Computer Shopper - UK (2019-10)

ISSUE 380|COMPUTERSHOPPER|OCTOBER 2019 111111

Indeed, Swade quoted Babbage’s
views on this question: “Babbage
predicted that without machine
computation science would stultify
because of ‘the overwhelming
incumbrance [sic] of numerical detail’.”
However,Campbell-Kelly was also at
pains to spell out what the Analytical
Engine could not have done.
“Because of its limited storage,it
could not have been used formany
important types of calculation, such
as weather prediction, that involve
matrices. And because of its
enormous cost, low speed and
limited I/O capability,itwould not
have been practical forbusiness
data processing,”hesays.
Interestingly,however,Swade sees a
potential beyond science and maths.
“It was AdaLovelace who articulated
the potential of computing outside the
bounds of numbers. She wroteofthe
Analytical Engine being able to
compose music once given the rules
of composition. If Lovelace’s ideas had
been pursued then, speculatively,it
could be used foranything able to be
represented by symbols and subject
to rule,” he adds.
Despitethe undeniable limitations
of Babbage’s initial design, it’s
interesting to speculateonwhether,
had it ever been built, it would have
paved the waytobigger and better
things –oractually,quitethe contrary,
smaller and faster things –aswe’ve
seen with electronic computers.
Swade explains how,with
electronics, reducing the physical
dimensions provides an increase in

speed, before contrasting it

with mechanical devices.

“Mechanical systems are

more limited in their capacity

forsize-reduction,”henotes.

“The reduction from the

physical scales to which

Babbage worked, to clockwork

–the smallest potentially

viable 19th-century medium

–isatmost afactor of 10.

So conventional mechanics

does not have the dynamic

range,offering performance

improvements comparable to

electronic technologies.”

QUICK OFF THEMARK

Campbell-Kelly makes much

the same point by reference

to a20th-century development.

“Mechanical computers reached

their zenith with the Harvard University

Mark Icalculator in 1943. It was

described as Babbage’s dream come

true.The Mark Iwas only capable of

200 arithmetic operations per minute

and was mainly used to calculate

mathematical tables. It was a

technological dead end. Modern

computers were only made possible

by electronics,”hesays.

So it seems that, despiteits

huge potential, the Analytical Engine

could never have heralded

asteampunk revolution

because of its reliance on

mechanics. Indeed, according

to Swade,Babbage himself

had no such aspirations.

“Babbage envisaged an

Analytical Engine in the major

capitals of the world. So there

would be relatively few

centralised installations,

analogous to later mainframe

ideas, large number-crunching

centralised installations

involving high capital

investments,”headds.

Having said that, however,

we can’t help but think of IBM

president Thomas Watson’s 1943

prediction concerning electronic

computers, namely,“Ithink there is a

world market formaybe five

computers”.Onthe other hand,

Campbell-Kelly offered aglimmer of

hope forthe romantic notion of

ubiquitous Victorian computing.

“There might have been abutterfly

effect –aninflection point in the

development of science,engineering

and mathematics –that would

have accelerated developments in

computer theory and practice that

happened much later in the 20th

century,” he notes.

AN ANALYTICAL

ENGINE FOR

THE21STCENTURY

TheAnalyticalEngine was the

pinnacleof Babbage’s achievements

in the worldof computing, but it

wasn’this first.Priorto this, he

produced adesign forsomething

he called the DifferenceEngine.

It wouldn’thavebeen auniversal

computingdevice like the Analytical

Engine,butitwould have offeredadegreeof programmabilityforgenerating mathematical

tables. We usethe phrase ‘would have’becausethiswasanotherof Babbage’sinventions that

never gotoff the drawing board or,tobemoreaccurate, notuntil1991.Itwasthenthatthe

Science Museum in London unveiled aDifferenceEnginebuiltto Babbage’splans. Indeed, the

project, led by then curator of computing, Doron Swade,provedthat,had itcome to fruitionall

those yearsago,itwould have worked exactly as intended.

This raisesthe question of whether the same would betrue of the AnalyticalEngine.

The snag is that building oneof these machines wouldbe amuchlarger andmoreexpensive

undertaking,as even an entry-levelvariant wouldcontain 50,000 parts, comparedto the

DifferenceEngine’s8,000.It’sbeendescribedas‘thesizeof asmalllorry’comparedto the

Difference Engine’s more compact dimensions of 2.1x3.4x0.5m,and itseemshard to believe

that its power could have come from anything but asteam engine,whereas the Difference

Engine is hand-cranked.

Despitethese enormous difficulties,aprojectisunderwaytocreateanAnalyticalEngine.

Youmighthaveto waituntilthe2030sto see itin action,200years after Babbage firstdreamed

⬆Had Charles

Babbage actually

completed his

Analytical Engine,

we can envisage

him having the

same place in the

annalsof computing

history as Alan

Turing has today

⬆Starting by digitising Babbage’s numerous plans and notes, the

Plan 28 project aims to build afull-sized working model of the

Analytical Engine

up theidea, but ifyou want to learn more,headover to the projectwebsiteatplan28.org.