Alt-BEAM Archive
Message #13221
To: beam@sgiblab.sgi.com
From: Bruce Robinson Bruce_Robinson@telus.net
Date: Sat, 08 Apr 2000 22:20:43 -0700
Subject: Re: 74HC14 for a microcore, or 74xxx240?
Chris wrote:
>
> How many neurons can i get on on 74HC14, ...
Six.
> ... would it be easy to attach two together without too much
> drain on the votage, ...
Yes.
> and how would I attach them???
Neuron output goes to neuron input.
> Is the neuron architecture for a 74xxx240 the same as the 74HC14???
Nope.
> Thanks for your help!
> I'm new to walkers can you tell?
Have a look at Miller's tutorial. Even if you just build the circuit,
you can learn a lot in a hurry.
http://vsim.freeservers.com/amiller/microcore.html
Bruce
13222 Sat, 08 Apr 2000 22:34:24 -0700 Re: WCRG? (plus info on WCRG events) beam@sgiblab.sgi.com Bruce Robinson James Taylor wrote:
>
> It is possible to turn water into it's basic elements.
Electrolysis. Used to do it a lot when I was a teenager. Two electrodes
immersed in water, and connected to a DC supply. A little electrolyte in
the water to make it conducting (e.g., baking soda), and a couple of
water-filled test tubes inverted over the electrodes to capture the
gases.
> I've seen it done chemically,
Expose calcium to water. It produces CaOH (calcium hydroxide), hydrogen
gas, and a great deal of heat ... enough heat to ignite the hydrogen if
there is any air/oxygen present.
Needless to say, you can't leave calcium lying around ... moisture in
the air will react with it. You can't pick it up, either ... moisture on
your hands will set of the reaction. The heat of reaction is bad enough,
but CaOH is also highly corrosive (to flesh among other things).
> Now all we need is a way to convert hydrogen or oxygen into
> electricity, or some other usable form of power.
The Ballard fuel cell seems pretty promising. Daimler Chrysler just
announced a major deal to make production autos using the technology
(and about time, too).
The problem is, you are going in a circle. If you have enough
electricity to break down water, then why not use it to power your 'bot?
Separating the water into oxygen and hydrogen, and then recombining it
will give you less electricity due to process losses.
I suspect the only practical way is to carry some kind of "food" (e.g.,
Calcium) that will react with water.
Bruce
13223 Sat, 8 Apr 2000 23:03:27 -0700 (PDT) Re: WCRG? (plus info on WCRG events) beam@sgiblab.sgi.com Daniel Grace Did this in Physical Science last year. Take two test
tubes, and stick them down in the water. Hook two
wires up to a power supply. Take the two wires, and
stick them into the water, under the test tubes (one
under one, the other under the other) and crank that
bad boy up! To find out which is which, take a match
to the top of one of the test tubes (block it off with
your finger, to keep the stuff from escaping first)
the hydrogen will emit a small pop (explosion, just
really little). That's all there is to it, no
chemicals at all.
~Daniel
>The process is called hydrolysis. I've
> seen it done chemically,
> and I think it is possible to do it through
> electrical means.
=====
ICQ # 39402143
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://im.yahoo.com
13224 Sun, 9 Apr 2000 15:05:49 -0700 Re: WCRG? (plus info on WCRG events) James Taylor
> A robot that is capable of feeding on it's environmental constants is
> intriguing.
> Solar robots take advantage of the large supply of light provided by the
sun
> (or some other electrical means).
> However the sun doesn't shine all day (unless you live extremely north or
> south, and I doubt the amount of light that reaches those extreme regions
is
> enough to power a bot). So is it possible to create a robot to feed off
of
> it's environment. Water is oxygen and two parts of hydrogen, one of the
> most powerful elements. It is possible to turn water into it's basic
> elements. The process is called hydrolysis. I've seen it done
chemically,
> and I think it is possible to do it through electrical means. Now all we
> need is a way to convert hydrogen or oxygen into electricity, or some
other
> usable form of power. I'm sure if someone could either burn the hydrogen
> (remember we also made oxygen with our little reaction) or use some sort
of
> fusion reaction (now it sounds somewhat like science fiction) a water
> eating robot would be possible. The most feasible method is to make some
> heat. (burn some hydrogen) We would then combine that heat with water and
> make some steam, and through some clever mechanics. Convert that steam
into
> electricity. Now we have a true aquavore! Only problem I see is the size
> of this little endeavor. Plus I'm not sure exactly what's involved with
> hydrolysis. I was rather young when I read an experiment for converting
> water into it's basic elements. I vaguely remember two metal rods and
some
> water. You probably need to mix some electrolyte in with the process.
I'm
> sure it's on the net somewhere.
> So who wants to take a crack at building one of these :)
>
>
>
> > In a message dated 4/7/00 12:51:01 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
> Synet@Psynet.net
> > writes:
> >
> > > Maybe one of the first, water based, BEAM bots actually was a
> aqua"vore".
> > Sounds like an excuse to me. I've only seen one (and it was a drawing)
of
> a
> > "bot" in the BEAM games booklet and it did not consume water. I've seen
> > photos of 3 others none of which worked adequately. None of them
consumed
> > water either. I have seen one that worked, and was sealed in a
florescent
> > light fixture, it also, did not feed on water. If names don't mean what
> they
> > translate to, then why use Greek at all? Why bother with correcting the
> > newbie about "phototropism and photophobism"? If you do have a mechanism
> > which operates on water power, I'd really love to see it, and I'm sure
so
> > would the Dept. of Energy.
> >
> > > But since then, "aquavore" has basically taken the name for any BEAM
> devise
> > > that is made to work in the water.
> > Even though it literally translates into water eater? This is just
> > stubbornness and an unwillingness to change. Even if the change is to
> correct
> > an error. Maybe it would go over better if someone in the inner circle
> > thought of it. So be it, let the water eaters loose.
> >
> >
> > See ya,
> > Jim
> > http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/Exhibit/8281/beamart.html
> > ICQ# 55657870
> >
>
> "I dream in first person shooters"
>
> Jim Taylor
> "Edgar the Hate Bug"
> URL:http://fly.to/springmeadows
> ICQ:14888587
>
>
>
Home