FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W4383343314> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W4383343314 endingPage "603" @default.
• W4383343314 startingPage "601" @default.
• W4383343314 abstract "SOME UNANSWERED QUESTIONS JOHN G. BRAINERD Dr. James E. Brittain’s article on “The Introduction of the Loading Coil” leaves several interesting questions unanswered. Although George A. Campbell was one of the greatest engineers of the first third of the 1900s, and undoubtedly deserves credit for the loading coil as well as for other developments and activities, Brittain may not have been en­ tirely objective in his presentation. I. The Possibility of Substantially Simultaneous “Invention” There are three men basically concerned with the question before us: Heaviside, Pupin, and Campbell. Heaviside had summarized his work in his Encyclopaedia Britannica article written in June 1902. After discovering earlier the famous law that R/L equals G/C for distortionless transmission over an ideal uniform transmission line, he definitely decided that an increase in L (inductance per unit length) was needed and said in the 1902 article: “The writer invented a way of carrying out the principle other than uniformly, and recommended it for trial; viz., by the insertion of inductance coils in the main circuit at regular intervals, say one per mile, according to circumstances. . . . The action of the coils is similar to that of small detached loads placed upon a string to give it inertia, and enable it to carry waves farther” (cf. Pupin’s claim of the idea of loading based on the string analogy in 1894). Further in the same paragraph Heaviside said: “Hence experiment alone can decide how few the coils need be for telephony through a distance far exceeding that possible without the coils. Nothing partic­ ular has been done in Great Britain to carry out the writer’s invention; but in America some progress has been made by Dr. Pupin, who has described an experiment supporting its practicability; the length tele­ phoned through was increased five times by inserting the coils.” It is noteworthy that Heaviside apparently knew only of Pupin’s work, and that he seemed to consider it an experiment in support of his theory. Meanwhile, Campbell was studying the same problem, probably Dr. Brainerd is director of the Moore School of Electrical Engineering of the University of Pennsylvania. He was in charge of the ENIAC project which pro­ duced the first large-scale electronic computer. 601 602 John G. Brainerd with full knowledge of Heaviside’s published work. E. H. Colpitts, later a well-known engineer in his own right, who started as an assis­ tant to Campbell, states (with the usual magnanimity of AT&T engineers) in his introduction to the “Collected Papers of George A. Campbell,” published by the American Telephone and Telegraph Com­ pany, New York, 1937: Campbell’s study of this problem both by mathematical and ex­ perimental methods was carried out quite independently and in ignorance of work which Professor Michael I. Pupin had in hand. Both investigators finished their work and applied for patents at about the same time. Professor Pupin was able to establish a slightly earlier date of conception, the patent interference was decided in his favor, and the parent company, following its practice of making available all improvements in the art to its Associated Companies, immediately acquired exclusive rights under the Pupin patents. But it seems fair to say that Campbell’s analysis of the problem was actually more detailed than Pupin’s, and it led him to formulae for the design and spacing of loading coils which were superior to his rival’s, so that from the very beginning they alone were employed for the building of loaded lines in the United States. There is almost nothing in Brittain’s article (see his n. 44) to suggest cross-knowledge between Campbell and Pupin, and no discussion of the question of substantially simultaneous discovery or development, although the data in the article seem to give a strong hint of this. We conclude that the possibility exists that simultaneous discovery is as probable as precedence for either man. II. Pupin’s Experimental Work Brittain tends to emphasize the experimental work done by Camp­ bell. I do not wish to question this work, but Brittain’s emphasis raises the interesting question of whether a college professor who makes a discovery or in modern terms conceives a breakthrough..." @default.
• W4383343314 created "2023-07-07" @default.
• W4383343314 creator A5003958677 @default.
• W4383343314 date "1970-10-01" @default.
• W4383343314 modified "2023-09-23" @default.
• W4383343314 title "Some Unanswered Questions" @default.
• W4383343314 doi "https://doi.org/10.1353/tech.1970.a894047" @default.
• W4383343314 hasPublicationYear "1970" @default.
• W4383343314 type Work @default.
• W4383343314 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W4383343314 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W4383343314 hasAuthorship W4383343314A5003958677 @default.
• W4383343314 hasConcept C111472728 @default.
• W4383343314 hasConcept C119599485 @default.
• W4383343314 hasConcept C127413603 @default.
• W4383343314 hasConcept C134306372 @default.
• W4383343314 hasConcept C136764020 @default.
• W4383343314 hasConcept C138885662 @default.
• W4383343314 hasConcept C165801399 @default.
• W4383343314 hasConcept C2776639384 @default.
• W4383343314 hasConcept C2777206241 @default.
• W4383343314 hasConcept C29210110 @default.
• W4383343314 hasConcept C30403606 @default.
• W4383343314 hasConcept C33923547 @default.
• W4383343314 hasConcept C41008148 @default.
• W4383343314 hasConcept C521332185 @default.
• W4383343314 hasConcept C7980502 @default.
• W4383343314 hasConceptScore W4383343314C111472728 @default.
• W4383343314 hasConceptScore W4383343314C119599485 @default.
• W4383343314 hasConceptScore W4383343314C127413603 @default.
• W4383343314 hasConceptScore W4383343314C134306372 @default.
• W4383343314 hasConceptScore W4383343314C136764020 @default.
• W4383343314 hasConceptScore W4383343314C138885662 @default.
• W4383343314 hasConceptScore W4383343314C165801399 @default.
• W4383343314 hasConceptScore W4383343314C2776639384 @default.
• W4383343314 hasConceptScore W4383343314C2777206241 @default.
• W4383343314 hasConceptScore W4383343314C29210110 @default.
• W4383343314 hasConceptScore W4383343314C30403606 @default.
• W4383343314 hasConceptScore W4383343314C33923547 @default.
• W4383343314 hasConceptScore W4383343314C41008148 @default.
• W4383343314 hasConceptScore W4383343314C521332185 @default.
• W4383343314 hasConceptScore W4383343314C7980502 @default.
• W4383343314 hasIssue "4" @default.
• W4383343314 hasLocation W43833433141 @default.
• W4383343314 hasOpenAccess W4383343314 @default.
• W4383343314 hasPrimaryLocation W43833433141 @default.
• W4383343314 hasRelatedWork W2075638542 @default.
• W4383343314 hasRelatedWork W2372985157 @default.
• W4383343314 hasRelatedWork W2537658304 @default.
• W4383343314 hasRelatedWork W2748952813 @default.
• W4383343314 hasRelatedWork W2793664082 @default.
• W4383343314 hasRelatedWork W2899084033 @default.
• W4383343314 hasRelatedWork W3009710297 @default.
• W4383343314 hasRelatedWork W4225313416 @default.
• W4383343314 hasRelatedWork W4308086234 @default.
• W4383343314 hasRelatedWork W4360592177 @default.
• W4383343314 hasVolume "11" @default.
• W4383343314 isParatext "false" @default.
• W4383343314 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W4383343314 workType "article" @default.