[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

RE Re: Theory and Practic



Subject:      RE Re: Theory and Practic
       Date:  Thu, 15 May 1997 00:32:00 GMT
       From:  robert.michaels-at-online.sme-dot-org (Robert Michaels)
Organization: Society of Manufacturing Engineers
         To:  tesla-at-pupman-dot-com


        Oh -- it's deja-vu  -- all over again, or in this case apples
        and oranges -- all over again...

        As a working scientist and engineer (tho surely not uniquely
        so on the list), may I attempt the following clarification:

        Science and Invention.  They are  =not=  the same.  There
        are many working scientists today.  There are very few in-
        ventors.   In the 19th century this ratio was reversed.



        Invention -- The fabrication of useful devices
                     e.g. Thomas Edison; Henry Ford
       -------------------------------------------------------------

        Usually the result of a half-baked idea plus more or less
        random tinkering.   I wasn't there, but I doubt Edison
        approached the phonograph or the light bulb from a theoretical
        standpoint.



        Science -- The search for basic truths about the innate nature
                   of things --  e.g. Einstein; Maxwell
        --------------------------------------------------------------

        Usually the result of a thorough exploration of theory, with
        the hope that it will give rise to a half-baked idea.

        I wasn't there, but I doubt that Einstein concluded that
        relativistic mass is proportion to velocity; or that
        space and time constitute an continuum -- by random tinkering.




        Science AND Invention -- Together  -- e.g. Robert Oppenheimer
        -------------------------------------------------------------

        Virtually no reputable organization will fund a research project
        if it has no theoretical grounding.

        No working scientist begins any practical work until he has
        thoroughly examined all that has gone before in his intended
        area of investigation.


        I doubt Oppenheimer (et. al.) obtained funding for the Manhattan
        Project (to build 1st atom bomb) by saying "Oh, theory is really
        a waste of time --  give us some U-235 and we'll just fool
        around  with it, see what happens".

        Yet - YET - Y E T!

        That is how the atom bomb got built:  Supposedly Oppenheimer was
        absent-mindedly squeezing a whole orange in his hand when it
        stuck him -- by compressing a sub-critical ball of U-235 by
        means of a spherical explosive charge, he could bring the
        U-235 to critical mass.   (Or so the tale is told -- I wasn't
        there).


                        |  Most every scientific advance starts  |
                        |  with a =hunch=.    Real scientific    |
                        |  talent is the ability to form these   |
                        |  hunches and to recognize them when    |
                        |  they occur.  (And perhaps the talent  |
                        |  to fashion a theory around them - one |
                        |  that will get you  =funding=  [wink!])!




        Now -- Dr. Tesla
        -----------------------------------------------------------

        My sense is that he was an odd-ball blend of both:  His
        mind was that of a scientist, but he acted like an inventor.
        (A lot of his ideas were half-baked).

        He did the theory and the math, but (by my reckoning) did it in
        his head.   He published little, because he kept much of his
        work in his head.   And with an inventor's impetuosity he wanted
        to be dabbling in something rather than writing up a paper
        on it (and it seems he lacked the staff/organizational setting
        to assist him much of the time).


                                - - - - - - -


        The bottom line is: what do you want to do -- science or
        invention.   They are not the same, tho they blend into
        one another at various points.

                                         Theoretically yours (tho
                                         practically, not) in --
                                         Detroit, USA

                                         Robert Michaels






T>  From:   richard hull <rhull-at-richmond.infi-dot-net>

T>All,

T>Tesla never formally published a theory in his lifetime!!!!  He
T>published
T>virtually zero in the open literature.  He was quoted a lot.

 [ ... ]


T>Tesla just did!  He just brought into being!

 [ ... ]


T>  Blind luck and intuition based on hunch is shunned as the stuff of
T>hairbrains.  True I wouldn't want to engineer anything for day to day
T>use   [ ... ]


T>reached its peak in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century
when
T>the
T>theory became THE THING.

  [ ... ]

T>Richard Hull, TCBOR