Slashdot Mirror


Real Steampunk Computer Brought Back To Life

New submitter engineerguy writes We discovered a 100 year old 19th century computer that does Fourier analysis with just gears spring and levers. It was locked in a glass case at the University of Illinois Department of Mathematics. We rebuilt a small part of the machine and then for two years thoroughly photographed and filmed every part part of the machine and its operation. The results of this labor of love are in the video series (short documentary), which is 22 minutes long and contains stunning footage of the machine in action — including detailed descriptions of how it operates. The photos are collected in a free book (PDF). The computer was designed by Albert Michelson, who was famous for the Michelson-Morley experiment; he was also the first American to win a Nobel Prize in physics.

81 comments

  1. 100 Year old by theArtificial · · Score: 1

    1914 is not the 19th century. I imagine this person still uses 'turn of the century' to refer to the 1900s, too. In a similar vein, an actual 19th century computer, there is Babage's Difference Engine (tighter shots here) which is very impressive to watch as well.

    --
    Man blir trött av att gå och göra ingenting.
    1. Re:100 Year old by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe they used their 19th century computer to calculate that?

    2. Re:100 Year old by ChrisSlicks · · Score: 5, Informative

      The machine was designed in the late 19th century (1897) and a working prototype was built. This particular machine was from 1914.

    3. Re:100 Year old by ChrisSlicks · · Score: 1

      Correction, they don't know when it was built exactly. Likely somewhere between 1901 and 1910. So a early 20th century machine based on a 19th century design.

    4. Re:100 Year old by ColdWetDog · · Score: 0

      Great you guys.... The post is a wonderfully pedantic argument about dating (things, not people, we don't worry about the latter around here). Nothing about the actual substance of the post (which is pretty cool, beats Bennett Halselton posts any day).

      I think the Aspberger's pheromone is strong today. Lighten up. At least say "Cool, but ...."

      Group hug time?

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    5. Re:100 Year old by ChrisSlicks · · Score: 1

      Was just pointing out that it really is a 19th century machine (design) as stated, but yes specific date is irrelevant. And yes it is cool, and I watched all the videos. Mind blowing that he was during mechanical fourier analysis at the time. It was a great period when several mathematical greats where also great engineers.

    6. Re:100 Year old by ArcadeMan · · Score: 1, Funny

      Or like when Apple introduced the old iPhone 5S, way back in the 19th century.

    7. Re:100 Year old by mikael · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Fourier analysis was first developed in the 1800's. It took 80 years for the first programmable mechanical hardware to appear in the form of weaving looms in the 1880's. Then the development of mechanical analysis systems like this happened another 20 or 30 years later. Another 70 years, and we can play music on our home PC's and see funky animated digitial audio equalizers.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J...

      --
      Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
    8. Re:100 Year old by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Jacquard loom was first demonstrated in 1801. Contemporary with Babbage.

      John

    9. Re:100 Year old by Teancum · · Score: 1

      Far more relevant in the 1880s is the United States Census for 1880 that took over 12 years to compile. The U.S. Census Bureau realized they would continue to fall behind unless they made some substantive changes to how they compiled the statistics which Congress insisted upon, not to mention plotting out the data needed for making district maps for Congress as required by the Constitution.

      That is how you got Herman Hollerith who made the punch card through a system that census workers would input data about each person in America in a digital format that could be mechanically tabulated. He also started up a tiny little company that became known as IBM. The 1890 census was far more successful, and each census since then has been done more efficiently.

    10. Re:100 Year old by morgauxo · · Score: 0

      "The post is a wonderfully pedantic argument about dating (things, not people,"

      Of course! I don't think any of them are likely to have any experience dating people!

    11. Re:100 Year old by catmistake · · Score: 1

      1914 is not the 19th century....

      If I drive an entirely rebuilt-from-new-materials last month classic 1967-9 muscle car, I suppose you'll say I'm driving a 21st century automobile. I could be wrong, but I think all the computers sold commercially today and for the forseeable future are in fact 20th century computers, regardless of the date of manufacture. A computer built in 1914 is not necessarily a 20th century computer, and your point is, in fact, irrelevant. But the links are cool, thx.

    12. Re:100 Year old by Beardo+the+Bearded · · Score: 1

      Hey man, I was BORN in the 1900s.

      ... now I feel old.

      --

      ---
      ECHELON is a government program to find words like bomb, jihad, plutonium, assassinate, and anarchy.
    13. Re:100 Year old by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A computer built in 1914 is not necessarily a 20th century computer ...

      Especially in a case like this when the design and original prototype date from 1897 and this particular instance was built some time around 1910.

    14. Re:100 Year old by Capsaicin · · Score: 1

      1914 is not the 19th century.

      That being rather obvious you ought to have stopped and asked yourself the mandatory question "What is it that I'm not getting?"

      Then RTFM which starts with the words "This book celebrates a harmonic analyzer designed in the late nineteenth century by the physicist Albert Michelson," his progress is described below:

      [Michelson] first built a 20-element analyzer, one that calculates with 20 sinusoids with radian frequencies starting at 1, the fundamental, followed by the harmonics 2, 3, and so on up to 20. He found the “results obtained were so encouraging that it was decided to apply to the Bache Fund for assistance in building the present machine of eighty elements.” His application succeeded: he got $400.00. With those funds he built a harmonic analyzer with 80 elements, which he described in detail in an article published in The American Journal of Science [in 1898].

      --
      Better to be despised for too anxious apprehensions, than ruined by too confident a security. --Edmund Burke
    15. Re:100 Year old by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      beats Bennett Halselton posts any day

      You're kidding, right? He's a fucking regular contributor, show some respect.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
  2. Oh, fantasitc... by houstonbofh · · Score: 4, Funny

    Now OpenBSD if going to need to buy more old hardware to support builds...

    1. Re:Oh, fantasitc... by NoNonAlphaCharsHere · · Score: 2

      Luckily, VMS runs on it natively.

    2. Re:Oh, fantasitc... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not Funny, Bozo.

    3. Re:Oh, fantasitc... by houstonbofh · · Score: 2

      Not Funny, Bozo.

      Damn right. The VMS was a port. Natively it runs RSTS/e!

    4. Re:Oh, fantasitc... by NoNonAlphaCharsHere · · Score: 1

      Originally, I was going to say RSX-11, but I didn't think enough people would get it.

    5. Re:Oh, fantasitc... by houstonbofh · · Score: 1

      Originally, I was going to say RSX-11, but I didn't think enough people would get it.

      It is hard to find, but you can get RT-11 here... http://simh.trailing-edge.com/...

  3. great video series! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I will watch the whole thing. He has a great presentation persona and all of his other videos are well worth watching as well. engineerguy is borderline the old show connections. If they were to remake that show they could do worse than use him.

    1. Re:great video series! by engineerguy · · Score: 1

      I loved that show. I still vividly remember it on PBS in (I think!) 1979: It started with the Trigger effect. Very dramatic, very well done.

    2. Re:great video series! by jnork · · Score: 2

      You may be thinking of James Burke and his series Connections. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C...

      --
      Cleverly disguised as a responsible adult.
    3. Re:great video series! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thus the reason he said:

      engineerguy is borderline the old show connections. If they were to remake that show they could do worse than use him.

  4. The year is 2014 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

    A hundred-year-old computer would be a twentieth century computer. Just FYI.

  5. Only 1 of 4 videos is up. by Animats · · Score: 0

    We know. It was on Hacker News days ago.

    When the guy publishes the videos of how to use it for Fourier analysis, that will be interesting. It's obvious how synthesis works, but not how the reverse operation works.

    1. Re:Only 1 of 4 videos is up. by Animats · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Oh, good, the other videos are up now. So that's how the machine is used for analysis.

      This is very similar to the Great Brass Brain, a tide prediction engine.

    2. Re:Only 1 of 4 videos is up. by __aaltlg1547 · · Score: 1

      Yes it is. Take the output, put it back into the input and reproduce the original input (scaled).

    3. Re:Only 1 of 4 videos is up. by ColdWetDog · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Ah yes, this thing. Saw one (perhaps a copy) when I was a kid. Totally amazing what you can do with gears and math.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    4. Re:Only 1 of 4 videos is up. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We know. It was on Hacker News days ago.

      The submitter is the creator of the video series, as well as many other great educational videos. You, on the other hand, come off like a goddamn fool.

  6. Misleading by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No steam, no punk.
    Rather 'clockwork spectral analyser'

    1. Re:Misleading by Garridan · · Score: 2

      No no, the presence of a brass gear is all that is necessary to make something steampunk. The Antikythera mechanism is just as steampunk as a rolex watch or a hat with a gear hot-glued to it, which are much more steampunk than a steam locomotive since they produce way too much torque to transmit through brass years. Don't you know anything?

  7. Re:Steampunk aka metal objects for hipsters by __aaltlg1547 · · Score: 1

    Don't repeat yourself.

  8. "Computer" by vikingpower · · Score: 4, Interesting

    "Computer", actually, has the meaning: "Machine that performs computations". In that sense, this contraption truly is a computer. It probably only has a memory size of only a few bytes, in modern terms, and can only do a few FLopS also. Yet, it is a computer, in all senses of the word.

    Funny. I always thought of Michelson as of one of the two guys involved in the "failed" mirror experiments that allowed A. Einstein to come up with the theory of Special Relativity. Not so, it turns out now: the guy was an accomplished engineer. How great.

    --
    Religous speak to God. Insane are spoken to by God. When all shut up, one can finally hear Shostakovich in peace
    1. Re:"Computer" by calidoscope · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Michelson did a lot of work on measuring the speed of light, one of the last measurements he did involved a mile long vacuum chamber. As with many experimental physicists, he had to be an accomplished engineer as well in order to conduct his experiments.

      --
      A Shadeless room is a brighter room.
    2. Re:"Computer" by newcastlejon · · Score: 1

      Back when this machine was made, "computer" actually had the meaning "person that performs computations".

      --
      If God forks the Universe every time you roll a die, he'd better have a damned good memory.
    3. Re:"Computer" by bjs555 · · Score: 1

      Actually, I've read that Einstein probably wasn't aware of the Michelson-Morley experiment. His reason for rejecting the existence of the ether was based on a thought experiment as mentioned in many non-technical books on relativity. However, nearly all of these books fail to mention what the thought experiment was. I finally found one explanation of it in the book "The Big Bang" by Simon Singh. According to him, Einstein's thought experiment is such:

      Get into a vehicle traveling at constant velocity through the ether at the speed of light c and hold a mirror in front of you face. You will see no reflection because both your face and the mirror are traveling through the ether at c and no light leaving your face can reach the mirror. But that would violate the fact that, as long as you are traveling at constant velocity in a straight line, no experiment can determine how fast you are going. Therefore, the ether doesn't exist.

      Does my paraphrasing of the explanation ring true or am I missing something?

    4. Re:"Computer" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But that would violate the fact that, as long as you are traveling at constant velocity in a straight line, no experiment can determine how fast you are going. Therefore, the ether doesn't exist.

      Citation needed. The Michelson-Morley experiment was specifically tailored at measuring the velocity of the experimental apparatus relative to the speed of light (I mean, the ether). Only its failure showed that determining the velocity was ... difficult, at best.

      Also, I've never heard Einstein didn't know about the Michelson-Morley experiment, but then, I'm not a physicist or a historian specialized in relativity.

    5. Re:"Computer" by Teancum · · Score: 2

      While partially true, there were a great many mechanical analog computers which did a great many things and were widespread in the early 20th Century... including when this particular machine was made.

      A good video that shows how some of those mechanical computers were made can be found in this U.S. Navy training film:

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s1i-dnAH9Y4

      Computers like this were used as early as the Spanish-American War and the Crimean War. A much older computer was found in the form of the Antikythera mechanism.

      Yes, there were also people who were called computers as a job title as well, but the mechanical variety existed as well before ENIAC, and were commonly used as well.

    6. Re:"Computer" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can also see the contradiction of the Galilean transformation in electrodynamics. Consider an electron moving with constant velocity parallel to a neutral net charge, current-carrying wire. In the rest frame of the wire, the electron moves through magnetic field created by the current, so it experiences a Lorentz force. In the rest frame of the electron, however, it is at rest with respect to the magnetic field, so it would not experience a Lorentz force. Whether or not the electron deviates from its parallel trajectory should not depend upon which reference frame you consider, it's gotta do one or the other, not both. Applying the Lorentz transformation to the situation shows that the force due to magnetism experienced in the rest frame of the wire is equal to the force experienced by electrostatics in the rest frame of the electron (the wire picks up a static charge due to the differential in length contraction picked up by + current going one way versus - current in the the other direction). That's one of the cool parts of special relativity, unifying electrostatic and magnetic forces into a combined electromagnetic force.

    7. Re:"Computer" by casings · · Score: 1

      While I don't disagree that this is should be classified as a "computer." It is obvious by your comment that you didn't watch the video.

    8. Re:"Computer" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Other examples still exist. NOAA used tide machine No 2 to predict tides until 1966.
      This machine is currently on display in the lobby of NOAA Headquarters in Silver Springs MD.

      A technical explanation of the equation Tide Machines solved can be found here http://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/predmach.html.
      Some history and pictures can be found here:
      http://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/predhist.html
      http://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/predma2.html

      Searching google for "Tide Predicting Machine No. 2" willfind some pictures

    9. Re:"Computer" by jnork · · Score: 1

      Higgledy Piggledy
      Albert A. Michelson
      Did his experiment,
      Came away miffed;
      "Need a more accurate
      Interferometer.
      Back to the drawing board;
      Can't get the drift."

      --
      Cleverly disguised as a responsible adult.
    10. Re:"Computer" by phantomfive · · Score: 0

      Yet, it is a computer, in all senses of the word.

      Except the sense of the word most commonly used today: it wasn't Turing complete. So, it's not a computer.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    11. Re:"Computer" by vikingpower · · Score: 2

      I checked that in vol. 3 of the 20-volume Oxford English Dictionary, my proudest material possession. You are right. Up to at least the 1850s, as supported by the extensive corpus of citations in the OED, "computer" meant "a person performing computations". The first solidly documented occurrence of the word as "machine performing computations" is from 1897; from 1915 on, the word is only found in this sense, i.e. the sense of "person performing computations" has then fully disappeared, in a period of only 18 years.

      Interesting. You made me discover something I did not know. Thanks.

      --
      Religous speak to God. Insane are spoken to by God. When all shut up, one can finally hear Shostakovich in peace
    12. Re:"Computer" by vikingpower · · Score: 1

      A computer does not necessarily have to be Turing complete. There is no formally constrained definition of "machine performing computations" that also involves "Turing complete", being simultaneously universally valid. At least, none that I know of.

      --
      Religous speak to God. Insane are spoken to by God. When all shut up, one can finally hear Shostakovich in peace
    13. Re:"Computer" by k6mfw · · Score: 1

      Funny. I always thought of Michelson as of one of the two guys involved in the "failed" mirror experiments that allowed A. Einstein to come up with the theory of Special Relativity.

      What also impresses me is him and Morley were wondering how fast Earth was moving through space during the times of cowboys and indians. Because their mirror set kept producing same c, they continued to build more elaborate sets (which were more complex engineering feats).

      --
      mfwright@batnet.com
    14. Re:"Computer" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A computer does not necessarily have to be Turing complete. There is no formally constrained definition of "machine performing computations" that also involves "Turing complete", being simultaneously universally valid. At least, none that I know of.

      By that interpretation, everything is a (analogue) computer. A definition that's that watered down is useless.

    15. Re:"Computer" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've no mod points today. Informative post, keep up the good work!

    16. Re:"Computer" by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      ok, so you are ignorant of the common meaning of words? What do you want me to say?

      Before 1948 a computer was a person, someone who computed (often in an assembly line with other people).

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  9. No, no, and no by jtara · · Score: 0

    | Like when Jesus was resurrected way back in the 19th century, or when the Chinese erected the Great Wall for fend off the Mongols, way back in the 19th century.

    face palm

    1. Re:No, no, and no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Reading comprehension is your friend.

    2. Re:No, no, and no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      face palm

      OMG, you don't seriously believe that Jesus was resurrected, or the Great Wall erected, in the 21st century, do you?! What ... are you like 12 years old?

  10. Mind blown by Puff_Of_Hot_Air · · Score: 4, Insightful

    There are times when I do things that I think are pretty smart, and then I see something like this and am humbled. It staggers the imagination to envisage how this Albert fellow was able to design this incredible machine. It's marvellous to watch, and beautiful in its operation. This is how Fourier analysis should be taught! Nothing has brought it more alive for me than watching this documentary. I desperately want one; I don't think I've ever seen a machine more beautiful.

    1. Re:Mind blown by hey! · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I was in the last cadre of high school student to learn the slide rule. I did trig and math problems on a Picket N800, although later I preferred a circular Scientific Instrumentys 300B.

      The idea of building a machine to perform mechanical analog computation is not so outside the box for anyone who's ever done analog computation by hand. A repetitive series of calculations boil down to a repetitve sequence of movements, and in particular if you used a circular slide rule the idea of some kind of gear train to do the calculation woudl have been obvious.

      Which is not to say the devices weren't ingenious. But except for the abacus and the adding machine, analog contraptions were the only way to do computation other than by handwriting.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    2. Re:Mind blown by zeugma-amp · · Score: 1

      I agree with your comments wholeheartedly. This was simply amazing, and took an amazing mind to design and build.

      --
      This is an ex-parrot!
    3. Re:Mind blown by bjs555 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Playing with a slide rule is like saying after sex, "I haven't had this much fun since I first encountered logarithms." In my case, I'd have to sadly admit that I've had more fun quantity wise with logarithms. Seriously, though, I too was in school at the time of the slide rule's demise. They were interesting to use. I recall using electronic analog computers at about the same time. They consisted of a patch board and a number of op amp differentiators, integrators, and gain blocks. You could use the patch cords to model a differential equation with the op amps and then apply power to get an answer as a voltage output. Are things like that still used?

  11. Mechanical computers are awesome by caseih · · Score: 3, Informative

    Wow, that was an amazing set of videos. Particularly how the machine can do decomposition. What a brilliant man who designed this machine.

    All analog computers fascinate me. Apparently analog computers implemented fire control on navy ships for many years, compensating for the speed, direction, and roll of the ship in order to aim guns. The accuracy of such a system was impressive, and they were used up until the 1980s on some older ships. Digital systems simply couldn't get the accuracy for many years.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

    Slide rules are very cool as well. I want to learn how to use one.

    1. Re:Mechanical computers are awesome by techno-vampire · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Back when I was in the Tonkin Gulf Yacht Club in '72, our ship carried a 5"/54 gun, which was aimed using a mechanical analog computer. I know that the Iowa Class Battleships all used mechanical fire control both because it was more than accurate enough for the job and because it was specifically designed to ignore the shocks caused by firing the main battery, as well as the bigger shocks caused by incoming shells, bombs and torpedoes.

      --
      Good, inexpensive web hosting
    2. Re:Mechanical computers are awesome by mcswell · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I was in that Yacht Club the exact same year. Our ship, the Goldsborough, had two of those guns aimed by mechanical computers; it was decommissioned in 1993, the last of its class in the US Navy, and I'm reasonably certain that her mechanical computers were not replaced with electronic ones (although certainly electronic computers were installed for other purposes). So mechanical analog computers were used until at least then in the US Navy. Several other ships of its class were still in commission in the Australian and German navies (and one or two of the US ships made their way to the Greek navy) into the 21st century, and presumably had those same computers; one of the German ships is now a museum ship, so punkers can probably see the computer. Perhaps gunfire control computers are on display in some other museum.

      I don't know whether more recent ships had mechanical computers.

    3. Re:Mechanical computers are awesome by swillden · · Score: 1

      Digital systems simply couldn't get the accuracy for many years.

      That makes no sense. While analog computers have inherent accuracy limitations, digital computers provide arbitrarily-accurate computations.

      I suspect the problem was speed, not accuracy. More precisely, that digital computers couldn't compute sufficiently-accurate results fast enough.

      Slide rules are very cool as well. I want to learn how to use one.

      That they are. I recently taught myself to use one; it's fun. I can't say that I'm proficient, and I'm sure I never will be fast, but it is fun.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
  12. Bill Murray, is that you? by rHBa · · Score: 1

    Is it just me or does Albert Michelson look the spitting image of Bill Murray?

    Go to 1.20 of the first video to see his picture...

  13. Great by faridx82 · · Score: 0

    But does it run linux?

    --
    I learn new things the hard way.
    1. Re:Great by n6kuy · · Score: 1

      Imagine a Beowulf cluster of these...

      --
      If you disagree with me on social issues, then it's pretty clear that you are a narrow-minded bigot.
    2. Re:Great by MrKaos · · Score: 1

      Imagine a Beowulf cluster of these...

      A scientific calculator!

      --
      My ism, it's full of beliefs.
  14. Gives me an idea... by TropicalCoder · · Score: 2

    Step 1.) Put a motor on the crank. Step 2.) Read the output into your computer with an optical mouse in place of the pen. Step 3.) Figure out a way to automate programming of the input. Step 4.) Sell it as a coprocessor! Step 5.) Profit!

    1. Re:Gives me an idea... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Step 1.) Put a motor on the crank.
      Step 2.) Read the output into your computer with an optical mouse in place of the pen.
      Step 3.) Figure out a way to automate programming of the input.
      Step 4.) BITCOIN MINER!
      Step 5.) Profit!

      FTFY

  15. That is NOT steampunk! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It is pretty damn cool.

    And anything "steampunk" is the other thing....

    1. Re:That is NOT steampunk! by VAXcat · · Score: 1

      Sinepunk? Cosinepunk? Analogpunk? Fourierpunk?

      --
      There is no God, and Dirac is his prophet.
  16. Cool by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Now the audiophiles who stick to analog everything can get up with the times with compressed music.

  17. But alas by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

    Michelson designed the machine to run on luminiferous aether.

    1. Re:But alas by Artifakt · · Score: 1

      ,,, and this and other early examples used all the luminiferous aether up, which is why there isn't any now. More proof, if any was needed, that "Science" only creates self fuffilling prophecies to keep its priesthood in jobs. ;-)

      --
      Who is John Cabal?
  18. I'm drunk, bad at English and can find four obviou by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    20th century, "gears," springs, part part.

    Aside from that the writing is awkward and bad and I don't like it.

  19. When Michelson attempted to create a square wave f by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    When Michelson attempted to create a square wave from Fourier series (on the gear machine prototype), he discovered what became known as Gibbs's phenomenon http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gibbs_phenomenon. He mentioned the bug to Gibbs, who "discovered" it.
    He was a master engineer and builder, improving many optical measurements. For example, measuring the meter by comparing the length of the metal bars to wavelength of light by counting lots of fringes. The Fourier analysis computer was made to calculate the spectra of gas emission lines from interferometer data. Yes, he was doing Fourier transform spectroscopy.
    His book, Studies in Optics, was republished by Dover.

  20. Charles Babbage by colonel+spalding · · Score: 1

    Although I don't think he had success due to the limits of engineering tech in the mid nineteenth century, I always thought Charles Babbage was considered the father of the computer, aka his analytical engine. Are there not blueprints to his failed machine available that can be worked on? BTW Bruce Sterling and William Gibson co-wrote a pretty interesting novel of how the world would could be circa late nineteenth century if the analytical engine had been successfuly built. Addiontally wasn't countess Ada Lovelace, a genius female mathematician of the same period the "father" or more realistically the mother of the 1st programming? Kudos still go to Alan Turings genius but we should give credit were due.