Atoms and Bits

>>>/x/

>>8873300
How is that /x/ tier?

Bits are voltage levels.

>>8873307
You mean the level of electricity being generated? How does that correlate to binary?

>>8873316

>You mean the level of electricity being generated?

Essentially yes but it is a lot more complicated.

>How does that correlate to binary?

In the broadest sense possible:

1 = 5V
0 = 0V

>>8873325
So when you get into megabytes and gigabytes, your essentially combining thousands of units attributed to 5V's to a certain degree?

Assuming that atoms are used to create those same bits, would it be theoretically possible to use atomic manipulation as network between the digital and physical scape?

>>8873332

>So when you get into megabytes and gigabytes, your essentially combining thousands of units attributed to 5V's to a certain degree?

Yes. Data (whether useful data or just commands for various computer parts) is essentially millions upon millions of voltage sequences that the computer interprets as information or commands.

>Assuming that atoms are used to create those same bits, would it be theoretically possible to use atomic manipulation as network between the digital and physical scape?

I'm not sure I understand what you're asking. Bits are "made" out of electrons using transistor logic. We funnel those electrons through a computer into a monitor. That's how you see what you see on a monitor. It's all a physical process. There is no "digital world".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diode%E2%80%93transistor_logic
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logic_gate
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_architecture
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_processing_unit
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_card
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_monitor
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_data_storage

>>8873392
I meant, would it be possible to use atomic manipulation on a computer to create a reaction in reality such as manipulating atoms to a point of creating something with the same atomic make up as what you made on a computer?

Some groups are using atoms/ions as bits for quantum computing

>>8873400

No. You can model things and make shapes using a computer and its software but you still need a 3D printer with materials that are not used in the PC to create it.

The PC doesn't use atoms to create anything. It just lights up (excites) whatever material your monitor is using to shed light.

>>8873428
So you couldn't send an electrical signal from a computer that could theoretically manipulate the positioning of atoms into a viable structure that would eventually become the item you wanted to create?

>>8873432
That's called a printer

>>8873432

No, absolutely not.

>>8873442
Is there a law or rule of logic that hails that as an impossibility?

>>8873435
So could you theoretically advance printing technology far enough to create material of your choice from a computer or store the atomic structure of said item in a form of bytes?

>>8873460
I mean maybe, if people got really good at manipulating atoms. There are more efficient ways of making useful materials.

idk why you keep saying "in the form of bytes" like it's something special, that's just how digital info is stored.

>>8873479
I meant because bits and bytes are the most basic comprehensible forms of information for computers. But if computers could store and operate on atoms, I'd have to wonder where that would lead technology.

>>8873488
It would just be a case of storing the relevant information pertaining to what you want to do.

>>8873506
Could you manipulate the characteristics of existing objects within that sort of thing. Could you theoretically create atoms or forever alter the size of existing items?

>>8873519

You'd need a computer to arrange the data of what you want to create and then send commands to a theoretical machine that could make atoms out of elementary particles.

>>8873539
So this would delve into quantum computing and quantum mechanics? Or would it possibly go even deeper?

>>8873545

No need for quantum computing, you could use a normal computer to just dish out commands to the atom making machine. The atom making machine would have to be all sorts of magical. I don't think there's any theoretical chance to build such a thing.

>>8873545
Since we have a pretty good handle on how atoms work it would mainly be a case of working out how to reliably manipulate them. This is more of an engineering problem, not a computing one. The only connection to computing for what you want is just the fact that computers are the most convenient thing to store and execute the necessary info.

>>8873559
It's been said that magic is simply advanced science, so I guess the question would be, how do you make atoms?

>>8873562
So computers would simply act as a vessel while you would need to find a way to engineer atoms whether is be chemical or physically?

>>8873570
>how do you make atoms?
The easiest way is to just find them

>So computers would simply act as a vessel while you would need to find a way to engineer atoms whether is be chemical or physically?
In the same way the computer acts as a vessel for information that comes out of my speakers in the form of music. Storing, manipulating and transmitting pure information is easy. Translating it into something physical involves peripherals.

Holy shit this takes me back to when I used to work in a call center and clients would insist that I could just go in a retrieve their data from this "digital world". No you retards, it's all a bunch of tubes and if your computer crashes because you were installing toolbars on company time then your work is forever gone.

>>8873602
So your saying that the real world is simply made up of data and we use computers as a vessel to manipulate, comprehend, and store said data? In that case, wouldn't the string theory support this?

>>8873295
>correlation between bits on a computer and atoms

In principle, a bit can be anything that can be measured and controlled.

In general, the smaller the thing, the faster and more dense the storage can be.

For example, you could theoretically store a bit using the spin orientation of one orbital electron on one atom.

Or you could theoretically transmit one bit using a single photon, where the bit value is determined by the amount of energy that the photon carries (i.e. its frequency). Or use that same photon to transmit 8 bits at a time, if you have a way of measuring 256 different frequencies for that photon.

Now, there's no guarantee that those techniques would be easy to engineer. But, compared to the way we're implementing bits now, we do have a lot smaller physical structures we could be using to store/transmit bits in the future.

>>8873432
>electrical signal from a computer that could theoretically manipulate the positioning of atoms into a viable structure

No. Electrical signals are used to transmit data, not to rearrange matter.

An electrical signal could be used to send commands to a 3D printer.

But to actually implement those commands, the 3D printer would need to use technology that manipulates matter at the atomic or subatomic level. That atomic manipulation might (in part) be performed by using specially-engineered, controlled, focused electromagetic radiation -- but I would not call such radiation a "signal".

Computers are used only to transmit and store data. To put it another way: The only physical output of a computer is the generation of heat. That heat is merely a waste product of the computation, and is far too unfocused to be used as a precision tool for the manipulation of matter at the atomic level.

>>8873720
So if we could store info in heat or use heat as a means of manipulation, then theoretically a computer would have a viable physical output?

>>8873617
>So your saying that the real world is simply made up of data

The real world is made up of matter and energy.

"Data storage" is the name we give to certain patterns that we find in the arrangement of matter. ("Data", in general, is the mathematical abstraction of such patterns.)

>>8873332

Well the voltage isn't the point, it can be anything

but when you talk about memory, you are talking about 1.2v usually because there are certain constant involved in electricity, such as the voltage drop of a diode

>>8873432

This is what electricity is:

If there is one metal plate that "wants" electrons and one metal plate that "wants to get rid of" electrons, the electrons will move through other materials (conductors) so that each one gets what they "want"

You can't actually make electricity (which is the movement of electrons) form something made of atoms (a solid)

You can however, use electricity to make something through electrical discharge machining, electroplating, etc.

>>8873732
>So if we could store info in heat or use heat as a means of manipulation

Data can theoretically be stored for a short period of time using temperature differences. However, temperature is a poor choice for data storage, because the laws of thermodynamics require that temperature differences equalize over time. ("Heat" refers only to the energy transfer that occurs during the temperature equalization process. Once the temperatures are finished equalizing, there is no more heat, and the stored data is lost.)

---

Computer waste heat could theoretically be used to manipulate matter.

Unfortunately, the physical location of a computer's waste heat is difficult to control in a precise way. You can do things like make the graphics card a little hotter, or make the CPU a little hotter, or make the network port a little hotter, but that's about the limit of the precision you have.

If you can successfully manipulate matter the way you want using computer waste heat, then you're really clever. However, a good engineer will always suggest a much easier and more efficient way of doing computer-controlled manipulation of matter -- and it will always involve some kind of additional hardware that's specially designed for the exact kind of manipulation you want to do.

That's very useful engineering to learn. To learn it, I would suggest getting a Raspberry Pi and using its GPIO pins to control LEDs, buzzers, relays, motors, and various other pieces of hardware that are specially designed for various types of manipulation of matter and energy.

>>8873432
you could make a system that manipulates material on at an atomic level, indeed that's how they make such powerful processors to begin with

>>8873307
Bits are 1s and 0s. Voltage is always 3.3 or 5V.

>>8873307
>>8873316
>>8874697

bits are a unit of information retards

> computer "science" hurr hurr
> anyone can learn that stuff

and yet here we are

>>8873307
MY SECRETZZZZ
THEY ARE LEAKING

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGH

>>8873432
Strip and Slip method...

You gotta apply energy and then chizel the electrons away...also keeping the atomic material of choice stable...

Good luck....also stasis frequencies are a thing...

>>8873295
It boils down to electrons moving and getting stuck somewhere or becoming free.

In Solid State, that is.

>>8873300
fpbp, this thread is absolute trash and actually making me mad

OP, kill yourself

saged, retard

So, a bit is "a bit" of information; the smallest, simplest form of intelligence, yes or no.

But atoms are basically bits to the physical universe, a terrifically more complex computer than any possible within it.

And darn, this kinda ruins my "Minecraft super computer out-performing the server it's hosted on" idea...

You know, kinda think of it... Bits are the smallest measurement of data /in a computer/.
The computer could be many an assortment of things... In an ecosystem, cells and germs would be bits... In the sky, particles and heat both are bits.
And in a person's head, biologically, the electrons through neurons are bits.
Or even a simple teeter totter, left versus right, the simplest achievable information there is in that system.

>>8875681

>bits are a unit of information retards

And? They're still represented as voltage levels when in transit.