I’ve been reading the “Science of the Discworld” series and enjoying the immensely. The science (for me at least) is fairly hard core and stretches my brain cells a fair bit, and I love anything by Terry Pratchett anyway — it makes a great combination.
A concept that is referred to quite a bit in the third book is the idea of “Steam Engine Time”. The questions is would James Watt, who made several key advances in Steam Engine technology (and is commonly, but mistakenly, known as the inventor of the steam engine), been successful if it wasn’t “Steam Engine Time”. Another way of thinking about this, is if James didn’t come along, would someone else of had his insights?
While it’s hard to unpick history, it’s clear that the Steam Engine has existed for many years, indeed powering various religious articles by steam dates back to ancient greece — if you’re an ancient priest, there is nothing like a mysterious door raised by steam power to impress the local supplicants and improve your standing with your God.
The conclusion seems to be that almost certainly someone would of had the idea (indeed there were others on similar tracks at the same time). I’m not here to debate it in great detail, other than to say I think there is real merit in this concept that a “Steam Engine Time” comes along and everyone is on a similar path at the same time. For example, without the fact that there were wealthy mineowners who needed solutions for pumping water from ever deeper mines, James may not of got his funding, conversely, if he hadn’t come along, there would of still been a need for the solution and money to find it.
Clearly the same phenomonom exists on the internet — in fact there is undoubtably an “Internet time” which was driven by many different causes, but regardless, I suspect something like the internet as we know it (World Wide Web) would of come along with, or without, Tim Berners-Lee. As we all know, the internet itself existed way back into the 70’s.
Another good example is the “Palm pilot time”, there were other devices (notably the Apple Newton) which did similar things and failed to various degree, eventually Palm were such a dominate player that there was a definite “Palm pilot time”.
The clear connecting thread in all of these is that there is a period of lead up where different concepts and parts of the idea exist, followed by a boom when someone eventually clicks with the right combination and the idea becomes widely and inevitably accepted, often like wild-fire.
I have several posts in mind over the next few days where I’ll refer back to this idea, so I wanted to make sure it was explained clearly first. Suffice to say, the question forming in my mind is simply “what time are we in now?”
If innovation is a process of the right idea, in the right place and at the right time, how do we judge what the right time is and measure what is going on around us to hit the right spot?
August 8th, 2007 at 10:30 pm
Interesting question, which I have come across in my thoughts a few times.
I think everything is inevitable, but we shouldn’t underestimate the individuals above. I’ve been doing a lot of reading on the origins of hypertext, and Berners-Lee’s creation of the web is a perfect example of what you are referring to. The guy that invented hypertext - 40 years on - is still trying to build it (Ted Nelson and the infamous Project Xanadu). There were also several hypertext systems floating around - but the brilliance of TBL’s hypertext system was that he kept it simple. So yes, a hypertext system would have been created eventually - and there were several in use academically and commercially (like apples hypermedia system), but not necessarily the world wide web.
If two people are looking at the exact same thing, and then one of them comes up with something that the other didn’t realise, we say that person is creative or intelligent. Knowledge and innovation to me - and arguably intelligence - is all about connecting the dots. TBL is said to have tried to mimic the human brain when he created the web with links. We can often dismiss smart ideas or people because what they came up with is so simple and obvious - but it takes a unique mind to connect the dots.
Another perspective - plenty of people probably did have the idea. But ideas need more than just thoughts to happen. And often, it’s the execution that is the hard thing and unrecognised with all great innovations.
August 9th, 2007 at 7:55 pm
Totally agree.
I don’t want to trivialise the insights these people had at all - I seriously doubt the various contributions to human progress were accidental. There is no doubt in my mind that innovation is hard work http://binaryplex.com/2007/04/21/the-battle-to-innovate/
What I’m interested in is how do you know which insights are occuring at the right time for them to strike fertile ground and succeed? And is this even possible? Perhaps only hind-sight can tell.
August 11th, 2007 at 8:29 pm
[...] an interesting discussion point on when is the right time to innovate. In a post titled “Steam engine time“, he asks: If innovation is a process of the right idea, in the right place and at the right [...]
August 21st, 2007 at 9:55 pm
[...] posted about the concept of a Steam Engine Time, so is it time for an intelligent RSS reader. A friend pointed me in the direction of Illumio, [...]
June 12th, 2009 at 11:51 pm
I am belting a system that’s attached in steam engine. If you have to attach it in steam engine then you don’t want to out put power to run your engine. It is a steam recycler if you once start it then it had run always. For start it wants out put electricity for few time. And it doesn’t wants to refill its boiler.
Sir what will I do now?