Re: [Vo]:The Memristor
It's a demonstration of a chaotic system: http://www.cmp.caltech.edu/~mcc/chaos_new/Chua_docs/works.html systems whereby very slight changes in the initial conditions can have significant results as time progresses: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaos_theory Check out the movie, The Butterfly Effect, to see what happens when someone makes slight changes in their past life. Terry On Fri, Jan 2, 2009 at 1:22 AM, thomas malloy wrote: > Terry Blanton wrote: > >> Strangely attractive! >> >> >> On 1/1/09, Jones Beene wrote: >> >> Terry Blanton writes, >> >> Harry, I think he emulated a memristor using transistors. >> >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chua%27s_circuit >> > > What exactly does it do, this circuit? > > > > --- Get FREE High Speed Internet from USFamily.Net! -- > http://www.usfamily.net/mkt-freepromo.html --- > >
Re: [Vo]:The Memristor
- Original Message - From: mix...@bigpond.com Date: Friday, January 2, 2009 0:56 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:The Memristor > In reply to Harry Veeder's message of Fri, 02 Jan 2009 00:40:27 - > 0500:Hi, > [snip] > >> ...yes, but like a transistor, a vacuum tube is an active > element, > >> not a passive > >> element. > > > >So the memresistor should be classified as an active element? > > > >Harry > The original statement was that the memristor could not be mimicked > by some > combination of passive elements. However that leaves open the > possibility of it > being mimicked by a combination of active and passive elements. > > That however doesn't answer your question. IMO the answer is that > the memristor > is both/either. In as much as it's parameters can be altered > electrically, it is > an active element. In as much as it retains the change, even > without power being > applied, it is a passive element. I guess the same applies to > magnetic disk > memory. I guess that makes the memristor a pactive element. ;-) Anyway, I found the term "fundamental" used in the article to be more confounding than illuminating. Harry
Re: [Vo]:The Memristor
mix...@bigpond.com wrote: In reply to Jones Beene's message of Thu, 1 Jan 2009 14:16:36 -0800 (PST): Hi, [snip] Terry, Strangely attractive! Here is something even more strangely attractive to Chua in a synchronous kind of way: US Patent 5,590,031 (1996) http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=5,590,031.PN.&OS=PN/5,590,031&RS=PN/5,590,031 Which is the famous origianl "ZPE patent" of Dr.Frank Mead of Edwards AFB, which is often mentioned by Valone It looks a lot like Tesla's Radiant Energy patent. Has anybody replicated this? --- Get FREE High Speed Internet from USFamily.Net! -- http://www.usfamily.net/mkt-freepromo.html ---
Re: [Vo]:The Memristor
Terry Blanton wrote: Strangely attractive! On 1/1/09, Jones Beene wrote: Terry Blanton writes, Harry, I think he emulated a memristor using transistors. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chua%27s_circuit What exactly does it do, this circuit? --- Get FREE High Speed Internet from USFamily.Net! -- http://www.usfamily.net/mkt-freepromo.html ---
Re: [Vo]:The Memristor
In reply to Harry Veeder's message of Fri, 02 Jan 2009 00:40:27 -0500: Hi, [snip] >> ...yes, but like a transistor, a vacuum tube is an active element, >> not a passive >> element. > >So the memresistor should be classified as an active element? > >Harry The original statement was that the memristor could not be mimicked by some combination of passive elements. However that leaves open the possibility of it being mimicked by a combination of active and passive elements. That however doesn't answer your question. IMO the answer is that the memristor is both/either. In as much as it's parameters can be altered electrically, it is an active element. In as much as it retains the change, even without power being applied, it is a passive element. I guess the same applies to magnetic disk memory. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/Project.html
Re: [Vo]:The Memristor
- Original Message - From: mix...@bigpond.com Date: Thursday, January 1, 2009 9:09 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:The Memristor > In reply to Harry Veeder's message of Thu, 01 Jan 2009 19:47:10 - > 0500:Hi, > [snip] > > > >If a configuration of vaccuum tubes and relays (i.e. resistors, > >capacitors and inductors) can emulate a transitor, and a > configuration>of transitors can emulate a memresistor, then it > follows that there > >exists (in theory) a configuration of vaccuum tubes and relays > which can > >emulate a memresistor...or not? > > > >Harry > ...yes, but like a transistor, a vacuum tube is an active element, > not a passive > element. So the memresistor should be classified as an active element? Harry
Re: [Vo]:The Memristor
On Jan 1, 2009, at 6:48 PM, Jones Beene wrote: Robin & Horace, I think you will find that the ZPE cutoff frequency is about 10^43 Hz. Any number in the THz region is simply a limitation imposed by the hardware. This may be a semantics problem. The Haisch Calphysics site mentions the recent work by Christian Beck at the University of London and Michael Mackey at McGill University suggesting that dark energy is nothing other than a subset of zero-point energy. He apparently agrees. Beck/ Mackey propose that a phase transition occurs so that zero-point photons (virtual) below a frequency of about 1.7 THz are gravitationally active whereas above that they are not. They distinguish this as dark energy. I take this to mean that below the upper cutoff of 1.7 THz, which is a rather cold equivalent temperature - it will be possible, with a properly engineered device - to cohere that subset of ZPE - dark energy - which is a gravitationally active component of zero-point energy. Perhaps the evidence of a successful harnessing of this energy, in addition to the obvious: P-out > P-in is an apparent loss of mass during operation. The "loss" would only be transient however. Do you disagree with that interpretation of Beck/Mackey? Jones This theory certainly seems at first glance to be at odds with my theory of Gravimagnetism: http://mtaonline.net/~hheffner/FullGravimag.pdf which concludes that the difference between virtual photons and real photons is the presence of mass charge. Only real photons have mass charge, i.e. the ability to emit or absorb gravitons. This nicely accounts for the fact the zero point field has no mass, because it is comprised of virtual photons. Dark energy is merely the presence of negative gravitational mass matter, which is spontaneously created from the vacuum (ZPE) by black holes at a rate depending on black hole mass and distance of the site of a specific pair creation from the black hole singularity. In fact the presence of this negative gravitational mass matter, spewing forth in a spherical manner from black holes at the center of galaxies, including the Milk Way, accounts for the MOND equation that fits galactic rotations. In my paper I discuss the fact this negative mass matter is likely cosmic dark matter, that is to say matter which is mirror matter that has a miniscule coupling constant with ordinary matter photons, and thus is "dark". However this negative gravitational charge matter, i.e what I called "cosmic matter" is not the "dark matter" which astronomers are trying to identify, because it carries a negative gravitational charge, and thus has been named by them "dark energy". I can't account for dark matter readily unless mirror matter itself can be created in two flavors - mirror matter with positive gravitational charge and mirror matter with negative gravitational charge. If such a combination exists, then negative mass black holes can spit out both ordinary matter and mirror matter having positive gravitational charge. I've posted variations of my theory here that would permit this. Clouds of this combined matter/mirror-matter material can then coalesce distantly from its source into galaxies comprised of both light and dark matter where new black holes form. The mass of the universe then is being continually created in waves of positive mass black holes generating matter that condenses into negative mass black holes generating positive mass black holes etc., ad infinitum. This to me makes much sense, because it answers the question of how we got out of the black hole that the big bang should have been. If all the mass of the universe were at a point at one time then that point would have been a whopping black hole. The answer to that dilemma is that the big bang was not a black hole. It was comprised of equal amounts of positive mass charge matter and negative mass charge matter - and thus was highly expansive, not contractive. All that said, it seems to me logical that improved coupling of the ZPF with nuclear particles occurs below some frequency, or more appropriately in some frequency band depending on particle type. This coupling adds energy and thus mass to nuclei. If momentum is uncertain, energy is uncertain, and thus mass is uncertain. But where does this mass reside? There is now some thinking that all matter might be virtual: http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn16095-its-confirmed-matter-is- merely-vacuum-fluctuations.html?full=true&print=true http://tinyurl.com/5b6b9y It seems to me this thinking is not right in that it leaves the question: what entity then remains to communicate via gravitons? If quantum mechanics is consistent with gravitation then what entity exists as a source and sink for the force messenger, i.e. gravitons? Of there is force then there must be a messenger and a charge
Re: [Vo]:The Memristor
Robin & Horace, > I think you will find that the ZPE cutoff frequency is about 10^43 Hz. Any number in the THz region is simply a limitation imposed by the hardware. This may be a semantics problem. The Haisch Calphysics site mentions the recent work by Christian Beck at the University of London and Michael Mackey at McGill University suggesting that dark energy is nothing other than a subset of zero-point energy. He apparently agrees. Beck/Mackey propose that a phase transition occurs so that zero-point photons (virtual) below a frequency of about 1.7 THz are gravitationally active whereas above that they are not. They distinguish this as dark energy. I take this to mean that below the upper cutoff of 1.7 THz, which is a rather cold equivalent temperature - it will be possible, with a properly engineered device - to cohere that subset of ZPE - dark energy - which is a gravitationally active component of zero-point energy. Perhaps the evidence of a successful harnessing of this energy, in addition to the obvious: P-out > P-in is an apparent loss of mass during operation. The "loss" would only be transient however. Do you disagree with that interpretation of Beck/Mackey? Jones
Re: [Vo]:The Memristor
On Jan 1, 2009, at 5:07 PM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote: In reply to Jones Beene's message of Thu, 1 Jan 2009 14:16:36 -0800 (PST): Hi, [snip] Terry, Strangely attractive! Here is something even more strangely attractive to Chua in a synchronous kind of way: US Patent 5,590,031 (1996) http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser? Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO% 2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=5,590,031.PN.&OS=PN/5,590,031&RS=PN/ 5,590,031 Which is the famous origianl "ZPE patent" of Dr.Frank Mead of Edwards AFB, which is often mentioned by Valone (he was not the primary examiner at USPTO for this one). Way ahead of its time, but it could possibly be pulled off today by a few of the best "fabs" so to speak. Mead's approach was to have microscopic nonlinear oscillators interact with the ZPE, not unlike the Chua cirucit, and if you could get that one above the 1.7 THz cuttoff frequency of ZPE, recently mentioned on Haisch's calphysics page, then you might be onto something truely chaotic ... for Big-Oil, that is. [snip] I think you will find that the ZPE cutoff frequency is about 10^43 Hz. Any number in the THz region is simply a limitation imposed by the hardware. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/Project.html Right on! Small size is key to tapping large amounts of ZPE because the energy distribution is cubic with frequency out to the Planck frequency. This is why I suggested using the nucleus to tap ZPE. For example: http://mtaonline.net/~hheffner/NuclearZPEtapping.pdf http://tinyurl.com/6ucwbl Best regards, Horace Heffner http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
Re: [Vo]:The Memristor
In reply to Harry Veeder's message of Thu, 01 Jan 2009 19:47:10 -0500: Hi, [snip] > >If a configuration of vaccuum tubes and relays (i.e. resistors, >capacitors and inductors) can emulate a transitor, and a configuration >of transitors can emulate a memresistor, then it follows that there >exists (in theory) a configuration of vaccuum tubes and relays which can >emulate a memresistor...or not? > >Harry ...yes, but like a transistor, a vacuum tube is an active element, not a passive element. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/Project.html
Re: [Vo]:The Memristor
In reply to Jones Beene's message of Thu, 1 Jan 2009 14:16:36 -0800 (PST): Hi, [snip] >Terry, > > >> Strangely attractive! > >Here is something even more strangely attractive to Chua in a synchronous kind >of way: > >US Patent 5,590,031 (1996) > >http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=5,590,031.PN.&OS=PN/5,590,031&RS=PN/5,590,031 > > >Which is the famous origianl "ZPE patent" of Dr.Frank Mead of Edwards AFB, >which is often mentioned by Valone (he was not the primary examiner at USPTO >for this one). > >Way ahead of its time, but it could possibly be pulled off today by a few of >the best "fabs" so to speak. > >Mead's approach was to >have microscopic nonlinear oscillators interact with the ZPE, not unlike the >Chua cirucit, and if you could get that one above the 1.7 THz cuttoff >frequency of ZPE, recently mentioned on Haisch's calphysics page, then you >might be onto something truely chaotic ... for Big-Oil, that is. [snip] I think you will find that the ZPE cutoff frequency is about 10^43 Hz. Any number in the THz region is simply a limitation imposed by the hardware. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/Project.html
Re: [Vo]:The Memristor
If a configuration of vaccuum tubes and relays (i.e. resistors, capacitors and inductors) can emulate a transitor, and a configuration of transitors can emulate a memresistor, then it follows that there exists (in theory) a configuration of vaccuum tubes and relays which can emulate a memresistor...or not? Harry - Original Message - From: Terry Blanton Date: Thursday, January 1, 2009 3:22 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:The Memristor > Harry, I think he emulated a memristor using transistors. > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chua%27s_circuit > > Terry > > On 1/1/09, Harry Veeder wrote: > > > > > > > > > > cool, but there is something that confuses me. > > > > Near the beginning of this article... > > > > http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/may08/6207 > > > > we are told that the memristor is a new fundamental > > > > circuit element because it cannot be made from a combination of the > > > > three known fundamental circuit elements - the resistor, the > capacity and > > the inductor. > > > > Then we are told further down the article that the theoretician > behind the > > memristor built a memresitor > > > > in the 1970's using a bunch of standard circuit elements. These are > > contradictory claims. > > > > Harry > > > > > > > > > > > > - Original Message - > > > > From: Terry Blanton > > > > Date: Wednesday, December 31, 2008 8:21 am > > > > Subject: Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC A prediction about future computers > > > > > > > > > There is a new innovation in electronics which will renew the > > > computing industry: > > > > > > http://www.hpl.hp.com/news/2008/apr-jun/memristor.html > > > > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memristor > > > > > > This two port device is "written" by a voltage and duration > (fixing> > its resistance) and "read" by a much lower voltage. > Moore was banging > > > his head against quantum physics with transistors approaching 250 > > > atoms in size; but, the memristor will renew the law. Unlike > dynamic> > ram, the memristor does not need to be refreshed so > that, when you > > > turn your computer on, it will "instantly" return to the state > prior> > to power off. > > > > > > IEEE Spectrum has several articles including the story of how the > > > device was built: > > > > > > http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/dec08/7024 > > > > > > Terry > > > > > > On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 5:55 PM, Jed Rothwell > > & gt; wrote: > > > > It is common knowledge that in the not so distant future hard > > > disks will be > > > > replaced with solid state memory, and MPP architecture will > become> > > commonplace. No doubt computers will run thousands of > times> > faster than they > > > > do now, just as today's computers run anywhere from 1000 to > > > 100,000 times > > > > faster than personal computers did circa 1980 (my estimate -- I > > > would like > > > > to see a more authoritative estimate). > > > > > > > > Anyway, I would like to make a prediction about these upcoming > > > machines.> Despite the fact that they will run thousands of times > > > faster, I predict > > > > that it will still take two minutes to turn Windows on. And to > > > turn it off, > > > > for crying out loud! Why it takes so long to terminate a program > > > is a > > > > mystery. The disk access light flutters and twitches, but the > > > program gives > > > > no hint what it is up to. By the standards of 1980 these > things are > > > > supercomputers and in two minutes you could probably enumerate > > > every person > > > > in the U.S. Anyway, two minutes seems to be a built-in computer > > > constant,> along with the price of whatever computer you want to > > > buy, which Dave Barry > > > > defined as: "$500 more than you hoped to pay." > > > > > > > > - Jed > > > > > > > > > > > >
Re: [Vo]:The Memristor
Terry, > Strangely attractive! Here is something even more strangely attractive to Chua in a synchronous kind of way: US Patent 5,590,031 (1996) http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=5,590,031.PN.&OS=PN/5,590,031&RS=PN/5,590,031 Which is the famous origianl "ZPE patent" of Dr.Frank Mead of Edwards AFB, which is often mentioned by Valone (he was not the primary examiner at USPTO for this one). Way ahead of its time, but it could possibly be pulled off today by a few of the best "fabs" so to speak. Mead's approach was to have microscopic nonlinear oscillators interact with the ZPE, not unlike the Chua cirucit, and if you could get that one above the 1.7 THz cuttoff frequency of ZPE, recently mentioned on Haisch's calphysics page, then you might be onto something truely chaotic ... for Big-Oil, that is. At least you would them "over a barrel" ;-) Jones
Re: [Vo]:The Memristor
Strangely attractive! Terry On 1/1/09, Jones Beene wrote: > > > > Terry Blanton writes, > > Harry, I think he emulated a memristor using transistors. > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chua%27s_circuit > > > > Hey what do you see when you look into the eyes of chaos ? > > ... a return stare? > > http://nonlinear.eecs.berkeley.edu/ >
Re: [Vo]:The Memristor
Terry Blanton writes, Harry, I think he emulated a memristor using transistors. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chua%27s_circuit Hey what do you see when you look into the eyes of chaos ? ... a return stare? http://nonlinear.eecs.berkeley.edu/
Re: [Vo]:The Memristor
Harry, I think he emulated a memristor using transistors. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chua%27s_circuit Terry On 1/1/09, Harry Veeder wrote: > > > > > cool, but there is something that confuses me. > > Near the beginning of this article... > > http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/may08/6207 > > we are told that the memristor is a new fundamental > > circuit element because it cannot be made from a combination of the > > three known fundamental circuit elements - the resistor, the capacity and > the inductor. > > Then we are told further down the article that the theoretician behind the > memristor built a memresitor > > in the 1970's using a bunch of standard circuit elements. These are > contradictory claims. > > Harry > > > > > > - Original Message - > > From: Terry Blanton > > Date: Wednesday, December 31, 2008 8:21 am > > Subject: Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC A prediction about future computers > > > > > There is a new innovation in electronics which will renew the > > computing industry: > > > > http://www.hpl.hp.com/news/2008/apr-jun/memristor.html > > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memristor > > > > This two port device is "written" by a voltage and duration (fixing > > its resistance) and "read" by a much lower voltage. Moore was banging > > his head against quantum physics with transistors approaching 250 > > atoms in size; but, the memristor will renew the law. Unlike dynamic > > ram, the memristor does not need to be refreshed so that, when you > > turn your computer on, it will "instantly" return to the state prior > > to power off. > > > > IEEE Spectrum has several articles including the story of how the > > device was built: > > > > http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/dec08/7024 > > > > Terry > > > > On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 5:55 PM, Jed Rothwell > & gt; wrote: > > > It is common knowledge that in the not so distant future hard > > disks will be > > > replaced with solid state memory, and MPP architecture will become > > > commonplace. No doubt computers will run thousands of times > > faster than they > > > do now, just as today's computers run anywhere from 1000 to > > 100,000 times > > > faster than personal computers did circa 1980 (my estimate -- I > > would like > > > to see a more authoritative estimate). > > > > > > Anyway, I would like to make a prediction about these upcoming > > machines.> Despite the fact that they will run thousands of times > > faster, I predict > > > that it will still take two minutes to turn Windows on. And to > > turn it off, > > > for crying out loud! Why it takes so long to terminate a program > > is a > > > mystery. The disk access light flutters and twitches, but the > > program gives > > > no hint what it is up to. By the standards of 1980 these things are > > > supercomputers and in two minutes you could probably enumerate > > every person > > > in the U.S. Anyway, two minutes seems to be a built-in computer > > constant,> along with the price of whatever computer you want to > > buy, which Dave Barry > > > defined as: "$500 more than you hoped to pay." > > > > > > - Jed > > > > > > >
