we expect to build
a reliable, effective equivalent of the brain (even a mouse's brain)?
Aren't thought experiments fun :)
Bruce
10870 Fri, 25 Feb 2000 14:12:15 -0800 [alt-beam] Re: Turning off robots beam@sgiblab.sgi.com Bruce Robinson Pete McCarthy wrote:
>
> I was just wondering...why doesn't anyone put off switches on their
> robots to save motor life?
I do. Blinkin' things keep turning each other on :)
Bruce
10871 Fri, 25 Feb 2000 17:10:23 -0500 [alt-beam] Re: printer caps? beam@sgiblab.sgi.com "Sathe Dilip" The voltage rating is not a problem. What happens is, with higher
voltage rating you also get a larger & heavier can for the capacitor.
If your bot can carry this extra load, you can use the capacitors.
Dilip
------------------------------
walkau wrote:
SNIP
> i opened up an old dot matrix printer and found some 4700uF (63v) caps.
> would these be BEAM-able or is the voltage rating far too high?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The early bird may get the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
10872 14th century Eloquence beam@sgiblab.sgi.com Timothy Flytch [mailto:flytch@hotmail.com]
______________________________________________________
10873 14th century Eloquence beam@sgiblab.sgi.com Timothy Flytch [mailto:flytch@hotmail.com]
______________________________________________________
10874 Fri, 25 Feb 2000 18:23:47 -0500 [alt-beam] Re: Eloquence "Richard Caudle" Does that not refer to communication? IMHO, Elegance is a more appropriate
term. Then again, we are at the crux of the problems that have plagued man
since the dawn of time. Opinions are like assholes. Everyone has one and
they think everybody else's stinks!
(Pardon my lack of eloquence)
Richard
Home