Temperature Free Logic Gates

  • baizuo
    20th Dec 2012 Member 0 Permalink

    I'd like to edit old post (the Not gate one), but I can't change my title, so there's the new post.

     

    And gate (SWCH based)

     

    Not gate (SWCH based)

     

    Or gate (It's an even-a-3-year-old-child-can-think-out-of-it design, just put it here for set bonus)

    [METL][METL][METL]

    [       ][       ][METL][METL][METL]

    [METL][METL][METL]

     

    All designs above is free to copy.

    "Free to copy" here means you can copy them and/or use in your saves and/or modify them and/or republish them and saying they're your own works.

    Feel free to use them.

     

     

     

     

     

     

    ********Advanced information for those who want to go further********

    And gate:

    Normal SWCH design is not stable, i.e. reliable, because the state of the SWCH is half-halfed: 4 frames on, 4 frames off when working. If it occasionally matches the phase of the input signal, it glitches, result in wrong output.

    The point of this design is, the state of the SWCH (the upper one, since there are 2 pixels of them) is 5 frames on, 3 frames off, which ensure a continuous and stable output.

    What's more, make sure the 2 pixel of SWCH is *NOT* connected, which will be glitchy under continuous signal input (infinite spark would occasionally occurrs)

     

    Not gate:

    This design is based on the drawing (initializing) sequence of TPT: the left top on is drawn first. So once you make sure the SWCH on the input side is drawn first (i.e. to the left or top), you got a stable Not gate.

    The INWR I used can be replaced with any normal conductor (except for PSCN, NSCN etc.). INWR is less likely to infect other circuit with naked design and it won't overheat the circuit too fast like METL, that's why I choose it.

  • boxmein
    20th Dec 2012 Former Staff 0 Permalink
    Edited for laziness.
    Also, awesome of you to invent these :D
    How is the "particle order" even relevant?
  • 0xFF
    21st Dec 2012 Member 0 Permalink

    Not bad.. But my version is faster =P

  • JamoHTP
    6th Jan 2013 Member 0 Permalink

    If speed is of the essence, ARAY can be used to make any gate out of compact, practically instantaneus ARAY interceptions, so long as the inputs are timed correctly, and you use an extra input which will always be activated at a specific time when the signal is passed through.

    For an XOR gate, the inputs come in parallel, each hitting METL which would shoot a ray at the opposite input ray. One of those rays would only cross the input line if one input was sparked, and the other was not. The extra input woud be needed to shoot PSCN rays at the spots where the rays intersept, to remove left over BRAY. Simply OR the two output lines for a single output.

  • PTuniverse
    6th Jan 2013 Member 0 Permalink

    XOR is already easy and made compact, cheap if you can convert metal electricity to wireworld electricity. Just use two parallel inputs, convert them to WE and make the wires (with 1 space to each other) meet then make the output from there.

    A METL PSCN WIRE WIRE

    . . . . . . . . . . . . . .WIRE WIRE NSCN Q

    . . . . . . . . . WIRE WIRE

    B METL PSCN

    Please know that this XOR design is time-sensitive and if rapid sparks do not time right, the output remains as if it was an OR.

  • baizuo
    8th Jan 2013 Member 0 Permalink

    Bingo! that's why I use SWCH instead of ARAY. They are RELIABLE. I‘ve test them with all 16 possible phases, those gates are working correctly under all situations.

    They‘re not the fastest nor smallest, they are just temperature free and reliable