Talk:Analog computer

message: 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)
thread_title:  First programmable analog computer? 

message: This is a bit off topic; if this bothers you stop reading now.
Years ago we had an engineering problem that used a PDB-8 to do a complex calculation. It gave us a correct answer, but was too slow, because the algorithm converged on the answer too slowly. If only we could start with an initial guess that was at least close to the final answer... Analog computer to the rescue! We built up a custom analog computer out of operational amplifiers and high precision hand-selected resistors and capacitors, and used the (inaccurate) answer as our initial guess for the PDP-8. Analog computers pretty much give instant answers. Worked great! --Guy Macon (talk) 23:43, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: That is an interesting application that would be very useful at Analog computer#Analog–digital hybrids if a reliable source were available. I don't mean a source for that particular device, but a source for the concept in general because many algorithms converge quickly and accurately, but only if they are given a reasonably good guess for an initial starting point. Johnuniq (talk) 10:26, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I will do some searching. I am pretty sure that other people did something similar, because the DEC salesman tried to get us to buy a Type 189 low performance analog to digital converter option for the PDP-8 and automate the process instead of reading the answer from the analog computer on an analog voltmeter and typing the numbers in. I did a search and could not find any info on the Type 189 other than that it existed. --Guy Macon (talk) 12:16, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fun story 

message: 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)
replies: text: I removed the part about Babbage. -Amcbride (talk) 23:05, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Babbage? 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Turing completeness?