2014-06-19 1:59 GMT+02:00 Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net>: > Normally we expect that the inventor understands his device, but you are > aware of the problems with that view - has anything changed? >
It seems not at all the rule. It is a recent pseudo-evidence of academic myth that theory is important for innovation. It helps, but afterward, to optimize the system. The normal path is : finding an anomaly denial by academic few crazy scientist stay stubborn but are locked by pet theories and lack of imagination crazy rule-breaker does something stupid according to all theories and it works engineers try to design something that work better based on observation and known practice academic start to admit facts they find a theory engineers based on the theory make the things work more reliably academic write history book where all started with a theory, and all before is forgotten a new anomaly is found
