On Aug 21, 2:10 pm, D Peter Maus wrote:
Ironic, that the very technology that permits you to publish
worldwide this diatribe about NASA....is a by-product of the space program.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Bull****. The internet would have, and did, evolve with or without the
existence of NASA. It's not surprising that their PR Dept. tries to
lay claim to makiing it all possible - a typical bureaucratic self
congratulatory agrandizement tactic while trying to justify its
existence. Raison d'être!

wrote:
On Aug 21, 2:10 pm, D Peter Maus wrote:
Ironic, that the very technology that permits you to publish
worldwide this diatribe about NASA....is a by-product of the space program.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Bull****. The internet would have, and did, evolve with or without the
existence of NASA. It's not surprising that their PR Dept. tries to
lay claim to makiing it all possible - a typical bureaucratic self
congratulatory agrandizement tactic while trying to justify its
existence. Raison d'être!



Take a step back. I'm not talking about the internet. But the
electronics that drives it. THAT is a by-product of the Space Program.

On Aug 21, 3:14 pm, D Peter Maus wrote:
wrote:
On Aug 21, 2:10 pm, D Peter Maus wrote:
Ironic, that the very technology that permits you to publish
worldwide this diatribe about NASA....is a by-product of the space program.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Bull****. The internet would have, and did, evolve with or without the
existence of NASA. It's not surprising that their PR Dept. tries to
lay claim to makiing it all possible - a typical bureaucratic self
congratulatory agrandizement tactic while trying to justify its
existence. Raison d'être!

Take a step back. I'm not talking about the internet. But the
electronics that drives it. THAT is a by-product of the Space Program.

Still bull****. The electronic technology that drives the internet
would have evolved with or without the existence of NASA - llkely
decades sooner had private enterprise and market forces been involved.
You employed by the NASA public relations juggernaut per chance?

wrote:
On Aug 21, 3:14 pm, D Peter Maus wrote:
wrote:
On Aug 21, 2:10 pm, D Peter Maus wrote:
Ironic, that the very technology that permits you to publish
worldwide this diatribe about NASA....is a by-product of the space program.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Bull****. The internet would have, and did, evolve with or without the
existence of NASA. It's not surprising that their PR Dept. tries to
lay claim to makiing it all possible - a typical bureaucratic self
congratulatory agrandizement tactic while trying to justify its
existence. Raison d'être!
Take a step back. I'm not talking about the internet. But the
electronics that drives it. THAT is a by-product of the Space Program.

Still bull****. The electronic technology that drives the internet
would have evolved with or without the existence of NASA - llkely
decades sooner had private enterprise and market forces been involved.


Actually, probably not. Without the mission critical pressures, to
create and develop new technolgies, the rate at which the electronics
would have developed through market forces would have been decades longer.

The transistor was invented in 1947. It took nearly a decade before
it was incorporated into a product because market forces are also
possessed of considerable inertia. And then it was trivial applications
like transistor radios. Production was slow, and rejection and failure
rates were high.

However, with mission critical pressures of the space program,
techniques needed to be developed to produce large scale miniaturized
electronics working at frequencies not even considered in terrestrial
applications. Which led to microwave technological innovations on a
grand scale. Driven by lower cost, higher volume, reliable production of
solid state devices, and rapid development of miniaturized computer
driven hardware.

Fuel cell technology had been known since WWII, but had never had a
real application. Practical results in the space program have given us
real world workable fuel cell technologies.

Battery technology developed by orders of magnitude through the space
program.

And medical knowledge has expanded more than a thousand fold through
the space program.

So, though technologies may have developed through commercial
channels, they didn't. They developed through NASA, and the space
program and its allied industries, without the participation of which,
they would likely have developed at a dramatically slower rate, or not
at all.


You employed by the NASA public relations juggernaut per chance?


No. I'm not now, nor have I ever been employed by or for NASA.

"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
wrote:

[snip]


The transistor was invented in 1947. It took nearly a decade before
it was incorporated into a product because market forces are also
possessed of considerable inertia. And then it was trivial applications
like transistor radios. Production was slow, and rejection and failure
rates were high.

I know I'm sorta nitpicking here, but the transistor we're familiar with,
the junction transistor was invented in 48, but Bell Labs didn't announce it
until 1951. It was first commercially used in hearing aids in 1952.

http://semiconductormuseum.com/Photo...lery_CK718.htm


However, with mission critical pressures of the space program,
techniques needed to be developed to produce large scale miniaturized
electronics working at frequencies not even considered in terrestrial
applications. Which led to microwave technological innovations on a
grand scale. Driven by lower cost, higher volume, reliable production of
solid state devices, and rapid development of miniaturized computer
driven hardware.

Fuel cell technology had been known since WWII, but had never had a
real application. Practical results in the space program have given us
real world workable fuel cell technologies.

Battery technology developed by orders of magnitude through the space
program.

And medical knowledge has expanded more than a thousand fold through
the space program.

And all that can be said in spades for military technological development.

I used to have an old Radio-Electronics magazine from 1965 or so which
included an article about the upcoming integrated circuit revolution. It
said that 90% of the then current IC production capacity was being used for
military production. It was expected to be 50-50 around 1970 and then
consumer production would explode.

The silicon transistor was developed around 1955 and it's early production
was also dominated by the military.

[snip]

Frank Dresser

Frank Dresser wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
wrote:

[snip]

The transistor was invented in 1947. It took nearly a decade before
it was incorporated into a product because market forces are also
possessed of considerable inertia. And then it was trivial applications
like transistor radios. Production was slow, and rejection and failure
rates were high.

I know I'm sorta nitpicking here, but the transistor we're familiar with,
the junction transistor was invented in 48, but Bell Labs didn't announce it
until 1951. It was first commercially used in hearing aids in 1952.



According to Shockley's papers, 1947.

I'm not familiar with the hearing aid appliction. Again, Shockely's
papers report the first use in 56 or 57, in consumer entertainment
applications.

Not bad for what was intended to be an industrial switch.

Thanks for the tip, though.


http://semiconductormuseum.com/Photo...lery_CK718.htm

However, with mission critical pressures of the space program,
techniques needed to be developed to produce large scale miniaturized
electronics working at frequencies not even considered in terrestrial
applications. Which led to microwave technological innovations on a
grand scale. Driven by lower cost, higher volume, reliable production of
solid state devices, and rapid development of miniaturized computer
driven hardware.

Fuel cell technology had been known since WWII, but had never had a
real application. Practical results in the space program have given us
real world workable fuel cell technologies.

Battery technology developed by orders of magnitude through the space
program.

And medical knowledge has expanded more than a thousand fold through
the space program.

And all that can be said in spades for military technological development.

I used to have an old Radio-Electronics magazine from 1965 or so which
included an article about the upcoming integrated circuit revolution. It
said that 90% of the then current IC production capacity was being used for
military production. It was expected to be 50-50 around 1970 and then
consumer production would explode.


Oh yeah. The technology that came out of WWII for instance fueled
generations of innovation.



The silicon transistor was developed around 1955 and it's early production
was also dominated by the military.


I remember reading that military leaders attempted to corral all
silicon transistor production to keep it out of the hands of general
interests, and our enemies.

The Cold War did wonders for technological evolution.

CBX, did you say you used to work for them, as in NASA? Was there a
woman who worked there when you was there? I think her last name is
Green.Did you read that article in Popular Mechanics magazine about five
something years ago about that woman who retired from NASA and she said
NASA is broken.I have that magazine floatin around here somewhere,
(because I subscribe to that magazine (Popular Science magazine too,
snail mail home delivery) but it would take me forever to find it.I am
sooooo unorganized and lazyyyy.Head on over to your local area libraries
and see can you find that article.If you do, copy it on a library
copying machine and take it home and scan it and post it in this
newsgroup for all the World to read.
cuhulin

And whilst is while, Actually.
cuhulin

wrote:

On Aug 21, 2:10 pm, D Peter Maus wrote:
Ironic, that the very technology that permits you to publish
worldwide this diatribe about NASA....is a by-product of the space
program.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Bull****. The internet would have, and did, evolve with or without the
existence of NASA. It's not surprising that their PR Dept. tries to
lay claim to makiing it all possible - a typical bureaucratic self
congratulatory agrandizement tactic while trying to justify its
existence. Raison d'être!
perhaps you need to read your history a bit more.
computer technology (such as that used on the internet) was directly
descended from research projects at AT&T and NASA.

If NASA had not existed, and we had NOT gone to the moon, we would still be
using older style modems and probably just getting to the TRS-80 Model 1
about now.