Isn\'t a three state object immedately capable of holding more information and handling larger values? I know that processors currently use massive nets of XOR gates and th
There are also theories that suggest that fiber optics could use light frequencies (i.e.color) to differentiate states thereby allowing a near infinite (depending on resolution of the detection unit) number of base possibilities.
Logic gates are definitely feesible for any base but let's use trinary for an example:
For a trinary XOR gate, it could be exclusive to one (or any) of the three states it is comparing OR one of the other three states. It could also tie two of the three states together for a binary output. The possibilities increase literally exponentially. Of course, this would require more complex hardware and software but the complexity should decrease the size and more importantly the power (read heat). There is even talk of using trinary in a nano computing system where there is a microscopic "bump, a "hole" or "unchanged" to represent the three states.
Right now, we are in sort of a QWERTY type problem. Qwerty was designed to be inefficient because of a problem with typing mechanics that no longer exists but everyone who uses keyboards today learned to use the qwerty system and no one wants to change it. Trinary and higher bases will someday break through this issue when we reach the physical limitations of binary computing. Maybe not for another twenty years but we all know that we cannot continue doubling our capability every year and a half forever.
Of course we'd be able to hold more data per bit, just like our decimal number system can hold far more data in a single digit.
But that also increases complexity. Binary behaves very nicely in many cases, making it remarkably simple to manipulate. The logic for a binary adder is far simpler than one for ternary numbers (or for that matter, decimal ones).
You wouldn't magically be able to store or process more information. The hardware would have to be so much bigger and more complex that it'd more than offset the larger capacity.
Well, for one thing, there is no smaller unit of information than a bit. operating on bits is the most basic and fundamental way of treating information.
Perhaps a stronger reason is because its much easier to make electrical components that have two stable states, rather than three.
Aside: Your math is a bit off. there are approximately 101.4 binary digits in a 64 digit trinary number. Explanation: the largest 64 digit trinary number is 3433683820292512484657849089280 (3^64-1). to represent this in binary, it requires 102 bits: 101011010101101101010010101111100011110111100100110010001001111000110001111001011111101011110100000000
This is easy to understand, log2(3^64) is about 101.4376
I believe it is for two reasons (please correct me if I'm wrong): first because the value of 0 and 1 is not really no-current/current or something alike. The noise is quite high, and the electronic components must be able to distinguish that a value fluctuating from, say, 0.0 to 0.4 is a zero, and from 0.7 to 1.2 is a one. If you add more levels, you are basically making this distinction more difficult.
Second: all the boolean logic would immediately cease to make sense. And since you can implement sum out of boolean gates, and from sum, every other mathematical operation, it is nicer to have something that maps nicely into practical use for math. What would be the boolean truth table for an arbitrary pair between false/maybe/true?
If we use 3 states, then the main problem arising due to this are
Hope i am convincing