Peter Graham said:Stick to the subject. This is a light bulb thread !rich said:Morse - now he was a controversial character! (Not meaning the detective from Oxford)
Sorry Peter! OK then, who invented the light bulb?
Peter Graham said:Stick to the subject. This is a light bulb thread !rich said:Morse - now he was a controversial character! (Not meaning the detective from Oxford)
Ah ha ! Check this.rich said:T'was not he apparently...............
rich said:I read that Swan's patent was granted in 1878, nearly a year before Edison's. This from Wiki.........
Edison did not invent the first electric light bulb, but instead invented the first commercially practical incandescent light. Several designs had already been developed by earlier inventors including the patent he purchased from Henry Woodward and Mathew Evans, Moses G. Farmer, Joseph Swan, James Bowman Lindsay, William E. Sawyer, Sir Humphry Davy, and Heinrich Göbel. Some of these early bulbs had such flaws as an extremely short life, high expense to produce, and high electric current drawn, making them difficult to apply on a large scale commercially. In 1878, Edison applied the term filament to the element of glowing wire carrying the current, although the English inventor Joseph Swan had used the term prior to this. Edison took the features of these earlier designs and set his workers to the task of creating longer-lasting bulbs. By 1879, he had produced a new concept: a high resistance lamp in a very high vacuum, which would burn for hundreds of hours.
rich said:i stand corrected......and impressed!
rich said:what's QI?
Cliff said:Pssst !!! I happen to know a chap who makes very passable repro lamp. He uses genuine brass for the bayonet or screw fitting bases. You can ring or email him and will fit either option for you with no extra cost. He does and good "Phillips", "Mullard", and the now very rare "Osram". The good thing is that you can use them as an everyday lamp without fear of ruining a real vintage lamp. The good thing is that they are a mere £499 each !! :lol: :lol: :lol:
Hamsterbear said:4 to say "didn't we go through this already a short time ago?"
Everyone who is worth his mettle in this field can tell you that "Mullard" never had a contract! If he is passing off Mullards as repros of the genuine thing, what does that say of his other goodies... I ask you!Cliff said:"Mullard":
Now this is deep man, really deep, and very intense. I very nearly choked on this one! THANK YOU!Cliff said:Are you refering to that age old thing where a point source which spreads its influence equally in all directions without a limit to its range will obey the inverse square law. This comes from strictly geometrical considerations. The intensity of the influence at any given radius is the source strength divided by the area of the sphere. Being strictly geometric in its origin, the inverse square law applies to diverse phenomena. Point sources of gravitational force, electric field, light, sound or radiation obey the inverse square law.............or you can have it in goat or steer hide !! :geek: :lol: :lol: