Comments on: The Closing Bell http://scienceprogress.org/2008/08/the-closing-bell/ Tue, 13 Sep 2011 13:59:48 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Dr. Richard French http://scienceprogress.org/2008/08/the-closing-bell/comment-page-1/#comment-2741 Dr. Richard French Sat, 30 Aug 2008 21:25:43 +0000 http://www.scienceprogress.org/2008/08/the-closing-bell/#comment-2741 All of the above depend upon the physics research into semiconductor materials that led to the breakthrough invention that is the transistor. "In 1947, the transistor, probably the most important invention developed by Bell Laboratories, was invented by John Bardeen, Walter Houser Brattain, and William Bradford Shockley (all of whom subsequently won the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1956)" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_Labs You can find many many other references. I'm so sorry that the R&D world is degenerating into the small minded domain of the fast-buck with no look to the future. Businessmen are tearing up the 'fields of innovation' that got them their jobs in the first place. All of the above depend upon the physics research into semiconductor materials that led to the breakthrough invention that is the transistor.

“In 1947, the transistor, probably the most important invention developed by Bell Laboratories, was invented by John Bardeen, Walter Houser Brattain, and William Bradford Shockley (all of whom subsequently won the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1956)”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_Labs

You can find many many other references. I’m so sorry that the R&D world is degenerating into the small minded domain of the fast-buck with no look to the future.

Businessmen are tearing up the ‘fields of innovation’ that got them their jobs in the first place.

]]> By: Don Monroe http://scienceprogress.org/2008/08/the-closing-bell/comment-page-1/#comment-2727 Don Monroe Wed, 27 Aug 2008 00:05:30 +0000 http://www.scienceprogress.org/2008/08/the-closing-bell/#comment-2727 I'm not sure I understand your point in your catty last paragraph. UNIX, touch-tone, cellular...not one of those was dependent on basic physics research, which was the subject of the Nature story. So even if the story were correct, it would by itself have no implications for that type of technological innovation. I’m not sure I understand your point in your catty last paragraph. UNIX, touch-tone, cellular…not one of those was dependent on basic physics research, which was the subject of the Nature story. So even if the story were correct, it would by itself have no implications for that type of technological innovation.

]]>