Talk:Chemical computer

This article had a pretty good jump-start by Hipporoo. I sectioned it, and trimmed it a bit by linking stuff explained elsewhere. A few things that might need a bit more attention:

• How come it would be so much easier to arrange chemicals than lines on a chip. Is there some sort of selfassembly planned?
• A clearer explanation of how exactly this could outperform chips (the "neuron" paragraph).
• Work by other than Adamatzky
• My language should probably be checked over again

Hipporoo: I'd really like to see your references. The ones I put in are for journal articles that are very technical and subscription-only and I think you have some better ones. Just found one freely available here, maybe that should go in too. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nvj (talk • contribs) 14:04, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, but I am afraid I don't have much personal knowledge in the field. I read the article on the net and found it so interesting that I thought it wouldn't hurt if it was transferred to Wikipedia, where others hopefully would add their own knowledge to the subject now and then. So I took the information and tried to write most of it with my own words, to make sure it isn't a direkt copy to avoid evntuel copyright problems. Since you have done some edits on your own, it is even less similar, and probably clearer. I don't know where the information in the article I read came from, but I can try to give some answears to some of the questions.

"How come it would be so much easier to arrange chemicals than lines on a chip?" From the article, I got the impression that since there is no need for the complicated electronic "highways" in the chemical component, it seems just logical it has a simpler "anatomy" and because of that easier to produce. And cheaper.

"A clearer explanation of how exactly this could outperform chips (the "neuron" paragraph)." Like mentioned, if the technology keeps its promises, which is handling a much larger amount of data because of the chemical properties, it will outperform the present chips. It is like saying if it succeeds to built a car that use only 10% as much fuel as the cars of today, it will in the longer run outperform our conventional cars. Not much realistic for the moment, but you get the idea. I don't have any links for the moment, but it has been mentioned in some article that the brain works in a different way than a computer, even if there is many similrities, and in a more chaotic way. And then we have the old example about how big a computer would have to be if it should have the sama capacity as a brain.

What modern theoretical analyses concerning sufficient complicated reactions it is referred to, I cannot tell, but the Belousov-Zhabotinsky reaction itself should be proof enough.

Some of the "citation needed" statements is based on "if it succeeds to turn theory into practice". From what the theory says, it sounds like the new principles will have a lot of advantages compared to the conventional machines.

The original article for those who read the language;

http://www.illustrertvitenskap.com/polopoly.jsp?d=154&a=3176 Hipporoo 23:14, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Du kunne jo bare have sagt du var norsk! ;-) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nvj (talk • contribs) 10:15, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Tjaaa, jeg kunne vel i grunnen det. Skal i fremtiden forsøke å finne en balansegang. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hipporoo (talk • contribs) 22:49, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Next time just put your link under references and mark it "(Norwegian)" - won't hurt, and might help. In any case, Illustrert Vitenskap has a quite deserved reputation for over-hyping (it sells) so I'll try to tone the claims down a bit. Let's see when I get around to it. Nice move on getting content in without copyright trouble. Nvj 10:48, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

I'll remember that. And take a look now and then in case there is any edits. Hipporoo 21:10, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Chemical computer. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150615085700/http://www.ijirt.org/paperpublished/IJIRT101166_PAPER.pdf to http://www.ijirt.org/paperpublished/IJIRT101166_PAPER.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:40, 21 November 2016 (UTC)