🚀 go-pugleaf

Miguel Cruz wrote:

> A 4Hz signal could certainly reach long distances. However, it makes for
> incredibly low bandwidth. A long email message could take the better part of
> a day. And this is assuming you're the only person with their dandelions set
> to that particular frequency range.

If you implement this, make sure that spam is directed to the plants' roots as
an excellent manure substitute.

Also, why restrict yourself to limited binary/ASCII modes of expression? That
would be both slow and difficult to implement with plants. Instead, consider
"alternative" hippy-style protocols like:

The plant's flower opening up = email received indicating employment offer,
raise, AOL cancellation confirmed, etc.
Cute little bud shooting out = positive response to your rec.romance or
whatever posting.
Many little plants growing nearby = heated exchange of above.
Sour grapes = flame wars about linux vs. NT.
Wilting/falling leaves = Employment rejections, spam, etc.

I think this will be an exciting area of research in coming years.

Trig.

On Fri, 28 Aug 1998 12:27:37 -0700, "Michael J. Fair"
<michael@technocage.com> wrote:

 >Hello all, at the risk of being flamed for crazy ideas I decided to
ask
 >the following question.
 >
 >Would it be possible to use plants as the transmission medium for
 >networks?
 >
 >The question stemmed from the assumption that the Earth already has
a
 >built in global communications network and all we need to do is
start
 >using it.
 >
 >I know plants are emitting a signal, so in a sense they are
"talking."
 >What they are saying is entirely up for interpretation but the
important
 >point is they are sending out some sort of signal.  This signal
operates
 >at appx. 4Hz from what I understand, which when asking some friends
 >about it has a wavelength that could probably reach around the
globe.
 >(Piece number 1)
 >
 >Plants like to be talked to and have music played for them.
Scientists
 >have proven that this increases their rate of graowth.  This implies
 >that they can receive messages and will respond to them. ( Piece
number
 >2)
 >
 >So it seems to me the gap I need to close is in being able to send a
 >message to a plant and hopefully have it "echo" the message.  I
 >unfortunately have no background in the electronics to make such a
 >device to start experimenting with it.  I would assume it would be
very
 >similar to radio technology but like I said, I don't know for sure.
 >
 >I am not concerned about bandwidth right now, I just want to get a
 >message to "bounce" off the plant.  Heck, it doesn't even have to be
a
 >meaningful message, just a simple "echo" of whatever I sent.
 >
 >My initial assumptions are that each plant (or plant species) has
its
 >own resonant frequency, and that whatever signal I sent at that
 >frequency the plant would duplicate and copy for me.
 >
 >I know someone out there can answer this question, I chose the linux
and
 >bionet groups because I figured they would have the highest
likelihood
 >of succeeding at answering this, and if it worked,
 >the linux guys could probably create a device driver for it.  The
long
 >term vision of this idea is that
 >we won't have to pay a phone bill for slow internet access anymore!
 >
 >Please respond to the newsgroups as I will not have access to my
email
 >over the next couple weeks.
 >
 >Thanks for any and all responses.  I know it might sound funny but
if
 >this does turn out to
 >be anything useful I would be very thankful.  I have a game going
with
 >about 63 other ppl that
 >says I can get one of these devices in my hands by November 21,
1998.
 >
 >So as Sherlock Holmes loved to put it:
 >The game is afoot!
 >
 >Thanks in advance,
 >-- Michael --

Hmm...interesting concept. I suppose you might be able to do it with
some sort of wire coil set up as an electromagnet. You might be better
off with some sort of superconductor. I don't know whether the coil
should be wrapped around the plant, parallel to it, or pointing at it,
however. In any case, you'd have to be careful that the energy was
high enough to get to the plant, but not high enough to interfere with
its metabolism.

Ignacio  <ivazquez@mapson_hotmail.com>

Michael J. Fair wrote in message <35E704A9.5EFFDA9C@technocage.com>...
>Hello all, at the risk of being flamed for crazy ideas I decided to ask
>the following question.
>
>Would it be possible to use plants as the transmission medium for
>networks?


Landscape Administration???

On Fri, 28 Aug 1998 12:27:37 -0700, "Michael J. Fair"
<michael@technocage.com> wrote:
> Would it be possible to use plants as the transmission medium for
> networks?
>
> The quesion stemmed from the assumption that the Earth already has a built
> in global communications network and all we need to do is start using it.
>
> I know plants are emitting a signal, so in a sense they are "talking."
> What they are saying is entirely up for interpretation but the important
> point is they are sending out some sort of signal.  This signal operates
> at appx. 4Hz from what I understand, which when asking some friends about
> it has a wavelength that could probably reach around the globe.

A 4Hz signal could certainly reach long distances. However, it makes for
incredibly low bandwidth. A long email message could take the better part of
a day. And this is assuming you're the only person with their dandelions set
to that particular frequency range.

Assuming plants do communicate, I think they have less need for
high-capacity data exchange than today's wired human. Therefore it's not
likely they would have evolved mechanisms optimized for what you're after.

Furthermore, you'd need a lot of power to go from Canada to Kandy, probably
more than your average petunia would prefer. And why wouldn't you just use a
regular antenna? And a higher frequency? And commercially-available wireless
networking hardware? And existing, cheap global infrastructure? Wait! I
think you're on to something here.

miguel

P.S. Was "stemmed" a pun?

In article <35E704A9.5EFFDA9C@technocage.com>, "Michael J. Fair"
<michael@technocage.com> wrote:

> Plants like to be talked to and have music played for them.  Scientists
> have proven that this increases their rate of graowth.  This implies
> that they can receive messages and will respond to them. ( Piece number
> 2)
> 

A minor point: there is NO evidence that plants respond to music or being
spoken too. There is lots of psuedo-science claiming such but no scientist
has proven this. 

But, plants do respond to external signals: light (intensity, wavelength,
direction), temperature (both hot and cold), gravity, touch, volatile
compounds from other plants,etc.

My 2 electrons,

Brian

-- 
Remove "REMOVE" to reply

taguebw@REMOVEwfu.edu writes:

> In article <35E704A9.5EFFDA9C@technocage.com>, "Michael J. Fair"
> <michael@technocage.com> wrote:
> 
> > Plants like to be talked to and have music played for them.  Scientists
> > have proven that this increases their rate of graowth.  This implies
> > that they can receive messages and will respond to them. ( Piece number
> > 2)
> > 
> 
> A minor point: there is NO evidence that plants respond to music or being
> spoken too. There is lots of psuedo-science claiming such but no scientist
> has proven this. 
> 
> But, plants do respond to external signals: light (intensity, wavelength,
> direction), temperature (both hot and cold), gravity, touch, volatile
> compounds from other plants,etc.

Ah,  so what you are saying is ... an optical global network using plants?
With a backup option of using gravitational waves or infra red or in the
worst case TCP/IP via polination packets carried by bees?

GJ.

Hmm, I really love that thought about plants being a communication
network's medium. The only problem is: How do you teach them the TCP/IP
protocol?

Regards
--
Stefan Sehnbruch
Gelsenkirchen, Germany

--- Experience is a quite useful thing,
--- normally you have it a short time after you needed it !

In article <gbjiuj9e5kw.fsf@ic.ac.uk>, Gerdjan Busker <g.busker@ic.ac.uk> wrote:

> taguebw@REMOVEwfu.edu writes:
> 
> > A minor point: there is NO evidence that plants respond to music or being
> > spoken too. There is lots of psuedo-science claiming such but no scientist
> > has proven this. 
> > 
> > But, plants do respond to external signals: light (intensity, wavelength,
> > direction), temperature (both hot and cold), gravity, touch, volatile
> > compounds from other plants,etc.
> 
> Ah,  so what you are saying is ... an optical global network using plants?
> With a backup option of using gravitational waves or infra red or in the
> worst case TCP/IP via polination packets carried by bees?
> 
> GJ.

No, I didn't say that at all! I was simply trying to clear up the common
misperception that plants respond to music or being spoken to. 

I'll let others develop plants as a global network ;-b.

My 2 electrons,

Brian

-- 
Remove "REMOVE" to reply

Stefan Sehnbruch wrote:

> Hmm, I really love that thought about plants being a communication
> network's medium. The only problem is: How do you teach them the TCP/IP
> protocol?
>
> Regards
> --
> Stefan Sehnbruch
> Gelsenkirchen, Germany
>
> --- Experience is a quite useful thing,
> --- normally you have it a short time after you needed it !

Actually the concept really offers some outstanding advantages among which:
free access to the root-directory within minutes (depending on soil
properties), privacy ensured through 2-bit DNA-encoding, a perfect solution
for network security (anything more effective than a fire-wall in a wood?)
However, the risk of winterly loss of data in deciduous forests still
remains.

mnc@diana.law.yale.edu (Miguel Cruz) writes:

>Furthermore, you'd need a lot of power to go from Canada to Kandy, probably
>more than your average petunia would prefer.

The plant communication test that I recall (from a 
long time ago) was a one-way system.  The plant
yielded detectable (and consistent) changes when
pain was inflicted on its owner.

As I recall, distance between the plant and its
owner as not a measurable factor.  The amount of
pain inflicted might have been.

Of course this is all from old non-error-correcting
memory...

--kyler

Stay away from the weed dude... :)

>The plant communication test that I recall (from a
>long time ago) was a one-way system.  The plant
>yielded detectable (and consistent) changes when
>pain was inflicted on its owner.
>
>As I recall, distance between the plant and its
>owner as not a measurable factor.  The amount of
>pain inflicted might have been.
>
>Of course this is all from old non-error-correcting
>memory...

In article <6sc1uf$op$1@news.ycc.yale.edu>,
Miguel Cruz <mnc@diana.law.yale.edu> wrote:
>Furthermore, you'd need a lot of power to go from Canada to Kandy, probably
>more than your average petunia would prefer.

Actually, the power you need is depends on the ionospheric conditions, which
varies with many factors (day/night, sun spot cycle, etc).  You can
communicate around the world with much less than 1W at times.

Now, how many petunias are needed for 200mW? :-)
-- 
Craig Ruff      	NCAR			cruff@ncar.ucar.edu
(303) 497-1211  	P.O. Box 3000
			Boulder, CO  80307

hmmmmm, tighten the rack for a "1", loosen for a "0"........

Andrew wrote:

> Stay away from the weed dude... :)
>
> >The plant communication test that I recall (from a
> >long time ago) was a one-way system.  The plant
> >yielded detectable (and consistent) changes when
> >pain was inflicted on its owner.
> >
> >As I recall, distance between the plant and its
> >owner as not a measurable factor.  The amount of
> >pain inflicted might have been.
> >
> >Of course this is all from old non-error-correcting
> >memory...
>

Michael J. Fair wrote in message <35E704A9.5EFFDA9C@technocage.com>...
>Hello all, at the risk of being flamed for crazy ideas I decided to ask
>the following question.
>
>Would it be possible to use plants as the transmission medium for
>networks?


Nah, too slow. Why not try for faster then light? It is a well known fact
that Kingship is transferred instantaniously (once the old king dies, the
heir _immediatly_ becomes king). Think of the potential! Of course, you'd
have to find a way to modulate the signal, and reuse the kings (we don't
have as many as we used to, after all). Research into that has not been
popular, for some reason :-)

To give credit where it is due, this is not my original idea - it was first
raised by Terry Prattchet, in one of his books. Be sure to mention him in
your Nobel prize lecture.

Have fun,

    Oren Ben-Kiki

Craig Ruff schrieb in Nachricht <6sf772$p0b$1@ncar.ucar.edu>...
>In article <6sc1uf$op$1@news.ycc.yale.edu>,
>Miguel Cruz <mnc@diana.law.yale.edu> wrote:
>>Furthermore, you'd need a lot of power to go from Canada to Kandy,
probably
>>more than your average petunia would prefer.
>
>Actually, the power you need is depends on the ionospheric conditions,
which
>varies with many factors (day/night, sun spot cycle, etc).  You can
>communicate around the world with much less than 1W at times.


I just can add a very personal experience, that flours love to grow toward
electronic equipment. While they first were focused on TV-sets and monitors
they nowadays
tend to avoid high voltage environments.

In fact these office plants here beneath my desk love to wrap cables, inp
articular
ethernet cables and modem lines. Thats the reason of poor network
performance ?
Already another unknown plant protocol causing high collisions and errors ?

Maybe that's the real reason for the undesired, unexpected routing of
ip-packets
between distinct subnets ?

Question: How will spider nets influence network performance in conjunction
with plant networks ? Has anyone else observed an increase of reflections ?

Michael
Seems, that bridgin between


begin 666 Michael Appelt.vcf
M0D5'24XZ5D-!4D0-"DXZ07!P96QT.TUI8VAA96P-"D9..DUI8VAA96P@07!P
M96QT#0I%34%)3#M04D5&.TE.5$523D54.F%P<&5L=$!B97)L:6YH<2YC;VT-
M"D5-04E,.TE.5$523D54.F%P<&5L=$!B97)L:6XN<VYA9G4N9&4-"D5.1#I6
&0T%21 T*
`
end

In article <35E704A9.5EFFDA9C@technocage.com>, "Michael J. Fair"
<michael@technocage.com> wrote:

> Plants like to be talked to and have music played for them.  Scientists
> have proven that this increases their rate of graowth.  This implies
> that they can receive messages and will respond to them. ( Piece number
> 2)
>
Increased rate of growth does not necessarily mean that the plant like
the treatment.  Maybe it is trying to grow away from the mess.
Growing plants in a deep hole give higher plants, because they must
struggle to reach light.  They don't necessarily like it though...

Helge


-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp   Create Your Own Free Member Forum

Gerdjan Busker wrote:
> 
> taguebw@REMOVEwfu.edu writes:

> > A minor point: there is NO evidence that plants respond to music or being
> > spoken too. There is lots of psuedo-science claiming such but no scientist
> > has proven this.
> >
> > But, plants do respond to external signals: light (intensity, wavelength,
> > direction), temperature (both hot and cold), gravity, touch, volatile
> > compounds from other plants,etc.
> 
> Ah,  so what you are saying is ... an optical global network using plants?
> With a backup option of using gravitational waves

Cool, a whole new meaning to the term *ether*net.

--
Tristan Wibberley

Oren Ben-Kiki wrote:
> 
> Michael J. Fair wrote in message <35E704A9.5EFFDA9C@technocage.com>...
> >Hello all, at the risk of being flamed for crazy ideas I decided to ask
> >the following question.
> >
> >Would it be possible to use plants as the transmission medium for
> >networks?
> 
> Nah, too slow. Why not try for faster then light? It is a well known fact
> that Kingship is transferred instantaniously (once the old king dies, the
> heir _immediatly_ becomes king). Think of the potential! Of course, you'd
> have to find a way to modulate the signal, and reuse the kings (we don't
> have as many as we used to, after all). Research into that has not been
> popular, for some reason :-)
> 
> To give credit where it is due, this is not my original idea - it was first
> raised by Terry Prattchet, in one of his books. Be sure to mention him in
> your Nobel prize lecture.

Should we consider using pyramids and camels (the camels can chew on the
plants while they perform the calculations for photorealistic rendering
- the pyramids will let it all happen immediately by warping time, and
let a huge network take up no space by twisting reality by 90 degrees).

--
Tristan Wibberley

On Mon, 31 Aug 1998 17:24:06 -0400, Andrew <aross@chat.carlerton.ca> wrote:
>Stay away from the weed dude... :)

This brings up a valid point. If we network through weed, will it screw
the packets up? ;) or will they just wander around the network aimlessly? 

-- 
       \_____|_____/
       /\____|____/\        Help! I'm stuck in              _
      / /\__ o __/\ \       the world wide web!       ___  ( )  ___
   __/_/_/_+-|-+_\_\_\__   _____ |                   /___\/   \/___\
     \ \ \__/^\__/ / /   __  |   |   _               /___(     )___\
      \ \/___|___\/ /   (__  | o |  /_\              /   (     )   \
       \/____|____\/     __) | | |__\__@mindless.com  /~~~\___/~~~\
       /     |     \

Oren Ben-Kiki <oren@capella.co.il> wrote:
>> Would it be possible to use plants as the transmission medium for
>> networks?
>
> Nah, too slow. Why not try for faster then light? It is a well known fact
> that Kingship is transferred instantaniously (once the old king dies, the
> heir _immediatly_ becomes king).

That gives me another idea. It is also a well-known fact that failure to
pick up an umbrella in the morning can cause major atmospheric stress,
sometimes hundreds of miles away, leading to precipitation which would
otherwise not have occurred.

I have surrounded my umbrella with antennae and scopes and have yet to
detect up any radiation emanating from it when I do not pick it up.
Therefore I must conclude that the signal is so faint that my expensive
equipment is simply not sensitive enough. And yet this signal is able to
travel miles, through building materials, trees, and clouds, to reach the
appropriate aerial receptors. 

Surely there is some wonderful science at work here. Anyone want to join me
in preparing a grant proposal? We could revolutionize networking (and ensure
a lifetime of sunny weekends, to boot).

miguel

First of all, I'd like to say that I respect you a *whole lot* for
posting such a radical idea.  Second, I'd like to say that I think it is
very feasible.  Maybe a plant could be used like the network of nerve
cells in the human body -- carriers of signals without themselves being
affected.  This would be difficult to do, but a bettert place to start
than an echo, is to try and pick up and make some sense out of the 4Hz
signal you say they emit already.  (really going out on a limb), It
could be an abstract form of communication, like the bark of a daog --
trasmitting concepts and feelings, rather than distinct concretes.  I
would say that the first move toward doing something like this is to try
to find a pattern that you could decode in this signal, much the way
Turing Machines were used to break codes during the war (Turing machines
back again!!).  Then, when you have isolated and made some sense out of
the signal, see if how different modulations of that signal affect it. 
You might try to artifically reproduce it, along with ones from other
plants to see how they interact in a controlled environment.  The
problem is that a plant already has so many variables.  
	Finally, I'd like to say that I may just take this up as a project. 
Each year for school I do one project for a half a credit, and this year
I was going to make a computer controlled coffee maker from Radio Shack
parts (/dev/coffee!!) and some filters, but this would be much more
interesting.  Doubt I'd succeed, but I could try.

--
Ross Vandegrift | Eric J. Fenderson

Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen.
                -- Albert Einstein

Miguel Cruz wrote:
> 
> Oren Ben-Kiki <oren@capella.co.il> wrote:
> >> Would it be possible to use plants as the transmission medium for
> >> networks?
> >
> > Nah, too slow. Why not try for faster then light? It is a well known fact
> > that Kingship is transferred instantaniously (once the old king dies, the
> > heir _immediatly_ becomes king).
> 
> That gives me another idea. It is also a well-known fact that failure to
> pick up an umbrella in the morning can cause major atmospheric stress,
> sometimes hundreds of miles away, leading to precipitation which would
> otherwise not have occurred.
> 
> I have surrounded my umbrella with antennae and scopes and have yet to
> detect up any radiation emanating from it when I do not pick it up.
> Therefore I must conclude that the signal is so faint that my expensive
> equipment is simply not sensitive enough. And yet this signal is able to
> travel miles, through building materials, trees, and clouds, to reach the
> appropriate aerial receptors.
> 
> Surely there is some wonderful science at work here. Anyone want to join me
> in preparing a grant proposal? We could revolutionize networking (and ensure
> a lifetime of sunny weekends, to boot).
> 
> miguel

Hmm, perhaps we could use butterflies and wind socks (pun! -
communication via winsock - Hmm, that will never work).

--
Tristan Wibberley

Miguel Cruz wrote:

> That gives me another idea. It is also a well-known fact that failure to
> pick up an umbrella in the morning can cause major atmospheric stress,
> sometimes hundreds of miles away, leading to precipitation which would
> otherwise not have occurred.
> 
> I have surrounded my umbrella with antennae and scopes and have yet to
> detect up any radiation emanating from it when I do not pick it up.
> Therefore I must conclude that the signal is so faint that my expensive
> equipment is simply not sensitive enough. And yet this signal is able to
> travel miles, through building materials, trees, and clouds, to reach the
> appropriate aerial receptors.

You will not be able to detect the signal, no matter how sensitive
your antennae and scopes.  It simply isn't an electromagnetic impulse,
and your detectors are entirely insensitive to it.

It is, rather, a quantum-mechanical effect.  Your umbrella is part of
a quantum-mechanical pairing with portions of the atmosphere at a
distance - the states of the two are entangled.  When you pick up
umbrella, you expose its inner surface to view, and can see whether
there's still moisture on the inside from yesterday's rain.  This act
of observing it "collapses" the wave function of the umbrella - until
you observe it, the inside of the umbrella is in an indeterminate
superposition of states (it's neither dry nor not-dry).  

By collapsing the wave function of the umbrella, you also collapse the
wave function of the atmosphere with which it is entangled, forcing
_its_ state to become determinate.  When this happens, either it rains
(elsewhere, thus dropping its moisture well out of your sight) or is
dry.  In either case, there isn't any rain present when it gets to you.

If you ignore the umbrella when you walk out the door, its state
remains indeterminate.  The atmosphere upwind remains in an
indeterminate superposition of states until it reaches you... at which
point, your act of looking up and saying "Those clouds look ugly!"
collapses its wave function and dumps buckets of water on your head.

The mathematics of this process can be found in any decent text on
quantum mechanics.  Look up the terms "Bell inequality" (which refers
to the inequality of rain distribution based on whether your umbrella
is left in a pointed/closed shape or opened out into a bell-like
shape), and "EPR paradox" (the acronym refers to the Excessive Pouring
Rain well known to those who study such things).

As Dave Barry says, "I am not making this up."

Excuse me - my cat Schroedinger wants to be fed.  At least, I think he
does... he just said "mu".

-- 
Dave Platt                                        dplatt@feghoot.ml.org
Visit the Jade Warrior home page:   http://feghoot.ml.org/jade-warrior/
  I do _not_ wish to receive unsolicited commercial email, and I will
     boycott any company which has the gall to send me such ads!

In comp.os.linux.development.system sTiLe <stile@mindless.com> wrote:
: On Mon, 31 Aug 1998 17:24:06 -0400, Andrew <aross@chat.carlerton.ca> wrote:
:>Stay away from the weed dude... :)

: This brings up a valid point. If we network through weed, will it screw
: the packets up? ;) or will they just wander around the network aimlessly? 

It all depends on whether the packets inhale or not as they pass thru
certain types of flora..

:)



-- 
Robert Hyatt                    Computer and Information Sciences
hyatt@cis.uab.edu               University of Alabama at Birmingham
(205) 934-2213                  115A Campbell Hall, UAB Station 
(205) 934-5473 FAX              Birmingham, AL 35294-1170

taguebw@REMOVEwfu.edu wrote:
> 
> In article <gbjiuj9e5kw.fsf@ic.ac.uk>, Gerdjan Busker <g.busker@ic.ac.uk> wrote:
> 
> > taguebw@REMOVEwfu.edu writes:
> >
> > > A minor point: there is NO evidence that plants respond to music or being
> > > spoken too. There is lots of psuedo-science claiming such but no scientist
> > > has proven this.
> > >
> > > But, plants do respond to external signals: light (intensity, wavelength,
> > > direction), temperature (both hot and cold), gravity, touch, volatile
> > > compounds from other plants,etc.
> >
> > Ah,  so what you are saying is ... an optical global network using plants?
> > With a backup option of using gravitational waves or infra red or in the
> > worst case TCP/IP via polination packets carried by bees?
> >
> > GJ.
> 
> No, I didn't say that at all! I was simply trying to clear up the common
> misperception that plants respond to music or being spoken to.
> 
> I'll let others develop plants as a global network ;-b.
> 
> My 2 electrons,
> 
> Brian
> 
> --
> Remove "REMOVE" to reply

Without compromising any opinions previously expressed by the learned
posters of c.o.l.h (and others), I would like to express both my
concerns and excitement at the proposal.

Firstly, resources such as plants are essential to the stable living
environment that the earth provides. It is essential that the plant base
is not compromised by technology, leading to mass destruction of natural
resources. It is well documented that algae can be used as memory
storage mechanisms, how far will this go? Is the Amazon going to become
the global hub of Organo-Communication? Will this lead to more careful
management of the natural resources like the Amazon? Will it lead to
malicious, power-hungry people and countries trying to monopolise these
resources? This must be carefully controlled!

Secondly, I am excited by the prospect of every "luser" of technology
having to have a desktop plant for communication. This will lead to a
healthier work environment. Having said this, these plants must be
maintained at least to a minimum standard. Work environments must be
smoke free, clean, and free from stress and tension which could
interfere with the plant's ability to have un-inhibited communication
abilities. A sad plant could have disastrous effects on network
stability.

Finally, is the organo-net principle going to be the saviour of the
Human (Rat) Race? If these Flora-Nets were slow, yet effective, it is
quite conceivable that it will necessitate the deceleration of human
culture. New York will expand Central Park. People will become more
aware of the potential of plants, thus leading to more peaceful
practices. Violence will decrease, and there will be a second revolution
of the Sixties Hippie Syndrome (I am pissed off that I missed it ...),
so this will be a good thing.

As an aside, I wonder whether the "happy" plants like Cannabis are
better suited to communication than "drab" plants like grass (not
technically a plant ..), or viscious plants like the 'dioneia Muscipula'
(Venus Flytrap). (Technically, is cannabis a grass (weed) or a plant?)

Well, all the best with your investigation.

Gus

P.S. How about investigating whether you can modulate the 4Hz frequency.
Also, what about massively parallel communication with something like a
corn field with every individual plant (grass) communicating a different
bit of information?

One final thing: Is "Interflora" the next rival of Microsoft?

You might wann check
http://src.doc.ic.ac.uk/computing/internet/rfc/rfc2324.txt

Regards

ROSCO

Ross Vandegrift wrote in message <35EC3E75.7937DA6A@erols.com>...
>Each year for school I do one project for a half a credit, and this year
>I was going to make a computer controlled coffee maker from Radio Shack
>parts (/dev/coffee!!) and some filters, but this would be much more
>interesting.  Doubt I'd succeed, but I could try.
>
>--
>Ross Vandegrift | Eric J. Fenderson
>
>Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen.
>                -- Albert Einstein

>Ross Crawford wrote:
Cool, another Ross who is into Linux!

Actually, I planned on not using a pre-existing coffe pot, and designing
my own.  I realize that /dev/coffee has consistently been a joke in many
circles, but I think it might be a neat idea.  My rationale, if there
need be one, would be that different temperatures, only a few degrees
apart are better for brewing different coffee for different purposes. 
For example, to erxtract the maximum amount of caffeine out of beans,
you need the water to be slightly cooler than normal.  Only an
electronic pot designed to brew for variable desires could handle such
precision.
	Not to mention my dad works for a controls company that specializes in
temperature control.  hehehe...

--
Ross Vandegrift | Eric J. Fenderson

Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen.
                -- Albert Einstein

Ross Vandegrift wrote in message <35ED8882.98A87026@erols.com>...
>>Ross Crawford wrote:
>Cool, another Ross who is into Linux!
>

Yeah, but not as much as I'd like to be ... M$ dev still pays most my bills
8?(

>Actually, I planned on not using a pre-existing coffe pot, and designing
>my own.  I realize that /dev/coffee has consistently been a joke in many
>circles, but I think it might be a neat idea.  My rationale, if there
>need be one, would be that different temperatures, only a few degrees
>apart are better for brewing different coffee for different purposes.
>For example, to erxtract the maximum amount of caffeine out of beans,
>you need the water to be slightly cooler than normal.  Only an
>electronic pot designed to brew for variable desires could handle such
>precision.
> Not to mention my dad works for a controls company that specializes in
>temperature control.  hehehe...
>


Hey, that's interesting. Some guys where I work (inc. me) were looking at
putting together a sensor on our urn and interfacing it (probably thru a
games port) to our intranet web page, so we know when it's at the optimum
temperature to make a cuppa. Hasn't got very far. What's the best device to
use? Thermistor? We're not looking at high accuracy. Just a rough idea.
Needless to say, the less $$$ involved, the better. 8?)

Regards,

ROSCO

Ross Crawford (rossc@prologic.com.au) wrote:
: 
: Hey, that's interesting. Some guys where I work (inc. me) were looking at
: putting together a sensor on our urn and interfacing it (probably thru a
: games port) to our intranet web page, so we know when it's at the optimum
: temperature to make a cuppa. Hasn't got very far. What's the best device to
: use? Thermistor? We're not looking at high accuracy. Just a rough idea.
: Needless to say, the less $$$ involved, the better. 8?)

Get a thermistor and place it on the urn, as the temperature goes up the 
resistance of the thermister changes, hook it up to a known voltage source
and watch the voltage change as the temperature changes. Then get get a 
little digital multimeter whcih can interface with your PC and read the
values off that :)

I've built one that hooks up to the parallel port. You just need an A/D,
a voltage divider circuit and a few other bits and pieces. If you have
a bidirectional parallel port you can also dispense with the MUX thats 
usually used in such a circuit.

Below is what you'll need to set it all up. with (V) being the voltmeter
you'll make :).. All up, it should cost you about $30USD and a bit of 
time :)

             |----(V)----|
             |           |
 |--------------\/\/\/\/----|
---                         |
 -                          |
 |__________________________|

Cheers.
-- 

First prove that plants do emit this 4Hz frequency.  Then check
whether it is due to the plant, or is it simply electron leakage
from the ground that a metal-handled broom can do as well.
Then prove that something listens to this frequency -- it is not
a "signal" if nothing can receive it.  In the process you'll also
learn how large an antenna you need to receive it yourself.

In article <35E704A9.5EFFDA9C@technocage.com>,
Michael J. Fair <michael@technocage.com> wrote:
| Hello all, at the risk of being flamed for crazy ideas I decided to ask
| the following question.
| 
| Would it be possible to use plants as the transmission medium for
| networks?

| I am not concerned about bandwidth right now, I just want to get a
| message to "bounce" off the plant.  Heck, it doesn't even have to be a
| meaningful message, just a simple "echo" of whatever I sent.

So you want to ping your Petunias... go out with some Miracle-Gro and
set the MAC address... pollenating the router... the mind boggles.

It scares me that I spent a minute trying to think of a use for
bandwidth this low.

-- 
bill davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>  CTO, TMR Associates, Inc
"The problem was not when we gave women the right to vote, it was when
we gave them the right to speak."
	-- Fat John (R.I.P.)

I'm thinking this has gone *way* off into the weeds.....

David Christensen

Gus wrote:

<snip>

One final thing: Is "Interflora" the next rival of Microsoft?

>

Can you spell "Microsoft Locust 2000"?

In article <35E704A9.5EFFDA9C@technocage.com>,
	"Michael J. Fair" <michael@technocage.com> writes:

> Hello all, at the risk of being flamed for crazy ideas I decided to
> ask the following question.
>
>  Would it be possible to use plants as the transmission medium for
> networks?

By a strange coincidence, there's an article on *fruit*-based
computers on segfault.org... It's a spoof news site, so don't expect
anything serious. The URL is;

http://www.segfault.org/story.phtml?id=35ec419d-0062ed00&mode=0

-- 
Ian - Edit address before mailing. | Have you got a question you want to ask
     Running Linux in the UK.      | Usenet? Search www.dejanews.com first!
             -- There are no facts, only opinions --

> Hey, that's interesting. Some guys where I work (inc. me) were looking at
> putting together a sensor on our urn and interfacing it (probably thru a
> games port) to our intranet web page, so we know when it's at the optimum
> temperature to make a cuppa. Hasn't got very far. What's the best device to
> use? Thermistor? We're not looking at high accuracy. Just a rough idea.
> Needless to say, the less $$$ involved, the better. 8?)

The Thermistor idea would certainly work.  However, like I said, my dad
works in computer controled temperature management.  I plan on having
him burn me a custom sensor, like they do for all their jobs.  This
would be free since it's my dad...  ;-) I don't know if it would be
practical for someone without that resource to go with that road.  You
should check out the Caffeine FAQ somewhere (anyone not forget the
link?) -- therein are the listings for the optimum coffee brewing temps.

--
Ross Vandegrift | Eric J. Fenderson

Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen.
                -- Albert Einstein

Pat Crean wrote in message <35EF3944.EF86715F@crean.com>...
>Gus wrote:
>
><snip>
>
>One final thing: Is "Interflora" the next rival of Microsoft?
>
>Can you spell "Microsoft Locust 2000"?


Gives a whole new meaning to "Internet worms".

-- 
Ross Smith ................................... mailto:ross.s@ihug.co.nz
.............. The Internet Group, Auckland, New Zealand ..............
  "Remember when we told you there was no future? Well, this is it."
                                                        -- Blank Reg

mnc@diana.law.yale.edu (Miguel Cruz) wrote:

>Oren Ben-Kiki <oren@capella.co.il> wrote:
>>> Would it be possible to use plants as the transmission medium for
>>> networks?
>>
>> Nah, too slow. Why not try for faster then light? It is a well known fact
>> that Kingship is transferred instantaniously (once the old king dies, the
>> heir _immediatly_ becomes king).

>That gives me another idea. It is also a well-known fact that failure to
>pick up an umbrella in the morning can cause major atmospheric stress,
>sometimes hundreds of miles away, leading to precipitation which would
>otherwise not have occurred.


>miguel

I think you're really on to something here, Miguel.

If we can learn to artificially generate the signals emitted by
umbrellas and washed cars, we might be able to achieve
something long hoped for by science.

Controlling the weather!

Bob
nienhuis@wgn.net

>>That gives me another idea. It is also a well-known fact that failure to
>>pick up an umbrella in the morning can cause major atmospheric stress,
>>sometimes hundreds of miles away, leading to precipitation which would
>>otherwise not have occurred.


I prefer to use an old Native American chant to cause rain:

Simply say the words, "Let's have a picnic".  The rains will come.

Tom "Hibernating Bear" Lake

Ross,

Thermistors are usually too insensitive for what you want.  Analog Devices
sells some pretty interesting absolute temperature sensors if you want real
precision.

Frank

Ross Crawford wrote:

> Ross Vandegrift wrote in message <35ED8882.98A87026@erols.com>...
> >>Ross Crawford wrote:
> >Cool, another Ross who is into Linux!
> >
>
> Yeah, but not as much as I'd like to be ... M$ dev still pays most my bills
> 8?(
>
> >Actually, I planned on not using a pre-existing coffe pot, and designing
> >my own.  I realize that /dev/coffee has consistently been a joke in many
> >circles, but I think it might be a neat idea.  My rationale, if there
> >need be one, would be that different temperatures, only a few degrees
> >apart are better for brewing different coffee for different purposes.
> >For example, to erxtract the maximum amount of caffeine out of beans,
> >you need the water to be slightly cooler than normal.  Only an
> >electronic pot designed to brew for variable desires could handle such
> >precision.
> > Not to mention my dad works for a controls company that specializes in
> >temperature control.  hehehe...
> >
>
> Hey, that's interesting. Some guys where I work (inc. me) were looking at
> putting together a sensor on our urn and interfacing it (probably thru a
> games port) to our intranet web page, so we know when it's at the optimum
> temperature to make a cuppa. Hasn't got very far. What's the best device to
> use? Thermistor? We're not looking at high accuracy. Just a rough idea.
> Needless to say, the less $$$ involved, the better. 8?)
>
> Regards,
>
> ROSCO

In comp.os.linux.networking Michael Fair <michael@access-pr.com> wrote:

> I just made an assumption that the Earth already has a built in global
> communication system, and all there is to do is find it and start using it.

It does, and you've obviously been out smoking some of it :)

--
 Graham Broadbridge 			Home 	<grahamb@peachy.apana.org.au>
 Marsfield  NSW	 Australia		Work 	<grahamb@nsw.unilink.oz.au>
 Australia				AmprNet	<vk2yui@gw.vk2yui.ampr.org>
						<vk2yui@amsat.org>

We will also need multithreaded spiders+silkworms.

york amber wrote:

> On Thu, 3 Sep 1998, Pat Crean wrote:
>
> > Gus wrote:
> >
> > <snip>
> >
> > One final thing: Is "Interflora" the next rival of Microsoft?
> >
> > >
> >
> > Can you spell "Microsoft Locust 2000"?
> >
> >
> > I just love us Plant People.....this was really funny you guys!