[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Machines and people



Hi Paddy,

try to find a good (beginner's) book about digital electronics. It will start 
with some discrete logic, should explain memory, i/o, algorithms, math, 
clocking, circuits etc. and how it all comes together to build up a (very 
small) 'computer'.

For the further understanding of how an actual CPU works, you might have a 
look into books about (x86?) Assembler. It should explain the architecture of 
your CPU and how to program it. (Almost) all CPUs work roughly the same which 
makes it possible to have higher level language programs being translated for 
all of these CPUs.

To see how higher level languages come into this, take e.g. a 'hello world' 
programm in C or whatever language you like. Most compilers have an option to 
translate the sourcecode into Assembler source code to make some studies.

Sorry, but I have no book titles at hand. And just german books at home;-)

Of course there are many more things to explore, but you will step over these 
things when you start your studies.

Tim

Am Sonntag, 4. Dezember 2005 14:32 schrieb Paddy Hackett:
> I am new to this list. Among my chief reasons for an interest in Linux
> is in relation to AI and the relationship of human intelligence to
> machines such as computers.Consequently I want to establish a clear
> understanding as to how the computers works.
> 
> In view of this could anybody tell me how we get from the stage of bits
> to the letters of say the English language. In short how do bits,
> Boolean Algebra lead to letters such as a,b,c,..etc.
> I have studied the Turing machine. However I am still not clear
> regarding this question. It appears that many learn higher level
> computer languages such as Java yet cannot answer the more fundamental
> cquestions.
> 
> Paddy Hackett
> 
> 
> -- 
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org 
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact 
listmaster@lists.debian.org
> 
> 



Reply to: