So, you realize that precisely describes a telegraph, right!?
Any signal transmitting some data. In the times of telegraph there was no modern concepts of "data" and "digital". Also, information transmitted over telegraph in no way interfere with transmission itself. The concept of data networks managed by transmitted data was created only in 50s.
Just staying a fact even if they did not commonly use the terms.
Btw, when we're fiber optic multiplexers invented?
Cellular transmitters?
But, the broader point I was making is that it is arbitrary and wrong to claim some specific date as the last time we had "technological breakthroughs" every technology is just a refinement or adaptation of previous technology, it is a ladder not a springboard.
Agriculture has been practiced since prehistory in various forms and fashions, but Greg "agricultural breakthrough" happened when? Yet when compared to modern agricultural technology, the "agricultural revolution" might as well be foraging for nuts and berries.
Steam eninges existed since at least Archimedes' time, he made designs for them, yet not until the 18th century did they cause a "breakthrough"
Btw, when we're fiber optic multiplexers invented?
Using of diffractional gratings to mux and demux lights of different colors fall even to 19 century. Fiber optic also used long before networking times, from multifiber flexible image transmitting "cables" to single-fiber applications.
Cellular transmitters?
Transievers of cellular equipment are no different from other transievers. 1G NMT/AMPS and 2G GSM transievers have no specific at all. 2G CDMA / 3G / 4G / 5G transievers was slightly different, due to wide band and channel division technology, but they are no very different from DSSS transievers from late 1940s (yes, it could be hard to accept that digital DSSS is so old, but it is).
every technology is just a refinement or adaptation of previous technology, it is a ladder not a springboard.
No. Back to the laser. There was no any previous device that was somehow similar to the laser at all. There existed separate knowledge of different things that works in laser, but nobody even predicted the properties of laser beams. Same with nuclear reactors, all semiconductor devices, and many other pre-70s inventions and discoveries.
Ladder is what we have now. Only technological improvements, no any new effects, no new principles, nothing. Internal combustion engine in your car use same theory, principles and effects as century ago. All semiconductors "miracle" around is nothing more than miniaturization of pre-70s semiconductor devices. Even in nanometer scale manufacturing process of all that GHz 64bit processors that magnitude orders more powerful than all pre-70s computers nothing new is used.
IDK, if you get the point, but I'm talking about things never existed before. Again with laser - nobody nowhere saw anything like laser beam. And after few scientists mixed some theories, here it is. Same with all other stuff I'm talking about. You will not find anything post-70s that never existed before and come to existence after some scientific work.
I even have an explanation of how that was done - imagine, that some scientists today want to explore some mix of science things that never was explored before. They don't know what they will get eventually (like that laser beam with unusual and unpredicted properties), they even don't know will it work at all. They only suppose that they could find something new and interesting. How do you think, what are their chances to get a grant?
Steam eninges existed since at least Archimedes' time, he made designs for them, yet not until the 18th century did they cause a "breakthrough"
The breakthrough was in using cylinder-piston system to convert steam energy to the movement. Unlike previous designs cylinder-piston system was useable. IIRC it was Huygens at the end of 17 century, who proposed first cylinder-piston design. It was question of only decade when first steam engine that used cylinder-piston design was made and was really useful, unlike that ancient toys.
No. Back to the laser. There was no any previous device that was somehow similar to the laser at all. There existed separate knowledge of different things that works in laser, but nobody even predicted the properties of laser beams.
This is patently false. The propagation and amplification of waves in a medium was well known with water and sound a hundred or two years before the laser was theorized (if we want to give Einstein the credit, more than 100 years ago.) The technology and tools to use this same theory on light simply had not been developed yet. Lasers do not use some revolutionary or novel physical process, rather an evolution of already known physical process into a new medium. It was not anything like you say, that lasers just sprung up from nowhere.
Out of curiosity, why do you choose the 1970's? It appears to me you could say 1950s for your main focal points... both lasers and semiconductors were being developed by then, what came in the 1970's?
(Also, btw, I would posit that quantum computers, if they ever become practical, will be the next "breakthrough" equivalent to semi-conductors. There is controversy about them and they are clearly only in a development stage, but so was laser technology in the 50's...)
Also, as a generalized answer to your questions, we are entering a collapse stage of society right now, new breakthroughs generally occur after collapses, not at the beginning.
Care to explain how you come to this completely incorrect conclusion?
A digital signal is one that transmits information only using two discreet states (1,0 or on,off etc.)
This is exactly how the telegraph operated, the circuit is either open or closed, and information was encoded and transmitted as a digital signal.
The fact that the Morse code used on telegraphs has variable periodicity to its signal ( .,-) does not make it non-digital because the fundamental mechanics of the device allow only on and off.
The earliest digital information transmitting, however, would be flashing a light or using reflective materials to flash sunlight in a purposeful pattern.
Because words mean things. Digital data is actual binary encoded by a computer. Clapping your hands or reflecting light isn't digital. And the variable length obviously does matter, though even if it wasn't variable length it still wouldn't be digital.
Oh, you are not understanding that "digital" is not a single usage...
In computer specific terms, sure, you are probably correct, it sounds correct.
But in the world of signal transmission, digital refers only to a data signal that can perform only two states, on and off, as opposed to analogue signals which can vary in amplitude, frequency, etc. The device encoding or decoding the signal is irrelevant, digital vs analogue is a characteristic of the signal itself.
So, you realize that precisely describes a telegraph, right!? A method of transmitting data using only 2 states, on and off, or 1 and 0...
Any signal transmitting some data. In the times of telegraph there was no modern concepts of "data" and "digital". Also, information transmitted over telegraph in no way interfere with transmission itself. The concept of data networks managed by transmitted data was created only in 50s.
Just staying a fact even if they did not commonly use the terms.
Btw, when we're fiber optic multiplexers invented?
Cellular transmitters?
But, the broader point I was making is that it is arbitrary and wrong to claim some specific date as the last time we had "technological breakthroughs" every technology is just a refinement or adaptation of previous technology, it is a ladder not a springboard.
Agriculture has been practiced since prehistory in various forms and fashions, but Greg "agricultural breakthrough" happened when? Yet when compared to modern agricultural technology, the "agricultural revolution" might as well be foraging for nuts and berries.
Steam eninges existed since at least Archimedes' time, he made designs for them, yet not until the 18th century did they cause a "breakthrough"
Using of diffractional gratings to mux and demux lights of different colors fall even to 19 century. Fiber optic also used long before networking times, from multifiber flexible image transmitting "cables" to single-fiber applications.
Transievers of cellular equipment are no different from other transievers. 1G NMT/AMPS and 2G GSM transievers have no specific at all. 2G CDMA / 3G / 4G / 5G transievers was slightly different, due to wide band and channel division technology, but they are no very different from DSSS transievers from late 1940s (yes, it could be hard to accept that digital DSSS is so old, but it is).
No. Back to the laser. There was no any previous device that was somehow similar to the laser at all. There existed separate knowledge of different things that works in laser, but nobody even predicted the properties of laser beams. Same with nuclear reactors, all semiconductor devices, and many other pre-70s inventions and discoveries.
Ladder is what we have now. Only technological improvements, no any new effects, no new principles, nothing. Internal combustion engine in your car use same theory, principles and effects as century ago. All semiconductors "miracle" around is nothing more than miniaturization of pre-70s semiconductor devices. Even in nanometer scale manufacturing process of all that GHz 64bit processors that magnitude orders more powerful than all pre-70s computers nothing new is used.
IDK, if you get the point, but I'm talking about things never existed before. Again with laser - nobody nowhere saw anything like laser beam. And after few scientists mixed some theories, here it is. Same with all other stuff I'm talking about. You will not find anything post-70s that never existed before and come to existence after some scientific work.
I even have an explanation of how that was done - imagine, that some scientists today want to explore some mix of science things that never was explored before. They don't know what they will get eventually (like that laser beam with unusual and unpredicted properties), they even don't know will it work at all. They only suppose that they could find something new and interesting. How do you think, what are their chances to get a grant?
The breakthrough was in using cylinder-piston system to convert steam energy to the movement. Unlike previous designs cylinder-piston system was useable. IIRC it was Huygens at the end of 17 century, who proposed first cylinder-piston design. It was question of only decade when first steam engine that used cylinder-piston design was made and was really useful, unlike that ancient toys.
This is patently false. The propagation and amplification of waves in a medium was well known with water and sound a hundred or two years before the laser was theorized (if we want to give Einstein the credit, more than 100 years ago.) The technology and tools to use this same theory on light simply had not been developed yet. Lasers do not use some revolutionary or novel physical process, rather an evolution of already known physical process into a new medium. It was not anything like you say, that lasers just sprung up from nowhere.
Out of curiosity, why do you choose the 1970's? It appears to me you could say 1950s for your main focal points... both lasers and semiconductors were being developed by then, what came in the 1970's?
(Also, btw, I would posit that quantum computers, if they ever become practical, will be the next "breakthrough" equivalent to semi-conductors. There is controversy about them and they are clearly only in a development stage, but so was laser technology in the 50's...)
Also, as a generalized answer to your questions, we are entering a collapse stage of society right now, new breakthroughs generally occur after collapses, not at the beginning.
Telegraphs weren't digital
Care to explain how you come to this completely incorrect conclusion?
A digital signal is one that transmits information only using two discreet states (1,0 or on,off etc.)
This is exactly how the telegraph operated, the circuit is either open or closed, and information was encoded and transmitted as a digital signal.
The fact that the Morse code used on telegraphs has variable periodicity to its signal ( .,-) does not make it non-digital because the fundamental mechanics of the device allow only on and off.
The earliest digital information transmitting, however, would be flashing a light or using reflective materials to flash sunlight in a purposeful pattern.
Semaphore is an analogue signal medium.
Because words mean things. Digital data is actual binary encoded by a computer. Clapping your hands or reflecting light isn't digital. And the variable length obviously does matter, though even if it wasn't variable length it still wouldn't be digital.
Oh, you are not understanding that "digital" is not a single usage...
In computer specific terms, sure, you are probably correct, it sounds correct.
But in the world of signal transmission, digital refers only to a data signal that can perform only two states, on and off, as opposed to analogue signals which can vary in amplitude, frequency, etc. The device encoding or decoding the signal is irrelevant, digital vs analogue is a characteristic of the signal itself.