Owen Nieuwenhuyse wrote:

> How does this apply to infra-red detectors at doors?



Simple: Stream the information from the infra-red detectors trough this

circut before leaving it for the other circuts.



> Do you want to exclude cyclic signals from activating the door?



Yes.



> Wouldn't a feedback loop do the job?-with a bit of hysteresis.



A "feedback loop"? Could you explain what you mean with this?



> What other uses would such a device have?



All pattern recotnigion, of course. Unlike software, it isn't delaying

the universe it is working in while processing the signal (;), so it

could as well be used in place of softweric pattern recotnigion.



I might add, I actualy figgured out the design while working on neural

circuts: Neurons are known to also have inhibition contacts, so creating

a lowercase "b" shaped neural circut, with the inhibition contact in the

junction in the middle, is equvalent to creating the electronic circut I

was previously describing.



> People demonstrate by their actions that they experience pain, pleasure

> etc that another person would recognise from their own experiences.

> 

> In theory, a computer could be made to give similar reactions to similar

> inputs. At that stage, most people could identify with the behavior of the machine,

> and attribute emotions to the machine.



I know what you mean with this, but the point was indentifying something

a bit more universal. For example, a person raised in China will have

diffirent emotion-reactions than a person raised in Europe, so the

"seems to be" don't even count within humans, what about machines! 



I have once built up a theory of "unlimited possibility of abbility

presence". In it I have determined that if a subject dosen't sense

something, it dosen't matter if that exists or does not and it is

undeterminable. A planet Earth type VT-fact (via theory fact) is the

colour vision topic between humans and dogs: Dog eyes use diffirent

colour determination pigments than human eyes, so both the dog and the

human could claim for eachother that they're colour-blind. Another

VT-fact is that machines and humans have diffirent kinds of

understanding of the world, so each could claim for the other that they

do not sense the world around them.



The simplest way to represent the point of this theory is in 1D:



Abbility spectre

I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I

Dog abbilities       I---------I             I---------I

Human abbilities                    

I---------------------------------------------I     



Of course only a Meaning Map can describe all of the theory exactly as

it should be.



> Not for many years-I can vaguely remember some. I have never been in a

> really

> big hydro plant. I would imagine that a very large lump of concrete would

> signifigantly damp out the shaking.



=]



> > > These new fuel cells sound interesting, but I would prefer really good

> > > batteries.

> > > The generation-transmission-battery-electric motor  system is grossly

> > > inefficient. - I still think running costs are lower for electrics-if

> > > you can create durable batteries!

> >

> > Well, I well know what powersource would I use, if it wasn't illegal to

> > use it. I would use the mini-format nuclear (uranium heats bimetals that

> > produce electricity). It would be rather small and would last forever.

> > You might think that radiation is in question here, but to tell you: as

> > much uranium it would take for a car, the radiation would probably be

> > way lower from what you get by driving on a granite-cube road. And

> > secondly, it surely is cost-effective to buy that little uranium if you

> > get a free ride for the rest of the existance of the car.

> >

> > The biggest problem would probably be what happens if you crash with

> > such a car: !!!***BANG***!!! [insert mushroom clouds here] => Just

> > kidding.

> ON:

> There is a hydrogen-moderated rocket engine that is very stable-however

> it puts out a heap of radiation when it is working! You need a lot of

> uranium/plutonium

> to get signifigant heat out of it.

> >

> > > How long do you think it will be before we all change over to

> > > a "hydrogen economy"? - that seems to be the major long-term transport

> > > plan for now.

> >

> > Hydrogen dosen't grow on trees and you can't either pump it from

> > anywhere like you do fuel or gas. So, no long term here. Compressed air

> > is a better and safer carier of energy, which sounds quite sad to me

> > ("balh, compressed air?!").

> ON:

> How many kw/hrs could you get into reasonable sized tank? Isn't throttling

> and compression a bit lossy? It would get very cold!

> 

> Hydrogen can be electrically seperated quite cheaply, but is hard to

> handle. You can make lots of electricity with nuclear power.

> There is more uranium around than petroleum, (or coal) relative to possible

> energy output.

> This puts the non-renewable energy problem off for another couple of

> hundred years.

> Renewable forms are so expensive, they would wreck the world economy.

> 

> Petroleum deposits are only going to last another 50 years or so,

> as far as I know.

> Bio-alcohol may be a more likely future fuel.

> 

> I was looking at air/hydraulic drive for a drag car-you could get 4000 hp

> for  6 or seven seconds quite easily! :-)

> It would be cheaper and more durable that car-engine based dragsters-

> pity there are no race classes for that type of machine.





--



Don't feel bad about asking/telling me anything, I will always gladly

reply.



Digging for info? Try AI Meta Search:

Http://WWW.AIMetaSearch.Com



GTSC4 -- If nobody else wants to do it, why shouldn't we?(TM)

Meson & GTSC4 are now merged:

Http://WWW.MesonAI.Com

