ucanttrustapenguin t1_iyd99ed wrote
He demonstrated it two years after logie Baird completed the first television transmission in 1925?
Edit: demonstrated*
BailoutBill t1_iyda5pw wrote
The way I understand it, Baird didn't use the scan technique that Philo came up with and all modern screens use. So, Baird had earlier visual displays, but his tech ultimately was not used to develop modern screens.
ramriot t1_iydckgh wrote
They both used a scanning line technique for camera & display. The key difference as I understand was that Biard's system was electromechanical while Farnsworth's was an all-electronic system. Baird was admittedly 1st, Farnsworth produced 2d something possibly independently that was more commercial & open to ongoing improvement.
If we follow the same logic for say the Phonograph then we acknowledge Edison for the cylinder phonograph but call Bell's Volta Laboratory the inventor of the modern disc phonograph.
Scottland83 t1_iydk7ek wrote
The French had scan-line fax machines in the 1850’s right?
ramriot t1_iye6a14 wrote
With synchronized pendulum clocks that could perhaps produce a single halftone document copy in perhaps 10 minutes. Bit of a far cry from producing & transmitting 15-25 greyscale images a second.
Scottland83 t1_iyeepya wrote
But same concept using scan lines and one-dimensional signal.
ramriot t1_iyf2ms9 wrote
Certainly the pantelegraph of the 1860's was conceptually a scanning device to output a serial transmission. One could argue by the same logic that taking words in lines on a page, converting & transmitting them as telegraph code serially & assembling the output back into words on a page is the same concept, something Morse & others were doing in the 1840's.
In the end all discovery is seeing a little further by standing on the shoulders of giants. Which means we acknowledge what went before but also acknowledge the thing that makes something patentable i.e.
- Patentable subject matter, i.e., a kind of subject-matter eligible for patent protection
- Novel (i.e. at least some aspect of it must be new)
- Non-obvious (in United States patent law) or involve an inventive step (in European patent law)
- Useful (in U.S. patent law) or be susceptible of industrial application (in European patent law[1])
Alan_Smithee_ t1_iyes0xf wrote
That’s right.
ucanttrustapenguin t1_iydb96o wrote
He still didn’t invent television. He invented a different technology used in television
BailoutBill t1_iydc1mz wrote
He didn't invent visuals on a screen. He invented the first devices that evolved into modern devices we refer to as televisions: https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/the-top-ten-patent-wars-television-10-73080/#:~:text=Philo%20T.,until%20shortly%20before%20they%20expired.
ucanttrustapenguin t1_iydckah wrote
So how was a television broadcast demonstrated before he demonstrated his technology?
The OPs headline is incorrect. You can’t say he invented “television” when he didn’t and wasn’t the first to demonstrate a television broadcast.
BailoutBill t1_iyde7f3 wrote
You're confusing the term "television." Technically, Baird invented what was called, at the time, a "televisor." It used tech invented by a German and used some sort of spinning disk. Farnsworth used line scanning. Televisions use line scanning.
https://www.sciencefocus.com/science/who-really-invented-the-mechanical-television/
ucanttrustapenguin t1_iydin1c wrote
The worlds first television broadcast happened in 1925. Farnsworth demonstrated his tech in ‘27.
He didn’t invent television or television broadcasts. He pioneered a technology that brought it forward. The inventor of the mobile phone didn’t invent telephones. IBM didn’t invent computers. Edison didn’t invent the lightbulb.
ShutterBun t1_iyef4pl wrote
He invented electronic television.
Hawkeye_x_Hawkeye t1_iyddewa wrote
>The OPs headline is incorrect. You can’t say he invented “television” when he didn’t and wasn’t the first to demonstrate a television broadcast.
This is like saying the inventor of the home computer didn't invent it because the Turing machine already existed.
Alan_Smithee_ t1_iyeshto wrote
Not at all.
He didn’t invent television; it was invented by Baird.
He came up with a new and improved approach, which became the standard.
But Farnsworth was himself screwed over by David Sarnoff of RCA.
Amazing how US technological history is so full of tales like that.
trailercock t1_iyf5r90 wrote
From what I underatand, Farnsworth did prove the concept could work or at least diagramed how electronic television could work in 1914 while he was still in school. So he probably was the first known person to publicly communicate the concept of electronic television.
Alan_Smithee_ t1_iyf96gp wrote
Nonsense.
So many inventors and scientists had been discussing the concept for years.
Farnsworth is credited as developing the first fully electronic system.
trailercock t1_iyfaube wrote
Gotcha. Good to know.
Pandarandrist t1_iyee8fg wrote
No, it's like saying the inventor of the "home computer" didn't invent "the computer".
PM_UR_NUMBER_IN_HEX t1_iydee7m wrote
a turing machine is fictional device used for proofs and was created after the computer
Hawkeye_x_Hawkeye t1_iydeuoi wrote
According to the wiki, it was invented in the 1930s. Its not fictional, it's a theoretical model of a working machine. The concept existed prior to the existence of computers. Would the inventor of image broadcasting owe credit of their invention to the inventor of the camera?
PM_UR_NUMBER_IN_HEX t1_iydgfk2 wrote
I am a computer scientist. Computers are extremely old. The first program was written before workable computer existed and well before the 1900s. Unless you have unlimited tape the machine can't exist. It's just supposed to be the simplest possible computer.
[deleted] t1_iydi15d wrote
[deleted]
thankyeestrbunny t1_iydv7ru wrote
Industrial Revolution Era French Loom machine? Sign here!
Restless_Wonderer t1_iyeq1zs wrote
Fingers and toes say hello
Sparkybear t1_iydsl5i wrote
Theoretical and fictional mean the same thing. A device with infinite memory is a thing of fiction, but because it's a useful concept for theories tested in math and science we label it theoretical instead.
Beyond that, the first computer was built by Babbage in the 1830s, 100 years before the Turing machine was thought up, unfortunately he died before he finished his general purpose analytical machine, but his differece engines are generally considered the first iterations of modern computers.
PM_UR_NUMBER_IN_HEX t1_iydh53n wrote
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Differential_analyser here is a computer olding than the Turing Machine concept
BobbyP27 t1_iyddwnf wrote
The Baird system used spinning discs with holes at progressively different radii so that the as the disc spins, the holes trace curved lines progressively across the image. The disc in the camera and the display have to be synchronised. The system is different from the method that eventually caught on, but the principle of progressively scanning an image line by line absolutely is a feature of the Baird system.
bastele t1_iydibgk wrote
There isn't really a singular inventor of the television, instead it's alot of people improving on eachothers work/inventing parts of what we have today.
Similar with alot of modern technology, it's the same for the telephone for example.
herbw t1_iyesngt wrote
Zactly! And when's the time you saw a raster on the large screen TV's we most commonly use today?!!!
ucanttrustapenguin t1_iydip9w wrote
Agreed.
squigs t1_iyero5o wrote
Yes. Baird was first. His technology was ultimately a dead end so Farnsworth deserves a certain amount of recognition, but not as "inventor of television".
Kai_Daigoji t1_iyevn0z wrote
Baird's device wasn't really the precursor to the modern television though.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments