Edge Rewrite
// HTMLRewriter · presentation

This page was redesigned at the edge.

Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.

// request.cf · coarse context

A page that knows where it met you.

Only coarse request metadata is shown. This demo does not display or persist visitor IP addresses.

Country
US
Cloudflare location
CMH
Connection
HTTP/2
Language
Not provided

Ray ID: a21db34e5e7ed96e

Jump to content

Talk:Analog computer

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 1 year ago by 89.247.227.122 in topic The main aspect about analog computers is

First programmable analog computer?

[edit]

Why do I keep seeing this same exact line "The castle clock, a hydropowered mechanical astronomical clock invented by Al-Jazari in 1206, was the first programmable analog computer.[10][11][12]" posted on all the major computing history Wikipedia articles? For starters, I believe the claim is a bit sensationalized, as the word "programmable" is being used very loosely here. The term programmable is usually meant in the context of being able to provide instructions to a machine so that the machine can adjust its operations accordingly. In this scenario for Al-Jazari's clock (also very loosely associated with a computer, but it performs a computation of sorts, namely, keeping time and such, so I will grant that I suppose), the clock had to be manually recalibrated. Does this qualify as programmable? In addition to this, the actual cited source isn't even correct. The episode in question of Ancient Discoveries of the History Channel is Series 3 Episode 9, and the episode itself (available on YouTube) doesn't even support the claim that Al-Jazari's clock was the first programmable analog computer. The episode actually makes an even stranger claim: that Al-Jazari's clock was a "super computer". I also looked through source 11 and didn't find the claim supported on the page given. What is going on here?  Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:82:200:8B20:0:0:0:3C04 (talk) 01:15, 16 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

Babbage?

[edit]

Why are Babbage's designs included here as precursors to the analog computer? The difference and analytical engines were digital. -Amcbride (talk) 20:04, 18 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

I removed the part about Babbage. -Amcbride (talk) 23:05, 19 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Turing completeness?

[edit]

I removed a link from external links because there was no content to do with the title on the page. I'm not sure if analogue computers can be turing complete at this moment, maybe they can.  Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7E:2ECA:200:FCBB:7BD1:C6B7:A5A7 (talk) 03:32, 21 December 2023 (UTC)Reply

They are somewhat turing complete in the sense that there computational power is analog to a Turing machine. But the Turing concepts can't be applied because analog computers aren't working on algorithms and have no memory. Therefor you should look up the Shannon concepts for analog computers. 2.207.118.239 (talk) 15:07, 29 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

The main aspect about analog computers is

[edit]

that they don't work on algorithms! That should be right at the beginning of the article. 89.247.227.122 (talk) 12:38, 1 April 2025 (UTC)Reply