Hi: Are there any purely-optical analog-to-digital converters yet? Any purely-optical DACs? Thanks, Green Xenon
Do any purely-optical ADCs exist yet?
Started by ●November 28, 2009
Reply by ●November 29, 20092009-11-29
Green Xenon wrote:> Hi: > > Are there any purely-optical analog-to-digital converters yet? Any > purely-optical DACs?describe an optical digit. Jerry -- Engineering is the art of making what you want from things you can get. �����������������������������������������������������������������������
Reply by ●November 30, 20092009-11-30
>Green Xenon wrote:>> Hi: >> >> Are there any purely-optical analog-to-digital converters yet? Any >> purely-optical DACs? >>describe an optical digit.I'm guessing that a higher-intensity light is 1, while a lower-intensity light is 0. Right?
Reply by ●November 30, 20092009-11-30
Green Xenon wrote:>> Green Xenon wrote: > >>> Hi: >>> >>> Are there any purely-optical analog-to-digital converters yet? Any >>> purely-optical DACs? > >> describe an optical digit. > > I'm guessing that a higher-intensity light is 1, while a lower-intensity > light is 0. Right?You particularized by describing a binary digit (bit). It is if you say so. Now what? Do you want to read the bits serially or in parallel? Jerry -- Engineering is the art of making what you want from things you can get. �����������������������������������������������������������������������
Reply by ●November 30, 20092009-11-30
>Green Xenon wrote:>>> Green Xenon wrote:>> >>>> Hi: >>>> >>>> Are there any purely-optical analog-to-digital converters yet? Any >>>> purely-optical DACs? >>>>> describe an optical digit. >>>> I'm guessing that a higher-intensity light is 1, while alower-intensity>> light is 0. Right? >>You particularized by describing a binary digit (bit). It is if you say >so. Now what? Do you want to read the bits serially or in parallel?I prefer parallel.
Reply by ●November 30, 20092009-11-30
Green Xenon wrote: ..>> You particularized by describing a binary digit (bit). It is if you say >> so. Now what? Do you want to read the bits serially or in parallel? > > I prefer parallel.That would be optical computing, then. Too bad that it would appear to be still a long long way away: http://queue.acm.org/detail.cfm?id=1530830 Richard Dobson
Reply by ●November 30, 20092009-11-30
Green Xenon wrote:>> Green Xenon wrote: > >>>> Green Xenon wrote: > >>>>> Hi: >>>>> >>>>> Are there any purely-optical analog-to-digital converters yet? Any >>>>> purely-optical DACs? > >>>> describe an optical digit. > >>> I'm guessing that a higher-intensity light is 1, while a > lower-intensity >>> light is 0. Right? > >> You particularized by describing a binary digit (bit). It is if you say >> so. Now what? Do you want to read the bits serially or in parallel? > > I prefer parallel.Good. What spreads them? Jerry -- Engineering is the art of making what you want from things you can get. �����������������������������������������������������������������������
Reply by ●November 30, 20092009-11-30
Richard Dobson wrote:> Green Xenon wrote: > .. >>> You particularized by describing a binary digit (bit). It is if you >>> say so. Now what? Do you want to read the bits serially or in parallel? >> >> I prefer parallel. > > That would be optical computing, then. Too bad that it would appear to > be still a long long way away: > > http://queue.acm.org/detail.cfm?id=1530830The original side-looking radar used an optical correlator to produce the images. That's optical computing of a sort. Jerry -- Engineering is the art of making what you want from things you can get. �����������������������������������������������������������������������
Reply by ●November 30, 20092009-11-30
>Green Xenon wrote: >>> Green Xenon wrote: >> >>>>> Green Xenon wrote: >> >>>>>> Hi: >>>>>> >>>>>> Are there any purely-optical analog-to-digital converters yet? Any >>>>>> purely-optical DACs? >> >>>>> describe an optical digit. >> >>>> I'm guessing that a higher-intensity light is 1, while a >> lower-intensity >>>> light is 0. Right? >> >>> You particularized by describing a binary digit (bit). It is if yousay>>> so. Now what? Do you want to read the bits serially or in parallel? >> >> I prefer parallel. > >Good. What spreads them?I wish I knew
Reply by ●November 30, 20092009-11-30
>Richard Dobson wrote: >> Green Xenon wrote: >> .. >>>> You particularized by describing a binary digit (bit). It is if you >>>> say so. Now what? Do you want to read the bits serially or inparallel?>>> >>> I prefer parallel. >> >> That would be optical computing, then. Too bad that it would appear to>> be still a long long way away: >> >> http://queue.acm.org/detail.cfm?id=1530830 > >The original side-looking radar used an optical correlator to produce >the images. That's optical computing of a sort. > >JerryA lot of optical signal processing has been used in weapon systems. In fact, it took a long time for DSP techniques to displace some of those optical methods - like the clunky but effective little optical correlators in torpedoes. I don't know of any digital optical signal processing in real world systems, though. Steve
