IMO even the original meaning of the word would have included that the 'invention' should be something which is not obvious to other people skilled in the same field. For example, going back 2000 years, I could have "found out" a road that leads to Rome and claim this as my "invention". However, there were many roads that lead to Rome and of course someone has put them there for very obvious reasons, so although "i found out this road" it is not an invention.
Same counts for nixie tubes, it is quite obvious you can use them to make a clock, but much less obvious to make a watch as you need a HVPS and cramp the whole lot in a very tiny enclosure. Since there was no nixie watch before Jeff made one, you can claim that as his invention. In the same group falls this pocket scope watch, it being the first one ever built, you can call that an invention. But I was not referring to the watch as such, I was focused on how the CRT displayed the numbers. Composed Lissajous segments, but as per Martin and Nick, this method was invented long before the scope pocket watch. I do agree it is indeed very difficult to place a border line as to what is and what is not an invention. Maybe it was easier in Roman times as modern day inventions are indeed mainly based on previous inventions. But then, even the good old Trebuchet is most likely derived from the more ancient Shadoufs.... Michel On Feb 16, 9:48 am, Quixotic Nixotic <nixci...@jsdesign.co.uk> wrote: > On 15 Feb 2012, at 21:24, Cobra007 wrote: > > > Well honestly, I do think an invention *must* be defined as "I > > found out what nobody else has found out before", no matter what > > the Latin word truly means. I find out many things in 1 day, but > > they are not unique nor would I call them inventions :-). > > OK, make up your own rules, but that is not the original meaning of > the word. All finding out is based on what someone found out before > you. Language, logical thinking, principles of electronics. You are > not going to make a nixie watch that you can claim is your sole > property or invention, for instance. > > I say to find out, pure and simple, is a more honest and less > conceited way to look at the word invention. A disaster is a bad > astrological reading of the stars, a dis-aster. I think we changed > that word too. I get more of those than inventions, but then I don't > know much about electronics. > > John S -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "neonixie-l" group. To post to this group, send an email to neonixie-l@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to neonixie-l+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/neonixie-l?hl=en-GB.
