The World's Largest Computer in 1951

  • Thread starter Thread starter wolram
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Computer
Click For Summary
The discussion centers around two significant machines: the ENIAC, an early computer that was 10 feet tall, weighed 30 tons, and required 150 kilowatts of power, and the Russian Ekranoplan, a ground effect vehicle that could travel over 400 km/h and weighed 540 tons. The ENIAC utilized a vast number of electronic components but had less processing power than a modern pocket calculator. The Ekranoplan, developed by the Soviet Union, operates just above water using a shock wave principle, allowing it to travel over various terrains. The conversation also touches on trivia and historical facts about these machines, highlighting their unique engineering and capabilities. Overall, the thread showcases a blend of technical details and engaging quiz-like interactions.
  • #691
zoobyshoe said:
Dewars?...
Oh, looks like zooby got this part first. Depending on who gets the last part, a few folks might have to share the prize.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #692
zoobyshoe said:
I took it to be a fun thread to pass the time. No one's being graded. Anyone who knows the answer off the top of their head can automatically get it into the thread before anyone could possibly google it, so the well read people with good memories win the round anyway.
The no-Google rule applied to different trivia quizzes, not this one. The other ones weren't pass-the-torch games like this one though, it was just a list of 10 or 20 questions that would have been far too quickly answered if they were googled and was intended to get those threads to last awhile. This one doesn't need a no-Google rule, because the whole game stalls if nobody knows the answer (and with some of these obscure inventions, nobody would know it off the top of their head). Honestly, I look at it as both a challenge to the questioner and answerer. I consider it more like an internet scavenger hunt...here are some clues, now see if you can find it. If the answer can be googled quickly then the question was too easy (then again, that gives everyone a chance to play, not just those who are endless fonts of trivia).
 
  • #693
sears? just a guess, sears tower
 
  • #694
Woah, left this thread for a couple days...came back to find myself in the dust.

And speaking of "Googling" Moonbear, what was that again about verbifying brand names ?

Dewar is a great guess Zoob. Would the brand name Moonie's looking for be Thermos ? (obvious guess for someone working in Low-Temp Physics)

Zoob, you're up next.
 
  • #695
[sidetrack on the issue of googling] I have a short trivia quiz (on mostly obscure literary references) nearly ready. But it would be all too Googlable... [/sidetrack]
 
  • #696
Gokul43201 said:
[sidetrack on the issue of googling] I have a short trivia quiz (on mostly obscure literary references) nearly ready. But it would be all too Googlable... [/sidetrack]
If you explicitely say, "no googling" people will stick to the rule.


Go ahead and ask one Gokul, if you're sure "Thermos" is correct. I was thinking "Dewars" was the name both of the whiskey and the flask.
 
  • #697
I have intended that every question asked could be googled. I see this as a test of google proof questions, unless otherwise specified.
 
  • #698
Gokul43201 said:
Woah, left this thread for a couple days...came back to find myself in the dust.

And speaking of "Googling" Moonbear, what was that again about verbifying brand names ?

Dewar is a great guess Zoob. Would the brand name Moonie's looking for be Thermos ? (obvious guess for someone working in Low-Temp Physics)

Zoob, you're up next.

Yep, that was what I was looking for. To sum up, Dewar's scotch-whiskey (they're trademark includes a Highlander, and Highlander also hints at Scotch if you didn't know the trademark) in a Dewar flask, which is better known as a Thermos. :biggrin:
 
  • #699
And a nasty drunk!
 
  • #700
Ivan Seeking said:
I have intended that every question asked could be googled. I see this as a test of google proof questions, unless otherwise specified.

So, why don't we just amend the rules that we'll assume googling (or Yahooing or running off to the encyclopedias, or whatever other search method you prefer) is allowed unless the person asking the question specifically invokes a no-google rule. :smile: I know I carefully chose my question so google wasn't going to help (I thought my barbed wire question would work that way too, but I didn't know every book ever written on inventions included barbed wire as an example :smile:). That's what took me so long writing a question last night, because I tossed out another one that every clue I tried to write pointed way too quickly to the answer in google. I better start working on a back-up supply of questions so Zooby doesn't get miffed that I take so long next time. :biggrin:
 
  • #701
Gokul's turn.
 
  • #702
I think googling is ok to confirm what you are guessing, or flesh out the answer, but not to actually look for the answer.

I thought everyone here was so smart and now I am terribly disillusioned. :frown: zoobie... :frown:

Ivan, you google for answers? I idolized you. :cry:

Gokul, please tell me you don't google answers.
 
  • #703
This thread is moving so fast that it left scorch marks on my screen.

What do you think everyone; Google is okay unless otherwise specified?

Also, I like how google is now a verb. :biggrin:
 
  • #704
Evo said:
Ivan, you google for answers? I idolized you. :cry:

I think I probably googled about half of my answers, so could you still idolize my left side? :frown:
 
  • #705
Ivan Seeking said:
I think I probably googled about half of my answers, so could you still idolize my left side? :frown:
But you already "knew" the answer, right? You just googled to confirm your guess? Because that's ok, I do that (and if I do it, it's ok). :-p

I guess I could idolize your left side. Is that the side your spare foot is on?
 
  • #706
Ivan Seeking said:
Also, I like how google is now a verb. :biggrin:
I think I've used google as every part of speech possible! :smile: I'm waiting for the grammar police to knock on my door any minute now. :rolleyes:
 
  • #707
Evo said:
I thought everyone here was so smart and now I am terribly disillusioned. :frown: zoobie... :frown:
Googling is smart. Wasting your brain storage space with masses of facts you never use is not smart. This is why austistic-savants are basically helpless people who can't take care of themselves, despite being able to remember the date of every day it rained since calendars were invented.
 
  • #708
Moonbear said:
I think I've used google as every part of speech possible! :smile: I'm waiting for the grammar police to knock on my door any minute now. :rolleyes:
(ppstt...moonbear...the grammar police don't exist. They're not real Like santa claus or the easter bunny)
 
  • #709
There are definitely questions that a quick google will find. But if worded well, google only helps if you have already figured out part of the answer; say the subject. For example, I was amazed at how quickly I was able to guess the RAT on about page two, in response to Nereid's question. It was a matter of anticipating Nereid as much as following the clue given. No amount of googling alone would have produced the answer. Of course it was a bit of a lucky guess. :biggrin:
 
Last edited:
  • #710
That is true. Often, if you don't have a solid lead, google gets you nowhere.
 
  • #711
It was all of the below ... (Google if you wish; but this is easily Googlable, so...)

-Pauli's last room number
-Schwinger's license plate number
-the source of Arthur Eddington's embarrassment

What was it ?
 
  • #712
zoobyshoe said:
That is true. Often, if you don't have a solid lead, google gets you nowhere.
I'm a master googler.
 
  • #713
Well then, get your gloves on and get going...I'm not going to stick around forever to okay the answer to this one.
 
  • #714
Gokul43201 said:
It was all of the below ... (Google if you wish; but this is easily Googlable, so...)

-Pauli's last room number
-Schwinger's license plate number
-the source of Arthur Eddington's embarrassment

What was it ?
The number 137
 
  • #715
Evo said:
I'm a master googler.
I turned yellow the other night.
 
  • #716
zoobyshoe said:
The number 137
Nice hit ! You're next.

I'll type up an explanation meanwhile.
 
  • #717
This was the largest of its kind ever built at the time. It could produce 1600 horsepower, and was about 20 feet tall. What was it, and where was it first installed? Hint: centenial
 
  • #718
a horse pyramid containing 1600 horses?
 
  • #719
yomamma said:
a horse pyramid containing 1600 horses?
Go to your room. And no desert!
 
  • #720
BUT I WANNA ICE[/size]CREAM[/size]SUNDAE! :cry:[/size]
 

Similar threads

Is Alan Turing given too much credit when it comes to computers?
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
5K
How to compute flexure and failure loads of acrylic sheets
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
15K