Hasty Briefsbeta

Bilingual

How Common Is Multiple Invention?

a year ago
  • #multiple-discovery
  • #history-of-technology
  • #innovation
  • Alexander Graham Bell narrowly beat Elisha Gray to patent the telephone in 1876, leading to a costly legal dispute resolved in Bell's favor by 1879.
  • Multiple invention is common, with examples like Edison and Swan's lightbulbs (1880), Kilby and Noyce's integrated circuits (1959), and von Ohain and Whittle's jet engines (1930s).
  • Studies by Ogburn, Thomas, and Merton documented hundreds of cases of multiple discovery in science and technology, suggesting it's a recurring phenomenon.
  • Estimates of multiple invention rates vary: 2-3% for simultaneous scientific discoveries, 8% chance of reinvention within a decade, and conflicting patent interference data (0.02% annually).
  • Multiple invention rates hint at the nature of technological progress—low rates suggest 'Great Man Theory,' while high rates imply progress driven by broader historical forces.
  • Analysis of 190 historic inventions (1800-1970) found over 50% had multiple efforts, with 72 cases of multiple successes or near-successes.
  • Categories of multiple invention: descriptions of ideas (e.g., Lillienfeld's transistor concept), serious development efforts (e.g., Haber-Bosch process competitors), and multiple successes (e.g., jet engines).
  • Independence of invention efforts is hard to verify, with cases like Goodyear and Hancock's vulcanized rubber showing potential influence.
  • Multiple invention rates appear stable over time (1800-1970) and across categories (electrical, chemical, mechanical, etc.), suggesting ideas emerge when conditions are ripe.
  • Key takeaway: Inventions often arise from obvious ideas or pressing problems, leading to convergent solutions by multiple inventors independently.
  • Clancy's work suggests unrecognized important ideas may be at higher risk of being missed, but this analysis finds high multiple invention rates even for retrospectively significant inventions.
  • The phenomenon reflects a 'collective evolutionary timeline,' where innovations emerge when societal and technological conditions align.