Talk:Timeline of invention

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

• /Archive 1: Sept 2004 - Feb 2006

Contents 1 Questionable edits 2 Chess 3 Irrigations, canals, drainage, ... 4 Blu-ray, DVD drivers and Intel Pentium processors 5 Telephone 6 Paper clip 7 Sketches are not inventions 8 Atlatl changed to Spear Thrower 9 First computer 10 1900 11 Ball bearing 12 Semi Ring Fabry-Perot (SRFP) Resonator

[edit] Questionable edits

In my opinion, there have been a rash of questionable additions and changes to this list recently. The edits appear to be nationalistic in nature. I've been trying to correct errors, but I'm getting overwhelmed. In the past, I simply had to cite my sources and that was that, but it appears that there are groups of people who seem to be pursuing an agenda of rewriting history (see Talk:Pottery). I'll continue to try to keep this list and source articles updated, but any help would be appreciated. Thanks. --Brunnock 14:30, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Chess

I don't think chess qualifies as an invention. The first board game might be an invention, but I don't want to start listing every board game ever designed. --Brunnock 16:06, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Irrigations, canals, drainage, ...

Are these individual inventions? Or just variations on water channels? --Brunnock 16:08, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

According to [1], drainage was developed by the Sumerians along with irrigation. --Brunnock 13:57, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Blu-ray, DVD drivers and Intel Pentium processors

I can't see how "Blu-ray discs" can be compared to telephones and automobiles. Not everything can be classified as an invention. Blu-ray discs are no more than a sort of compact discs and those were "invented" in 1970s, but hey, once we have started we could also list Memorex 52x CD-R:s to. Why stop? I "invented" a "stone-washer" when I was eight, that should also join the list. -Funper 22:59, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. Many of the latest "inventions" are simply standards, variations on a theme, or even marketing gimmicks. Feel free to purge the list. --Sean Brunnock 23:39, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

I would not hesitate but there is to much. Suggesting rewrite of the article? --Funper 19:13, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

I don't think it's necessary to rewrite the article. If there's an entry you think should not be on the list, just remove it and make a note in the edit summary. --Sean Brunnock 19:22, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Telephone

Since there were versions before Bell, perhaps a note to make it clear? Perhaps a list in paranthesis by those preceding him?DanielDemaret 15:26, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

There are thorough articles at Invention of the telephone and Timeline of the telephone. I'd say pick an inventor and have the entry in this article point to Timeline of the telephone. No need to reproduce that timeline here. --Sean Brunnock 20:59, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Paper clip

Removed:

• 1901: Paperclip: Johan Vaaler

This is apparently a persistent falsehood. Vaaler patented a type of paper clip but it was not the first, and his version was never widely used. The paperclip article suggests it was invented much earlier, but gives no fixed date.

[edit] Sketches are not inventions

A sketch is not an invention. That's why this list doesn't state that Leonardo invented the helicopter and Babbage invented the computer. --Sean Brunnock 12:03, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Try telling that to the patent office.WolfKeeper 14:59, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

I think there's a difference between something that self-evidently wouldn't work with the technology of the time (Leonardo's helicopter) and something that would (Babbage's computer). The evidence from the London Science Museum's construction of the difference engine with contemporary techniques is that Babbage's idea works.WolfKeeper 15:04, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

There was no patent office during the Middle Ages. The rule on this timeline is first working version. That's been the rule for years. Please respect the rules. If you want to make changes, please discuss it first. --Sean Brunnock 15:16, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

You'll have to delete all the patent based inventions, or move them to a different date then. The patent offices don't consistently require a working version. Also, this is a very non standard definition of invention that you are attempting to use.WolfKeeper 15:25, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Patents have only been around for a few hundred years. This timeline goes back over a million years. Therefore, patents are irrelevant to this article. --Sean Brunnock 15:57, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

I'm unclear that that is so. Also, I'm trying to get my head what you mean here, or what the ramifications of it are. So if I think up a device, draw a picture of it, hand the diagram to a machinist, and he builds it and it works. Then according to the standards of this article the machinist is the one that invented it?WolfKeeper 16:04, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

I'm not interested in hypothetical situations and I'm not interested in doing original research. --Sean Brunnock 16:31, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

OK. Great. In that case, please can you give a reference to the definition of 'invention' you are using in this article then? Since you aren't engaged in OR it should be easy to give this.WolfKeeper 17:45, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

You could read the invention article- An invention is an object, process, or technique which displays an element of novelty...A "castle in the air" or a "pie in the sky" (or "castles in Spain") may refer to a creative idea which does not reach fruition due to practical considerations. --Sean Brunnock 19:14, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Atlatl changed to Spear Thrower

I boldly changed the name Atlatl to Spear Thrower, because the link stated that the device was invented in North Africa. Atlatl is presumably the North/South American name. I think 'Spear Thrower' is more widely recognised - I had never heard of Atlatl, and couldn't guess what it could possibly be. Better to go for an internationally recognised term. In my country, however, it is known as a Woomera and may predate the North African invention, but I don't have a reference to prove it. It is also known as a 'Throwing Stick', but that name is ambiguous as it could also apply to a stick which is itself thrown rather than a stick which does the throwing. An example of this is the boomerang.Iramoo Bearbrass 01:04, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Please read Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style#Disputes_over_style_issues --Sean Brunnock 01:16, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Done. Interesting. What about the Atlatl though - if it was invented in Nth Africa, should we use a native american indian name for it, or a descriptive English language name? Iramoo Bearbrass 10:14, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

I think you should discuss that on the Atlatl article. --Sean Brunnock 12:14, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] First computer

By definition, a universal, general-purpose computer has to be Turing complete. By that definition, ENIAC was the first computer. I realize that Zuse's Z3 was proven to be Turing complete, but Zuse never intended for the Z3 to be Turing complete. It wasn't even proven possible until 1998. --Sean Brunnock 12:02, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Just to clarify, is this what the above paragraph is saying?

• to qualify as a computer a machine must be Turing complete;
• the Z3 was Turing complete;
• the designer didn't intend the Z3 to be Turing complete;
• therefore the Z3 was not a computer.

Or, as seems quite likely, have I misunderstand what was intended? Adrian Robson 16:55, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Rojas discovered a hack which allows the Z3 to simulate conditional branching. Prior to 1998, it hadn't even been suggested.

You might as well argue that the Nazca Indians invented hot air balloons. --Sean Brunnock 18:18, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 1900

Year 1900 is in 19th century, not 20th, how can we fix it? --Vlad Jaroslavleff 17:06, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Unfortunately, 1900 is part of the [[1900s], so it went under that heading. A case of pick the lesser of two evils. --Sean Brunnock 20:44, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ball bearing

Wolfkeeper,

Did da Vinci create a ball bearing or did he just draw one? --Sean Brunnock 14:04, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

He definitely drew one. It's the earliest known diagram or mention of one. It seems reasonable to assume that he invented it. Generally, most inventions are dated from patent date. A patent is just a document with a diagram and description.WolfKeeper 14:15, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Drawings are not inventions. See above. --Sean Brunnock 15:19, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

I disagree. They certainly can be. But the question might be whether they had successfully invented it. It seems to me that the real question would be with a drawing as to whether the diagram *as described* is actually a workable design with the technology of the day.WolfKeeper 15:40, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

There is a working model of one on display in Melbourne Australia right now, alongside models of all his other inventions [2]. I had a play with it last week - it certainly looks like it works. Come over and have a look for yourselves! (closes 1 October). Perhaps the exhibition will move to a location near you???? Iramoo Bearbrass 03:30, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Semi Ring Fabry-Perot (SRFP) Resonator

Can someone explain what this invention is? Is it significant enough to have a place in this article? - TexMurphy 09:57, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

• I don't think it belongs on this list. --Sean Brunnock 11:32, 26 January 2007 (UTC)