Reply-To: "Kevin Aylward"
From: "Kevin Aylward"
References: <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com> <6RWg9.101$Fc5.firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: Re: Alan Blumlein site
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-Inktomi-Trace: public1-pete2-5-cust19.pete.broadband.ntl.com 1032105672 27627 188.8.131.52 (15 Sep 2002 16:01:12 GMT)
Date: Sun, 15 Sep 2002 17:00:13 +0100
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 15 Sep 2002 17:01:11 BST
"N. Thornton" wrote in message
> > > > Stereo
> > >
> > > Electronic TV
> > >
> > > High-resolution Radar,
> > >
> > > Ultra high resolution transformer ratio arm bridge
> > >
> > > High speed switches.
> > >
> > > Many, many "standard" circuit configurations.
> > >
> > > And he was dead by the age of 39
> > >
> > > A genius.
> > But this dont a genius make.
> Yes it does.
You must have rather low standards then. Look, twiddling a few
connections randomly is not an indication of genius. Genius takes hard
work. Doing something that is *truly* simple in essence can not, imo,
qualify as something that special. This is obvious, becuase many others
could also do it, given that they were in simular circumstancse.
However, this is to be contrasted to reducing something vthat is very,
very, complicated to it is quite simple.
Numerous useful inventions does in my book anyway. How do
> you define a genius?
Certainly not by numbers anyway. Have a look at my other posts on this
in this thread.
The Cambride dictionary gives:
(a person with) very great and rare natural ability or skill, esp. in a
particular area such as science or art
In science one could state that a key idea is *extreme* cleverness. That
is, simple being clever on its own is not enough. It must be a rare
attribute. All very clever people can not be geniuses, even *very*
clever people. It must be a state that is *overwhelming* more then the
normal. Now if someone has an invention that is basically quite simple,
such that *many* others, in the same situation would have essential came
up with a similar invention, then this can hardly be described as
extreme cleverness. Making 100 or 1000 or 10000 of such inventions does
not change the situation, usefull as they may be. Utility and genius are
So, being very clever is not enough to be called a genius. Most
inventors are simple not geniuses, despite being very clever, no matter
how many inventions they make.
For me genius is actually more mundane. Its systematic hard work. For
example, arguable the dude that solved Fermats last theorem is a genius.
1000's of people for over 300 years all tried, and failed. This guy
showed a *rare* and great ability that *no* one else, in the *same*
circumstances, could achieve. The *only* reason why any competent design
engineer nowadays can not invent a diff pair, or invent stereo, is
because someone else beat them to such simple tasks such as this
already. Even today, *most* competent mathematicians can still not prove
Fermats last theorem.
For starters, geneuos
SuperSpice, a very affordable Mixed-Mode
Windows Simulator with Schematic Capture,
Waveform Display, FFT's and Filter Design.