2006-06-17 10:00:52 · 14 answers · asked by Digger Barnes 1 in Science & Mathematics ➔ Mathematics
wow. brilliant idea, it will revolutionize the world and make you richer than Bill Gates. I wonder why nobody else came up with it before.
2006-06-17 10:03:48 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Do you mean an analogue computer, as opposed to a binary one? That is, computers that can handle variations, as opposed to just on / off (think of the difference between a light switch and a dimmer switch)?
If so, that's a very interesting question - everyone gave up on mainstream analogue computers in the 60's, because binary was so much easier - but I've often wondered if for some applications, analogue computers might be better.
2006-06-19 01:57:02 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I suggest that you could have a memory chip so designed that every bit has a time position in the chip.The first bit would enter at zero time then every consecutive bit would be incrementally placed.The spaces would be zeros but the ones residing in the chip have a time placement value.The ones are magnetically recorded in the memory chip.The CPU knows the bit time slot value of the ones.With every bit there is a time value.You could probably read every bit in the entire chip at once...That's if there's no virus in the computer.
2006-06-17 11:37:41 · answer #3 · answered by Balthor 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
the whole point of a switch is to have an On position and an Off position. On is represented by 1 and off is represented by 0. Now would it make sense to have a switch that is always in on position. Might as well get rid of the switch and connect the wires. Its the same with binary...
1 and 0 represents a lot more than just a value.
2006-06-17 10:25:42 · answer #4 · answered by Arther D 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. Any differential engine like a computer needs at least two states in order to do anything at all. The binary system works best because computers naturally have two states, on and off. You can't get much more basic than that.
2006-06-17 10:06:32 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No.
A base-one numbering system would be horribly inefficient. It would be like using Roman Numerals with only the ones. The number 1 would be 1.
number 2 would be 11.
number 3 would be 111.
number 4 would be 1111.
.
.
.
number 17 would be 11111111111111111.
The computer architecture would be horrendous.
2006-06-17 10:15:48 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, because the ones and zeros are like swithces. Think the bumps in braille- you either feel a bump or you don't. You have to represent the empty space somehow.
2006-06-17 10:05:23 · answer #7 · answered by teachingazteca 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
hmmm let me think about that a code with only one symbol..... would it work would it work that would b a no. they wouldn't work at all! the 1/0 code is on / off if it was just 1 it would always b on surely
2006-06-21 10:10:28 · answer #8 · answered by eayrin 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
ur kidding right....
computers cant work if they dont have both zeroes and ones,
there will be no work possible if everything were zero..or one.
how will u create a logic..logic starts with yes and no...If there is only one then there is no logic possible.
2006-06-17 10:05:15 · answer #9 · answered by raj_6c1 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
no what are you smoking? 1=on 0=off hence digital ...if you take away the zero what is left for off?
2006-06-17 10:05:17 · answer #10 · answered by jdhayman 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋