Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Encyclopedia of Complexity and Systems Science pp 5466–5482Cite as

Mechanical Computing: The Computational Complexity of Physical Devices

  • Reference work entry

Definition of the Subject

Mechanical devices for computation appear to be largely displaced by the widespreaduse of microprocessor‐based computers that are pervading almost all aspects of our lives. Nevertheless, mechanical devices for computation are ofinterest for at least three reasons:

(a):

Historical: The use of mechanical devices for computation is of central importance in the historical study of technologies, with a history dating back thousands of years and with surprising applications even in relatively recent times.

(b):

Technical & Practical: The use of mechanical devices for computation persists and has not yet been completely displaced by widespread use of microprocessor‐based computers. Mechanical computers have found applications in various emerging technologies at the micro‐scale that combine mechanical functions with computational and control functions not feasible by purely electronic processing. Mechanical computers also have been demonstrated at the molecular...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   3,499.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD   549.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Abbreviations

Mechanism :

A machine or part of a machine that performs a particular task computation: the use of a computer for calculation.

Computable :

Capable of being worked out by calculation, especially using a computer.

Simulation :

The term simulation will be used to denote both the modeling of a physical system by a computer as well as the modeling of the operation of a computer by a mechanical system; the difference will be clear from the context.

Bibliography

  1. Turing A (1937) On Computable Numbers, with an Application to theEntscheidungsproblem. Proc Lond Math Soc, Second Ser, London 42:230–265. Erratum in 43:544–546

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  2. Lewis HR, Christos PH (1997) Elements of the Theory of Computation, 2ndedn. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River

    Google Scholar 

  3. Landauer R (1961) Irreversibility and heat generation in the computingprocess. IBMJ Res Dev 5:183

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  4. Bennett CH (1973) Logical reversibility of computation. IBM J Res Dev17(6):525–532

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  5. Li M, Vitanyi P (1996) Reversibility and Adiabatic Computation: Trading Time andSpace for Energy. Proc Roy Soc Lond, Series A 452:769–789. Preprint quant-ph/9703022

    Google Scholar 

  6. Crescenzi P, Christos PH (1995) Reversible simulation of space‐boundedcomputations. Theor Comput Sci 143(1):159–165

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  7. Wolfram S (1984) Universality and complexity in cellular automata. Phys D10:1–35

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  8. Blum L, Cucker F, Shub M, Smale S (1996) Complexity and Real Computation:A Manifesto. Int J Bifurc Chaos 6(1):3–26

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  9. Feynman RP (1982) Simulating physics with computers. Int J Theor Phys21(6–7):467–488

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  10. Benioff P (1982) Quantum mechanical models of Turing machines that dissipateno energy. Phys Rev Lett 48:1581

    MathSciNet  ADS  Google Scholar 

  11. Deutsch D (1985) Quantum theory, the Church–Turing principle and theuniversal quantum computer. Proc Roy Soc A 400:97–117

    MathSciNet  ADS  MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. Gruska J (1999) Quantum Computing. McGraw–Hill,Maidenhead

    Google Scholar 

  13. Nielsen M, Chuang I (2000) Quantum Computation and QuantumInformation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  14. Jaeger G (2006) Quantum Information: An Overview. Springer,Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  15. Reif JH (2007) Quantum Information Processing: Algorithms, Technologies andChallenges In: Eshaghian-Wilner MM (ed) Nano‐scale and Bio‐inspired Computing. Wiley, Malden

    Google Scholar 

  16. Reif JH (1979) Complexity of the Mover’s Problem and Generalizations. 20thAnnual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, San Juan, Puerto Rico, October pp 421–427; (1987) In: Schwartz J (ed) Planning,Geometry and Complexity of Robot Motion. Ablex Pub Norwood, NJ, pp 267–281

    Google Scholar 

  17. Canny J (1988) Some algebraic and geometric computations in PSPACE In: Cole R(ed) Proceedings of the 20th Annual ACM Symposium on the Theory of Computing. ACM Press, Chicago, IL, pp 460–467

    Google Scholar 

  18. Schwartz JT, Sharir M (1983) On the piano movers problem: I the case ofa two‐dimensional rigid polygonal body moving amidst polygonal barriers. Comm Pure Appl Math 36:345–398

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  19. Hopcroft JE, Schwartz JT, Sharir M (1984) On the Complexity of Motion Planningfor Multiple Independent Objects: PSPACE Hardness of the Warehouseman’s Problem. Int J Robot Res 3(4):76–88

    Google Scholar 

  20. Bennett CH (1982) The thermodynamics of computation –a review. Int J Theor Phys21(12):905–940. http://www.research.ibm.com/people/b/bennetc/bennettc1982666c3d53.pdf

    Google Scholar 

  21. Bennett CH (2003) Notes on Landauer’s principle, reversible computation, andMaxwell’s Demon. Stud History Philos Mod Phys 34:501–510. eprint physics/0210005:http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/physics/0210005

  22. Adamatzky A (ed) (2001) Collision‐based computing. Springer,London

    Google Scholar 

  23. Squier R, Steiglitz K (1994) Programmable parallel arithmetic in cellularautomata using a particle model. Complex Syst 8:311–323

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  24. Fredkin E, Toffoli T (1982) Conservative logic. Int J Theor Phys21:219–253

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  25. Adamatzky AI (1996) On the particle‐like waves in the discrete model ofexcitable medium. Neural Netw World 1:3–10

    Google Scholar 

  26. Adamatzky AI (1998) Universal dynamical computation in multidimensionalexcitable lattices. Int J Theor Phys 37:3069–3108

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  27. Jakubowski MH, Steiglitz K, Squier R (1998) State transformations of collidingoptical solitons and possible application to computation in bulk media. Phys Rev E58:6752–6758

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  28. Jakubowski MH, Steiglitz K, Squier R (2001) Computing with solitons:a review and prospectus, Collision‐based computing. Springer, London, pp 277–297

    Google Scholar 

  29. Feynman RP (1963) In: Feynman RP, Leighton RB, Sands M (eds) Ratchet and Pawl,The Feynman Lectures on Physics, vol 1, Chapter 46. Addison–Wesley, Reading

    Google Scholar 

  30. Shapiro E (1999) A Mechanical Turing Machine: Blueprint fora Biomolecular Computer. Fifth International Meeting on DNA-Based Computers at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Proc DNA Based ComputersV. Cambridge, MA, pp 14–16

    Google Scholar 

  31. Reif JH, Sharir M (1994) Motion Planning in the Presence of MovingObstacles. 26th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, Portland, OR, October 1985 pp 144–154; J ACM (JACM)41(4):764–790

    Google Scholar 

  32. Canny J, Reif JH (1987) New Lower Bound Techniques for Robot Motion PlanningProblems. 28th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, Los Angeles, CA, October pp 49–60

    Google Scholar 

  33. Canny J, Donald B, Reif JH, Xavier P (1993) On the Complexity of KinodynamicPlanning. 29th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, White Plains, NY, October (1988) pp 306–316; Kinodynamic MotionPlanning. J ACM 40(5):1048–1066

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  34. Reif JH, Wang H (1998) The Complexity of the Two DimensionalCurvature‐Constrained Shortest‐Path Problem. Third International Workshop on Algorithmic Foundations of Robotics (WAFR98). Peters AK Ltd,Houston, pp 49–57

    Google Scholar 

  35. Reif JH, Tygar D, Yoshida A (1994) The Computability and Complexity of OpticalBeam Tracing. 31st Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, St Louis, MO, October (1990) pp 106–114; The Computability andComplexity of Ray Tracing. Discrete Comput Geometry 11:265–287

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  36. Tate SR, Reif JH (1993) The Complexity of N-body Simulation. Proceedings ofthe 20th Annual Colloquium on Automata, Languages and Programming (ICALP’93), Lund, pp 162–176

    Google Scholar 

  37. Reif JH, Sun Z (2003) The Computational Power of Frictional MechanicalSystems. Third International Workshop on Algorithmic Foundations of Robotics, (WAFR98). Peters AK Ltd, Houston, Texas, Mar 5–7 1998,pp 223–236; On Frictional Mechanical Systems and Their Computational Power. SIAM J Comput (SICOMP)32(6):1449–1474

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  38. Moore C (1990) Undecidability and Unpredictability in Dynamical Systems. PhysRev Lett 64:2354–2357

    MathSciNet  ADS  MATH  Google Scholar 

  39. Moore C (1991) Generalized Shifts: Undecidability and Unpredictability inDynamical Systems. Nonlinearity 4:199–230

    MathSciNet  ADS  MATH  Google Scholar 

  40. Munakata T, Sinha S, Ditto WL (2002) Chaos Computing: Implementation ofFundamental Logical Gates by Chaotic Elements. IEEE Trans Circuits Syst-I Fundam Theory Appl 49(11):1629–1633

    Google Scholar 

  41. Sinha S, Ditto (1999) Computing with distributed chaos. Phys Rev E Stat PhysPlasmas Fluids Relat Interdiscip Top 60(1):363–77

    Google Scholar 

  42. Knott CG (ed) (1915) Napier tercentenary memorial volume. The Royal Society ofEdinburgh, Longmans, Green, London

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  43. Hartree DR (1950) Calculating Instruments and Machines. Cambridge UniversityPress, Cambridge

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  44. Engineering Research Associates Staff (1950) High‐Speed ComputingDevices. McGraw–Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  45. Chase GC (1980) History of Mechanical Computing Machinery. Ann Hist Comput2(3):198–226

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  46. Martin E (1992) The Calculating Machines. The MIT Press, Cambridge,Massachusetts

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  47. Davis M (2000) The Universal Computer: The Road from Leibniz toTuring. Norton, New York

    Google Scholar 

  48. Norman JM (ed) (2002) The Origins of Cyberspace: From Gutenberg to theInternet: a sourcebook on the history of information technology. Norman Publishing, Novato

    Google Scholar 

  49. Horsburgh EM (ed) (1914) Modern Instruments and Methodsof Calculation: a Handbook of the Napier Tercentenary Exhibition, London, G Bell and Sons, Edinburgh, The Royal Society of Edinburgh, p 223. Reprinted 1982

    Google Scholar 

  50. Turck JAV (1921) Origin of Modern Calculating Machines. The Western Society ofEngineers, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  51. Svoboda A (1948) Computing Mechanisms and Linkages. McGraw–Hill,Columbus

    Google Scholar 

  52. Soroka WA (1954) Analog Methods in Computation andSimulation. McGraw–Hill

    Google Scholar 

  53. Freeth T, Bitsakis Y, Moussas X, Seiradakis JH, Tselikas A, Mangou H,Zafeiropoulou M, Hadland R, Bate D, Ramsey A, Allen M, Crawley A, Hockley P, Malzbender T, Gelb D, Ambrisco W, Edmunds MG (2006) Decoding the ancientGreek astronomical calculator known as the Antikythera Mechanism. Nature 444:587–591

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  54. de Morin H (1913) Les appariéls d’intégration: intégrateurs simples etcompasés, planimètres, intégromètres, intégraphes et courbes intégrales, analyse harmonique et analyseurs. Gauthier-Villars, Paris,pp 162–171

    Google Scholar 

  55. Thomson W (later known as Lord Kelvin) (1878) Harmonic Analyzer. Proc Roy SocLond 27:371–373

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  56. Henrici (1894) Philos Mag 38:110

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  57. Lord Kelvin (1878) Harmonic analyzer and synthesizer. Proc Roy Soc27:371

    Google Scholar 

  58. Miller D (1916) The Henrici harmonic analyzer and devices for extending andfacilitating its use. J Franklin Inst 181:51–81; 182:285–322

    Google Scholar 

  59. Fisher EG (1911) Tide‐predicting machine. Eng News66:69–73

    Google Scholar 

  60. Bush V (1931) The differential analyzer: A new machine for solvingdifferential equations. J Franklin Inst 212:447

    Google Scholar 

  61. Bernal JD (1964) The Structure of Liquids. Proc Roy Soc Lond Ser A 280,299

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  62. Finney JL (1970) Random Packings and the Structure of Simple Liquids. I TheGeometry of Random Close Packing. Proc Royal Soc London, Ser A, Math Phys Sci 319(1539):479–493

    Google Scholar 

  63. Bragg L, Nye JF (1947) A dynamical model of a crystalstructure. Proc R Soc A 190:474–481

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  64. Bragg L, Lomer WM (1948) A dynamical model of a crystal structureII. Proc R Soc A 196:171–181

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  65. Corcoran SG, Colton RJ, Lilleodden ET, Gerberich WW (1997) Phys Rev B190:474

    Google Scholar 

  66. Adamatzky A, De Lacy BC, Asai T (2005) Reaction‐DiffusionComputers. Elsevier, Amsterdam

    Google Scholar 

  67. Adamatzky AI (1994) Constructing a discrete generalized Voronoi diagramin reaction‐diffusion media. Neural Netw World 6:635–643

    Google Scholar 

  68. da Vinci L (1493) Codex Madrid I

    Google Scholar 

  69. Napier J (1614) Mirifici logarithmorum cannonis descriptio (the description ofthe wonderful canon of logarithms). Hart, Edinburgh

    Google Scholar 

  70. Oughtred W (1632) Circles of Proportion and the Horizontal Instrument. WilliamForster, London

    Google Scholar 

  71. Pascal E (1645) Lettre dédicatoire à Monseigneur le Chancelier sur le sujet dela machine nouvellement inventée par le sieur BP pour faire toutes sortes d’opérations d’arithmétique par un mouvement réglé sans plume ni jetons, suivied’un avis nécessaire à ceux qui auront curiosité de voir ladite machine et de s’en servir

    Google Scholar 

  72. Babbage C (1822) On Machinery for Calculating and Printing MathematicalTables. Edinburgh Philos J VII:274–281

    Google Scholar 

  73. Babbage C (1822) Observations on the application of machinery to thecomputation of mathematical tables. Memoirs of the Astronomical Society 1:311–314

    Google Scholar 

  74. Babbage C (1826) On a Method of expressing by Signs the Action ofMachinery. Philosophical Trans Royal Soc London 116(III):250–265

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  75. Ludgate P (1909) On a proposed analytical engine. Sci Proc Roy Dublin Soc12:77–91

    Google Scholar 

  76. Lindgren M (1990) Glory and Failure: Difference Engines of Johann Muller,Charles Babbage and Georg and Edvard Scheutz. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  77. Swade D (1991) Charles Babbage and His Calculating Engines. Michigan StateUniversity Press, East Lensing

    Google Scholar 

  78. Lovelace A (1843) Sketch of the analytical engine invented by CharlesBabbage. Translation of: Sketch of the Analytical Engine by Menabrea LF with Ada’s notes and extensive commentary. Esq Sci Mem3:666–731

    Google Scholar 

  79. Cohen BI, Welch GW (1999) Makin’ Numbers: Howard Aiken and the Computer. MITPress, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  80. Boole G (1847) Mathematical Analysis ofLogic. Pamphlet

    Google Scholar 

  81. Boole G (1854) An Investigation of the Laws of Thought, on Which are Foundedthe Mathematical Theories of Logic and Probabilities. Macmillan, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  82. Shannon C (1938) A Symbolic Analysis of Relay and SwitchingCircuits. Trans Am Inst Electr Eng 57:713–719

    Google Scholar 

  83. Jevons SW (1870) On the Mechanical Performance of Logical Inference. PhilosTrans Roy Soc, Part II 160:497–518

    Google Scholar 

  84. Jevons SW (1873) The Principles of Science. A Treatise on Logic andScientific Method. Macmillan, London

    Google Scholar 

  85. Hamer D, Sullivan G, Weierud F (1998) Enigma Variations: an Extended Family ofMachines. Cryptologia 22(3):211–229

    Google Scholar 

  86. Lehmer DH (1928) The mechanical combination of linear forms. Am Math Mon35:114–121

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  87. Shamir A (1999) Method and apparatus for factoring large numbers withoptoelectronic devices. patent 475920, awarded 08/05/2003

    Google Scholar 

  88. Shamir A (1999) Factoring large numbers with the TWINKLE device. CryptographicHardware and Embedded Systems (CHES) 1999. LNCS, vol 1717. Springer, New York, pp 2–12

    Google Scholar 

  89. Lenstra AK, Shamir A (2000) Analysis and optimization of the TWINKLE factoringDevice. Proc Eurocrypt 2000. LNCS, vol 1807. Springer, pp 35–52

    Google Scholar 

  90. Madou MJ (2002) Fundamentals of Microfabrication: The Science ofMiniaturization, 2nd edn. CRC Press, Boca Raton

    Google Scholar 

  91. Plummer D, Dalton LJ, Peter F (1999) The recodable locking device. Commun ACM42(7):83–87

    Google Scholar 

  92. Wang H (1963) Dominoes and the AEA Case of the Decision Problem. In: J Fox(ed) Mathematical Theory of Automata. Polytechnic Press, Brooklyn, pp 23–55

    Google Scholar 

  93. Branko GS, Shepard GC (1987) Tilings and Patterns. H Freeman,Gordonsville. Chapter 11

    Google Scholar 

  94. Berger R (1966) The Undecidability of the Domino Problem. Mem Am Math Soc66:1–72

    Google Scholar 

  95. Lewis HR, Papadimitriou CH (1981) Elements of the Theory ofComputation. Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, pp 296–300, 345–348

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  96. Winfree E (1998) Simulations of Computing by Self‐Assembly. In:Proceedings of the Fourth Annual Meeting on DNA Based Computers, held at the University of Pennsylvania. pp 16–19

    Google Scholar 

  97. Xia Y, Whitesides GM (1998) Soft Lithography. Annu Rev Mater Sci28:153–184

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  98. Rothemund PWK (2000) Using lateral capillary forces to compute byself‐assembly. Proc Nat Acad Sci (USA) 97:984–989

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  99. Seeman NC (2004) Nanotechnology and the Double Helix. Sci Am290(6):64–75

    Google Scholar 

  100. Reif JH, LaBean TH (2007) Nanostructures and Autonomous Devices Assembledfrom DNA In: Eshaghian-Wilner MM (ed) Nano‐scale and Bio‐inspired Computing. Wiley, Malden

    Google Scholar 

  101. Adleman LM (1994) Molecular computation of solutions to combinatorialproblems. Science 266(11):1021–1024

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  102. Adleman L (1998) Computing with DNA. Sci Am279(2):34–41

    Google Scholar 

  103. Winfree E, Liu F, Wenzler LA, Seeman NC (1998) Design andSelf‐Assembly of Two‐Dimensional DNA Crystals. Nature 394:539–544

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  104. Yan H, LaBean TH, Feng L, Reif JH (2003) Directed Nucleation Assembly ofBarcode Patterned DNA Lattices. PNAS 100(14):8103–8108

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  105. Rothemund PWK (2006) Folding DNA to create nanoscale shapes andpatterns. Nature 440:297–302

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  106. Mao C, LaBean TH, Reif JH, Seeman (2000) Logical Computation UsingAlgorithmic Self‐Assembly of DNA Triple‐Crossover Molecules. Nature 407:493–495

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  107. Yan H, Feng L, LaBean TH, Reif J (2003) DNA Nanotubes, Parallel MolecularComputations of Pairwise Exclusive-Or (XOR) Using DNA String Tile Self‐Assembly. J Am Chem Soc (JACS)125(47):14246–14247

    Google Scholar 

  108. Rothemund PWK, Papadakis N, Winfree E (2004) Algorithmic Self‐Assemblyof DNA Sierpinski Triangles. PLoS Biology 2(12), e424.doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.0020424

    Google Scholar 

  109. Yin P, Yan H, Daniel XG, Turberfield AJ, Reif JH (2004)A Unidirectional DNA Walker Moving Autonomously Along a Linear Track. Angew Chem [Int Ed] 43(37):4906–4911

    Google Scholar 

  110. Reif JH, Sahu S (2008) Autonomous Programmable DNA Nanorobotic Devices UsingDNAzymes, John H. Reif and Sudher Sahu. In: Garzon M, Yan H (eds) Autonomous Programmable DNA Nanorobotic Devices Using DNAzymes, 13th InternationalMeeting on DNA Computing (DNA 13). Lecture Notes for Computer Science (LNCS). Springer, Berlin. To appear in special Journal Issue on Self-Assembly,Theoretical Computer Science (TCS)

    Google Scholar 

  111. Reif JH, LaBean TH (2007) Autonomous Programmable Biomolecular Devices UsingSelf‐Assembled DNA Nanostructures. Comm ACM (CACM) 50(9):46–53. Extended version:http://www.cs.duke.edu/%7Ereif/paper/AutonomousDNA/AutonomousDNA.pdf

  112. Bath J, Turberfield AJ (2007) DNA nanomachines. Nat Nanotechnol2:275–284

    ADS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We sincerely thank Charles Bennett for his numerous suggestions and very important improvements to this survey. This work has been supportedby NSF grants CCF-0432038 and CCF-0523555.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computer Science, Duke University, Durham, USA

    John H. Reif

Authors
  1. John H. Reif
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. RAMTECH LIMITED, 122 Escalle Lane, Larkspur, CA, 94939, USA

    Robert A. Meyers Ph. D. (Editor-in-Chief) (Editor-in-Chief)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2009 Springer-Verlag

About this entry

Cite this entry

Reif, J.H. (2009). Mechanical Computing: The Computational Complexity of Physical Devices. In: Meyers, R. (eds) Encyclopedia of Complexity and Systems Science. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-30440-3_325

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation