🚀 go-pugleaf

On 2018-02-21, JimP <solo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Feb 2018 10:11:05 -0800, Michael LeVine
><mlevine...@redshift.com> wrote:
>
>>On 2018-02-21 17:48:34 +0000, Gene Wirchenko said:
>>
>>> On 21 Feb 2018 11:13:54 GMT, maus <ma...@mail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> On 2018-02-20, Gene Wirchenko <ge...@telus.net> wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 19 Feb 2018 09:11:12 +0000, Gareth's Downstairs Computer
>>>>> <headstone255.but.n...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On 19/02/2018 07:26, Gene Wirchenko wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Not enough description of the state machine, though, for
>>>>>> each state need to know action if 1 or 0 read, whether to
>>>>>> write back 1 or 0, and next state whether 1 or 0 read.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> It is particularly fascinating that a Turing Machine could
>>>>>> have been built with the technology available at the time
>>>>>> it was first postualted (1935?)
>>>>> 
>>>>> I do not think that that is that notable.  The machine could have
>>>>> been made back in Babbage's time.  (Too bad Babbage did not come up
>>>>> with something more immediately practical.)
>>> 
>>>> AFAIhaveread, the problem was that it not possible to machine parts to
>>>> the limits that Babbage's machines needed, at that time.
>>> 
>>>      I was thinking of that plus that Babbage did not get something
>>> practical going.  That might have helped get mechanical computing
>>> going big.
>>> 
>>> Sincerely,
>>> 
>>> Gene Wirchenko
>>
>>His difference engine was built tothe same tolerance's that were 
>>available in his time,
>>and it worked as designed.
>>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=be1EM3gQkAY
>>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BlbQsKpq3Ak
>
> The antikythera mechanism was built to very tight tolerances and
> worked.

CITE:?

What was it for?


-- 
greymaus.ireland.ie
Just_Another_Grumpy_Old_Man