Any good books or articles about German computing pre-1945?The first digital, programmable computer wasn't actually the American ENIAC (1945), but the German Z3 (1941).The downside the Z3 had was that it was based on relays instead of vacuum tubes, making it slower (yet more reliable).It was also programmed using punch cards instead of manually re-arranging wires, which is how one programmed ENIAC, so it's unclear whether or not ENIAC would've provided much of an edge (it took weeks to create a program and failure rate was high).Zuse, the creator of the Z3, also created Plankalkul, the first high level programming language.He had an assistance who wanted to build the Z3 with vacuum tubes, Helmut Schreyer, but when they approached the army they wouldn't fund it (in case of the ENIAC the army did fund it).Didn't help that Schreyer had to work on the V2, which halted his computer efforts.Speaking of the V2, the so called Mischgerat was the first electronic analog computer, designed by Helmut Holzer, who was taken to the US after WW2 and subsequently became the director of Marshal Space Flight Center's Computation Division.That's where my knowledge ends. Any more in-depth sources would be appreciated.Where there more than these 3 German pioneers in Germany at the time?What about the cryptography program?England built the Colossus (1944) as part of their cryptographic efforts.It was top secret until the 1970s.Did Germany realize the potential of computers, did they have something similar?After all the Mischgerat was obviously state-funded as part of the V2 program and the Z3/Z4 was used in aerodynamic research, carried out by Alwin Walther, the teacher of Hoelzer. This suggests early German computer scientists exchanged ideas.Lastly there is this: https://spectrum.ieee.org/the-vacuum-tubes-forgotten-rivalIt's a very interesting topic in my opinion because computing after 1945 was shaped almost entirely by the Americans, to some degree the English.
Maybe a bit more context:2) CryptographyThe German cryptographic effort is often seen as small, insignificant and maybe even a failure.There are a few problems with that:Cryptography is top secret.If you have broken your enemies code you don't want your enemy to know.Therefore downplaying German cryptography would have been a viable and necessary strategy.In fact we know that the western allies captured what became known as "Russian Fish". Pic related. Whole boxes of equipment.>"German prisoners prepare the "Russian Fish" for loading and shipment to England. These are the only pictures of this highly secret equipment ever published." (caption from Thomas Parrish, The Ultra Americans, original source of the picture).https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fish_(cryptography)#/media/File:Russian_Fish.jpgSome of Germany's brightest minds were involved in their cryptographic efforts too, such as Oswald Teichmuller, who certainly doesn't pale in comparison to Turing, ask a mathematician, Teichmuller theory is quite well respected.3) German computing after 1945Zuse went to Switzerland, which became a mojor European hub for computing.ALGOL was developed there, which was a serious competitor to other early programming languages like Fortran. But the Swiss were all influenced by Americans after WW2 to my knowledge. If this isn't actually the case let me know.
bump
OP is a retarded/underaged groypertard Ossi from /int/>>>/int/219382886We apologize for his existence
>>18353594>>18353627Kek, who gives a flying fuck? It was the Anglos, and Americans who laid foundations for modern computing. not Germs. ENIAC was like 100x faster than anything that Zusse ever created. None of Zusse's ideas influenced what we call a modern computer nowadays.
>>18354935Again, ENIAC was also much less reliable.While it might have been 100x faster it also took weeks to create a program and vacuum tubes often failed, leading to considerable downtime due to fault finding being carried out.Plus analog computers were used for practical purposes well into the 1960s, because they were simply much faster and more compact than vacuum tube computers (room sized with much excess heat and therefore energy use) and early transistorized computers.For the theory behind digital computers it doesn't matter whether or not you build them with vacuum tubes, relays or transistors. And again, Zuse's assistant Schreyer wanted to build the computers with vacuum tubes instead of relays.Btw, Zuse's company existed until 1971 while the company of ENIACS creators only existed until 1950.Zuse sold the Z4 as a commercial product on it worked well, being used to calculate dams in Switzerland.The ENIAC creators tried to do the same with the BINAC and it never worked at the customers site.Who gives a fuck? People interested in history I guess. This might be the wrong board for you, pal.
>>18355126Note: Analog computers do not deliver exact results, but they were really useful for doing integration etc with acceptable errors.>>18354935Btw:>In 1936, Konrad Zuse also anticipated, in two patent applications, that machine instructions could be stored in the same storage used for data.[9]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Von_Neumann_architectureIt's true that he didn't get the recognition he deserved and that he was much less influential than he should've been, but a lot of concepts fundamental to modern computers hehe discovered first.Btw all of it goes back to Goedel and his work on the incompleteness theorem, just so you know.
>>18355132The first general purpose electronic computer was invented by Americanshttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ENIAC
>>18355135>The Z3 was a German electromechanical computer designed by Konrad Zuse in 1938, and completed in 1941. It was the world's first working programmable, fully automatic digital computer.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Z3_(computer)The ENIAC was electronic, yes, meaning it was based on vacuum tubes instead of relays, but for the principles behind a digital computer that doesn't matter.It just about having elements that behave like switches.So relays, vacuum tubes and transistors are all good for that.The difference is that the ENIAC was faster when doing calculations, but vacuum tubes were still unreliable and fault finding did take a considerable amount of time.Plus creating a program was about manually re-arranging wires. That is pretty far removed from a modern computer to say the least.So again, did the ENIAC offer that much of a practical edge? Unsure about that.See, the BINAC, the commercial version of the ENIAC, didn't even work at the customer's site, the Z4 did.Not that anything after 1945 is a fair comparison, as German scientists couldn't continue their work for the most part. Zuse for instance had to move to Switzerland.That isn't to say that the war didn't impact Zuse. The Z3 was destroyed in a bomb raid in 1943.Something Americans didn't have to deal with.
>>18355135>>18355138And actually Schreyer did build a small vacuum tube computer and planned to do more.>Schreyer had theorized on the use of electrical circuit technology to implement computers, but while he first considered it practically infeasible, he subsequently could not get the necessary funding for his theory. Up to 1942 Schreyer himself built an experimental model of a computer using 100 vacuum tubes,[4] which was lost at the end of World War II.>Schreyer planned to build a computer memory for 1000 words in 1943, that was to contain several thousand electron tubes, but the war put an end to all larger plans.[5] In 1944 he built an electrical circuit to convert decimal to binary numbers.[6]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helmut_SchreyerBut the British Colossus predates ENIAC by a year. It was built to decrypt German messages. All physical evidence and documentation was destroyed, only making it public in 1970.You might believe the British or not. Up to you. But apparently some Americans were in on it and actually saw it...Either way, who is to say someone in Germany didn't build an electronic computer we don't know about, especially seeing that Britain destroyed theirs, despite winning the war.Right, people who won't consider that possibility as it hurts their national ego.Suit yourself.
The creator of the British Colossus was Tommy Flowers btw.Apparently the computer was mostly funded by Flowers himself.>Flowers was left in debt after the war after using his own personal funds to build Colossus.[17] The government granted him £1,000 payment which did not cover Flowers' personal investment in the equipment; he shared much of the money amongst the staff who had helped him build and test Colossus. After the war he never contributed to computers, instead he worked in the field of telephony.So in light of that who is to say that the German cryptography effort didn't lead to something similar?I think at least asking the question is fair, but apparently "nobody cares" on a history board? I mean if someone isn't interested they would just hide the thread, no?Seems there is more to that. Some people might not like to see new research in this very niche topic we know so little about.I mean what was in those boxes? Can you tell me that? >>18353627
Konrad Zuse wrote The Computer - My LifeThe technological race during the war is fascinating, there was a sudden urgent need for R&D yet the world was divided with different countries making different breakthroughs with a significant effect on the course of the war. The Japanese "long lance" torpedo, America's proximity fuses, Britain's code-breaking efforts and rush to develop radar, Italy's frogmen and zany yet sometimes effective aircraft and tank designs, Russia's adaptation like the Lavochkin-5 which placed a heavy engine on a light fighter matching the German aircraft improving pilot survival rates and in turn aces who could then instruct new pilots. Then of course there was the Manhattan project. Most books of course focus on tanks, aircraft or ships, I know of no such book taking this broader perspective.
>>18355154The proximity fuze and radar are interesting here as they are related to electronics too.A German scientists disclosed German R&D to the English as early as 1939. In it was the prototype of a proximity fuse.>he sent the Report along with a vacuum tube from a prototype proximity fuze. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oslo_ReportSubsequently they started their own research into this. The German prototype was based in capacitive effects while the one the allies settled on was based on the Doppler effect (often described as radar like). In theory one could design a defense system that makes the fuzes detonate prematurely, this is why modern proximity fuzes are not based on the Doppler effect, instead they used capacitive effects too!The allied fuze was designed in Britain, but mass manufactured in America.When the war started Germany had better radar than Britain.>The Freya radar was more advanced than its British counterpart, Chain Home.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freya_radarThe British used the cavity magnetron to significantly downsize radar. This led to improved radar in aircraft, which gave them an edge particularly in night operations.Ironically the cavity magnetron was invented by a German as early as 1935, but the German military wasn't interested.>He invented and patented a prototype of the cavity magnetron in 1935,[1] but the German military considered the frequency drift of Hollman's device to be undesirable, and based their radar systems on the klystron instead.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_HollmannThe British then improved it in Oxford in 1940. Operationally it was used since 1942, but quickly figured out by the Germans.(1/2)
>>18355154>>18355180Both Germany's research into centimetric radar and proximity fuzes was halted on Hitler's direct orders in 1940. They only started speeding R&D up again in 1943, when they started to lose the war.Even the rocket program suffered from this.>The years 1939-1942, when Hitler had blocked development and production of the V-2, were lost years.http://www.astronautix.com/p/peenemuende.htmlGermany was reluctant to make use of the cavity magnetron even after figuring it out in 1943, their own aircraft made use of it only towards the very end of the war. Maybe because of the aforementioned frequency drift which made them reject the thing in 1935?Some people say that Rheinmetall finished the German proximity fuze from the Oslo report in 1945, calling it 'Kuhgloeckchen'. But I don't know if there are any credible sources for this.Btw the proximity fuze was so important for the allies because with them they had a fair chance to shoot down V1 weapons which traveled at roughly the speed of sound. Germany on the other hand didn't face aircraft this fast, instead swarms of bombers.(2/2)
According to AI it's not a myth, but it lists Facebook as a source...According to this post there is a CIOS report where it is mentioned.https://www.facebook.com SLASH groups/Luft46.SG/posts/2448595552163421/CIOS:The Combined Intelligence Objectives Sub-Committee (CIOS) reports area collection of over 700 technical, scientific, and industrial investigations conducted by Allied teams in Germany and occupied territories immediately following WWII (1944–1945).I haven't really looked into this myself. You be the judge.
>>18355126No, you dumb fuck. Colossus and ENIAC were much more reliable, and faster. Zusse's work was irrelevat.>>18355138>>18355141Allies won the fucking war. Z3 served no practical purpose, and didn't help the reich in any way.
>>18355180Both proximity fuses and Radar were superior on the Allied side.
Thread themehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fr_Ga4A8TqQ
>>18355899>Several tubes burned out almost every day, leaving ENIAC nonfunctional about half the time. Special high-reliability tubes were not available until 1948https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ENIACAs to Colossus no idea as it was top secret and nothing is known about it. But I highly doubt that England had higher quality vacuum tubes than America.That one was unable to shape computing in any way whatsoever because Churchill had it destroyed along with its documentation, Tommy Flowers subsequently worked in telephony.The Z3 and Z4 were used for wind tunnel research.Btw you getting emotional in they way you doesn't add credibility to your claims, on the contrary.>>18355907As the German proximity fuze wasn't ready for operational use that's a given.Doesn't change the fact that capicitive fuzes are superior to Doppler effect fuzes, as the latter ones could in theory be easily countered. That's why the allies originally used it only on the ocean, so that the enemy wouldn't get their hands on them, which could've led to countermeasures being developed.As for radar as I said Freya was more advanced than Chain home.Luckily for Britain their research into the cavity magnetron paid off, something that was ironically discovered by a German by refused by the German army.Doesn't change the fact that the cavity magnetron was soon figured out by the Germans not long after the Brits started to use it operationally. Countermeasures were soon developed.And again, the cavity magnetron gave them an edge when it came to aircraft, for ground based radar that's no so clear cut.The Wurzburg radar was used in England for astronomy research after the warInteresting if their radar was so much better, innit?>German radar equipment including two Würzburg antennas (obtained from RAE Farnborough) was used by Martin Ryle and Derek Vonberg at the Cavendish Laboratory from 1945 to observe sunspots.[6]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W%C3%BCrzburg_radar
