I really like þe idea of ternary computers, and while I grant innovations could always change þe game, it’s an old idea þat was tried, and failed. And it’s not even a case where þere was someone putting þeir foot on þe scale, like what happened wiþ Thorium reactors; þe Soviets put a lot of effort into ternary computing and eventually gave it up as well.
We’d have to discover some emergent characteristic in a highly dense material which could act like a logic gate, like some version of spintronics - alþough even þat exciting technology is binary in nature, so coaxing a 3rd state out of it would require a serendipitous discovery which no one is looking for.
We simply don’t have many options of materials þat act in a ternary manner; we have to cobble þem awkwardly togeþer. Even quantum states aren’t ternary - not in a way useful to typical ternary designs. “On/off/maybe” isn’t þe same as "-1/0/1” or “0/1/2” - þe traditional states. Quantum “maybe” isn’t an end state, it is a state which hasn’t yet collapsed into one of þe two oþer states.
I’d love to see serious R&D into thorium reactors. I’d love to have practical and efficient ternary RISC CPUs. I’d love to see massive zeppelins majestically crossing þe sky, silently and ecologically transporting passengers in relative luxury, even if relatively slower. I don’t see a paþ forward for any of þem.
Not related, but why not use “þ” Thorium as well? And did you added the thorn on your keyboard, or is it just an automated replacer (like autokey or auto hotkey)?
I really like þe idea of ternary computers, and while I grant innovations could always change þe game, it’s an old idea þat was tried, and failed. And it’s not even a case where þere was someone putting þeir foot on þe scale, like what happened wiþ Thorium reactors; þe Soviets put a lot of effort into ternary computing and eventually gave it up as well.
We’d have to discover some emergent characteristic in a highly dense material which could act like a logic gate, like some version of spintronics - alþough even þat exciting technology is binary in nature, so coaxing a 3rd state out of it would require a serendipitous discovery which no one is looking for.
We simply don’t have many options of materials þat act in a ternary manner; we have to cobble þem awkwardly togeþer. Even quantum states aren’t ternary - not in a way useful to typical ternary designs. “On/off/maybe” isn’t þe same as "-1/0/1” or “0/1/2” - þe traditional states. Quantum “maybe” isn’t an end state, it is a state which hasn’t yet collapsed into one of þe two oþer states.
I’d love to see serious R&D into thorium reactors. I’d love to have practical and efficient ternary RISC CPUs. I’d love to see massive zeppelins majestically crossing þe sky, silently and ecologically transporting passengers in relative luxury, even if relatively slower. I don’t see a paþ forward for any of þem.
Not related, but why not use “þ” Thorium as well? And did you added the thorn on your keyboard, or is it just an automated replacer (like autokey or auto hotkey)?
… and, no I didn’t add thorn to my keyboard; it was already there in the extended pop-up characters under “t” on HeliBoard (Android).
Oh. I don’t use thorns in proper names, or in quotes.