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.
  • #991
Brewnog and Gokul both incorrect. It is something you both have already heard of, I'm sure, but didn't know this detail.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #992
Nope, I'm not going to get it without another hint!
 
  • #993
Me neither...though I'm certain there was something that sat in a pool of mercury in the Bay Area.
 
  • #994
The point of the complex mercury bearing was to obviate the fact of how sensitive the device was to any vibration.
 
  • #995
zooby said:
Brewnog and Gokul both incorrect. It is something you both have already heard of, I'm sure, but didn't know this detail.

Ohh, but look!


The 200 tonne Dunn Solar Telescope at Sacramento Peak is suspended from a container holding ten tons of mercury, which acts as a bearing. This allows the telescope to be easily rotated during research.

Do I win?
 
Last edited:
  • #996
Michelson-Morley interferometer...?

Daniel.
 
  • #997
Hmmmmmmm...good research, but does this telescope fit the rest of the description: "...mounted on a block of concrete that floated in a cylindrical, brick enclosed trough of mercury"?

Here's another clue: this was a measuring apparatus.
 
  • #998
dextercioby said:
Michelson-Morley interferometer...?

Daniel.
Whooops! We have a winner!

Your turn.
 
  • #999
dextercioby said:
Michelson-Morley interferometer...?

Daniel.


Gah, and I'd have got that if I'd thought the block was concrete instead of marble! Honest!
 
  • #1,000
I'm a theorist,i can't possibly recollect too many experiments.So i'll ask an embarassingly simple question.You can google it,if u don't know the answer.

"Revolutionized chemistry".An object.And who's responsible for "revolutioning chemistry"?

Daniel.
 
Last edited:
  • #1,001
dextercioby said:
"Revolutionized chemistry".And who's responsible for "revolutioning chemistry"?

Dmitri Mendeleev?
 
  • #1,003
Humphrey Davy?
 
  • #1,004
Nope.Yes,it's fair to ask the year,too.Approximately,of course.

Daniel.
 
  • #1,005
dextercioby said:
Nope.Yes,it's fair to ask the year,too.Approximately,of course.
No it's not. All we can do is guess, answer, or ask for another clue.

Was it Faraday?
 
  • #1,006
I'm really sorry to say,but Faraday was not a chemist.

Clue.There's no chemical laboratory in the world without this thing.

Daniel.
 
  • #1,007
Bunsen and his burner
 
  • #1,008
Mr Bunsen?

Edit: Aww, pipped to the post. (Assuming that's the right answer!)
 
  • #1,009
Go ahead Brewnog, I can't stick around right now anyway.
 
  • #1,010
Good try.Not what i had in mind.It can't get any more elemenatry than that.

The difficult,possibly googling part would be to come up with a name and an approximate year.

Daniel.
 
  • #1,011
1924, the invention of Pyrex? :smile:
 
  • #1,012
It's not a chemical substance,but an object,INSTRUMENT,if u prefer.

No more clues.

Daniel.
 
  • #1,013
Buchner filter?
Leiblich condenser?
 
  • #1,014
The only relevant hint I've given is "revolutionized chemistry".

Daniel.
 
  • #1,015
dextercioby said:
I'm really sorry to say,but Faraday was not a chemist.
Michael Faraday's Contributions to Electricity and Chemistry
Address:http://sln.fi.edu/franklin/scientst/faraday.html
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #1,016
He was a physicist.It's like saying Hilbert was a physicist,just because Hilbert spaces are crucial in physics and the Hilbert action for the gravitational field is essential in GR.

Electrolysis came after "chemistry was revolutionized".

Need i say that this is not a technical question,so it can be answered by virtually anyone...?

Daniel.
 
Last edited:
  • #1,017
The Centrifuge, invented by Benjamin Robins in the 18th century?

Only chem-pun I can think of around "revolutionized"...
 
  • #1,018
dextercioby said:
He was a physicist.It's like saying Hilbert was a physicist,just because Hilbert spaces are crucial in physics and the Hilbert action for the gravitational field is essential in GR.

Electrolysis came after "chemistry was revolutionized".

Daniel.
Excluding Faraday as the correct answer on the basis he wasn't a chemist, rather than because it isn't the answer your looking for, is snooty and gratitously picayune, since electrochemistry did revolutionise chemistry.
 
  • #1,019
The Periodic Table of Elements, Dmitri Ivancritch Mendeléeff, 1864?? Edit: Oops, already guessed. :redface:
 
  • #1,020
Nope,i excluded Faraday,simply because it was not a revolution. in the sense putting a *************** in a chemistry lab was.:wink:

Mendeleev's first published Table of Elements was in 1869.:wink:

Daniel.
 

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