they said okay, exploded at 150 feet. that's the best average. the trouble was scientists realized once they started sifting through the data it had been out of site for 45 seconds even though the death charges were probably exploding at the right depth on average,

[inaudible] we're missing their targets. in fact the results were positively dismal. fewer than 1% of all cited were being successfully attacked. the scientists propossessed an -- proposed an incredibly simple change involving no new anything. change the deathing on the -- setting on the death charges from 100 feet only attack u boats that had been out of sight for less than fifteen seconds. when they carried out an attack, the target would be at the right depth and the right place. u-boats had a small fifteen second wind dough wouldn't have had time to take action. the scientists calculated it would increase the successful kill rate from 1% to 10%. now imagine if you had approached the military

commandedder and said we have the incredible new wonder weapon that is more powerful explosive and will increase by a factor of 10 for success in it would have been astonishing. there was in weapon it changed depth setting. sure enough when the results were implemented it was almost exactly at that. astonishing. it took some convincing to get the change introduced, as you can imagine. when it happened the results were undenialble. that. change along transformed the anti-submarine war campaign from almost ineffectivenesses in 1941, as i mentioned, to the decisive battle of war winning operation it would become by 1943 and by that summer of 1943, it effectively knocked the u

boat of the war and ensured the success of d-day. repeatedly a similar team of scientists that were established by the u.s. navy after america's entry to the war produced equally results. doubling or tripling the effect of the existing weapons. again through fairly simple able seize and asking the right questions about tactical strategic decisions that had been often made by tradition, history, circumstance, rather than rigorous analysis. the most powerful piece of new technology was the back of the. one time they wrote out a few lines that lead to another dramatic jump in the air campaign against the u boat. he was visiting western command

which oversaw all of the envoy crossing the atlantic, bringing the vital supply to britain. they had a large map, they were also tracking what they believed were the known position of u boat, and they knew that u boat mostly traveled on the surface. he he was able to figure out how many u. boats should have been spotted. when he compared them to the actually numbers were being spotted, they were only finding a third or a fourth number. so apparently in other words the u-boats were seeing the control plains saw the u-boats giving them time to dive and escape. well, all sorts of fanciful ideas were proposed that explained what was going on, but the answer turned out to be very simple yet overlooked.

one day an air force officer asked what color? it turned out most were planetted baseball because they were night blockers. black is a good color if you don't want to be seen bay search light. it's the worst possible color if you don't want to be seen against a sky by day. repainting the underside of the wings white of the planes let to a cobling of u-boats citing. one every 700 hours to one every 350 hours. imagine if you were a commander and you went to your commander in chief or to the prime minister and said we would like to have twice as many airplanes. he wouldn't have gotten it. it would have produced the same

effect by the analysis and effect. now after the war, in fact, took pains to emphasis it wasn't really the case of a bunch of brilliant scientists telling, you know, showing how stupid the military commanders were as much as it might have sounded like that. he said most of the time it turned out the military was doing things. but by going back to square one, they again, and again turned up small points that overlooked the fill morris, who was the m.i.t. physicist that headed american anti-submarine research effort after the war wrote something in order to show how the same idea could be applied to business and many sort of every day practical problems. and his favorite example, he cited, he said it was an trivial but very good illustration of

what operations research could do. one of his scientists was out in the field visiting some fairly rough con decisions, and he noticed after every meal there was a huge line of soldiers waiting to wash the mess kit. being a good operationers researcher he started timing what was going on. they had four wash tubs, two for washing your mess kit and two for rinsing. there was a huge backup. he timed how long it took each operation. he noticed it took three times as long to wash as to rinse it. so he finally said, you know, if you have three tubs for washing and one more rinsing it will speed things up. not only did the line shrink, the license vanished

completely. actually, that's a common phenomena with the operation research analysis but not diminishing but increasing. the lines tend to ferment lines. it if you can find the bottle neck and remove it, often, you know, it's the seemingly miraculous result. now one more important illustration was the work carried out -- a brilliant eccentric british geneticist. he managed to triple the number of flying hours that the command air scrod rones able to carry out. not adding a single airplane or additional man to the ground crew but summerly by looking where the bottle necks were in routine maintenance operations, looking at what components broke

most often and rearranging procedure and routine. one wing commander asked about his work was full of praise. i think he showed exactly what the scientist were sometimes up against when it came to traditional military attitude. he said, an efficient chap. he was no gentleman. [laughter] it was an extraordinarily diverse group of men and women what made up the british and research teams that were fizzists, mathematician, botanist, and one expert on the sex life of the ohser, as described by the colleague with no exaggeration. it was actually the only one i'm aware of that had any military background at all. what they shared was the scientific mind set and no

preconceived notion. it was also crucial, i think, they were outside. they were not military professionals. they had no career on the line and there were only the results mattered. he advised one of his colleagues to turn it down. he said it was far better to remain a civilian so he could talk back to admiral he was told. i think the civilians also meant, it was quite important factor, they could more easily talk to and associate with the enlisted men who as everyone in the military knows really knows what's going on. one of the operational researchers who called his colleague got most of the useful information by hanging out in the pub where the nco went which lead him to conclude 90 percent of operational research is

beer. [laughter] i found the sociological aspect of what blackett and later his american counter parts did, actually bit as fascinating as the technical scientific details. it took an incredible amount of tact and understanding of bureaucracy politics on the force of blackett to obtain permission in the first place to be embedded with squad ron not just to see secondhand data but see how things worked and be able to ask questions. blackett, i think, very shortly decided his group was not going stake his reputation to fight for small, or marginal or implemented group. he said if it was going require some complex scientific statistical analysis to prove they had actually made things better, they were never going

persuade the admiral and generallies. he said they had to concentrate on the things that produce results that were dramatic they would speak for themselves as in fact he did for that example of changing color of the camouflage. these were examples that convinced initially disbelieving officer that the civilian intellectuals did have something. like wise, blackett said, they needed to stifle the natural tendency of scientists to sit around intellectualizing about a problem for the own sake. he told his colleagues that there this was not the situation like the own labs, their job was to improve things if they can, and if not keep quiet. on the american side, phil morris from the outset showed an

arguably more skilled understanding of bureaucracy and military bureaucracy. to make it an absolute rule, in fact, he required everyone read this every single month same standing instructions. he said we have to be able to get her mission to -- per notion talk to the operation squadron. we have to be able to talk from everyone from high to low to gather the facts. we can't be seen as some sort of spy who are going to tell on them they're doing something wrong. and even more important, the credit has to go to the demand -- commanding office. we report to the commanding officer. he cautioned all of the scientist and said don't try to claim credit for yourself our job did is to help win the war not run it others. well, i want to mention one other point that fascinated me in the course of my research

before i get to questions. and while i definitely set out to write the story of the nerds who won world war ii. i would not expecting i was going to write the -- it was a striking fact emerged with the blackett and many of the scientists pioneered operations research and help to win the very crucial victory against the u-boats were hard left marxist or literally communists. it turned out there was several important reasons for this. it's interesting and important understand most basic scientists until the 1920s or so were actually as a matter of principle not -- earnest rutherford ran the lab bore. britain told his student it is would harm your objectivity for

detachment as a scientist if you were involved in politic. you should not be involved in politics in any way. two things changed one was the great depression. blackett was one of many scientists in the 1930s who was fourous as what he saw as this incomprehensible disconnect between the incredible discovery that were being made in the laboratory, there was the colden age in physics incredible breakthrough and discovery that understanding of being made so there was that on the one hand, on the other hand it was miserable poverty of the working population. i think that was particularly true with britain. britain in a sense the stock market crashed of 1929, and the great depression. here was less and which become a

worldwide phenomena. they saw a situation which was not benefiting science as a society as a whole. they concluded that the rational organization -- the other important factor was that scientists had far more international context than almost any other segment of society. and so far sooner than mo very were aware of the nazi germany beginning with the persecution and dismissal of all jewish scientist from the universities in 1933. blackett himself was involved as many of these british-american scientists were during this period in finding physicians for

refew refugee i think the politics was far less supportive that night brilliance, the commitment, and the true fearless. the scientist in britain and america involved in this including no fewer than six past or future nobel prize winners. what they showed was even in something as uncertain and tradition bound as war, scientific thinking was crucial to victory. observed that hitler had a romantic or the belief in power of destiny, individual heroism even magical thinking and -- hitler and his generals broke the official historian failed to produce any operational research

comparable to the allied development. if they had, they probably would have won the submarine campaign and the war. thank you very much. thank you very coming. i would be delighted to answer any questions. it's been a pleasure. [applause] if you have questions, wait for the microphone so we can get your question heard and recorded. how did you research the topics give of what happened seven, -- eighty years ago? >> there was very interesting array of sources of available. i went to london and spent fascinating days look at blackett's papers. public record office in dlon has

a lot of reports cone by the anti-submarine operational research group. a lot of memos all the way up to church hill. it's interesting, churchill had a very strange relationship with him. he was a -- which was wonderful. he sometimes got caried away with the pet ideas of his which was terrible waste of time and effort. there was -- i mentioned the work on-air craft maintenance. in the british archive is a memo from churchill, the same month the work began fully aware of it. fully supporting it, mentioning saying i understand this is going to be a triple the number of flying hours. please continue, it was very interested. on the american side, slr -- similarly the national archives here in washington has a lot of reports, a lot of the memos.

and a number of the sign -- all of them are dead now, but in the 1970s, some of the professional societies involved in operations search did some world history. there's new reminiscent, very spotty, of course, a few nice personal telling details. >> you mentioned that one of the important aspect of operation of research was that scientist and -- [inaudible] aren't part of the military. is that the case today? >> yeah. , you know, it's been a fascinating question to me. in thinking about it, and i think part of the lesson of world war ii in a sense that our entire society is -- [inaudible] the most brilliant scientific mind. the most brilliant legal minds,

people who had no interest in a year in the military and some ways people who were almost opposite of the kind of person able to stand have the military career. i don't mean that disparagingly. i mean, it wouldn't have been the kind of thing that was part of their personality. there was a sense of urgency, a sense of breaking the rules when necessary, improvization, that was true certainly in the code breaking effort as well. it was true in special operations and espionage, and i think on the one hand, we can say it really is an accomplishment that scientific understanding is now, you know, second nature. it's been professionalized. that's good, but, you know, we lost something too because the

greatest mind in science are not playing this role in the military. the greatest legal minds and mathematical. so you to keep them under control. i'm not saying the scientist with the -- i think we have lost something that you have people who are making it a career who are part of the chain of command and, you know, you saw this actually. i try to follow through just a bit at. end of what happened ever operation research? it was a great try yomp but a success is part of standard military thinking. in the 50s and early '60s you saw a lot of cases where the or researchers who were now often civilian employee of the navy or army were giving the answers that generals wanted. and so, you know, it's a very

interesting question. years ago, i was talking to general bill odom who had been nsa director, it was right at the time -- new thinking about things and he said, you know, he said we ought to have a ceremony. run down the flag in front of the cia. say we won the cold war we're abolishing the cia and start a completely new education from scratch because, you know, he was -- we lost something when, i mean, bureaucracy is, you know, become -- in themselves. >> how quickly after the war did operations research move in to industry? >> yeah. very quick.

it's interesting, phil who headed u.s. anti-submarine or effort very quickly decides we're going to accomplish a program at m.i.t. i think it was the mid '50s had begun. they students founding the operation research society of america which was very much focused 0en civilian problems, you know, everything from scheduling, firefighters, work ships to water flow on dam to problems of managing bottle necks in warehouses and factory these guys, i think became aware of the larger possibility. some was because of their politic. we thought we proved what central planning and scientifically informed central

ranking can do in the world when the victory against the u u-boats and we're going have, you know, scientific socialism organized industry particularly britain. which was much more resistant or lack of interest. it didn't work out that way. the civilian economy is vastly more complex than the problems defeating u-boats. in the war against the u-boats everyone agreed on the measure. it was how many shipses you saved and how many u-boats you spunk. when dealing with the economy what is the measure? it depends on the political view. the efforts were less successful. certainly in term of a discipline that could be applied to practical problem and industry would be very quickly

[inaudible] what i was doing as a young jean was -- [inaudible] >> the studies went back earlier, and i think tended to have somewhat, you know, narrower focus, and the or guys were making broader for how much the approach could be applied particularly when you got to things of analyzing work flow and scheduling and analyzing where the bottle necks were. that was -- and i think they were probably right. it was at least the concept. >> okay. yeah. and, you know, look, there have this great memo from one annoyed

british bureaucrat from around this time, we are talking 1950. i think, you know, just getting back to the anti-submarine story world war ii, they really did something, i think, fundamentally new which was to say basic questions about mill strair strategy are even amenable to a scientific. -only done peacefully. >> i wonder if your research came across a guy named johnny walker? >> johnny walker? >> not the scotch. >> yeah. no. who was he?

>> he was one of the most successfully anti-submarine guys in the british navy? >> he was an officer? he was . >> he was a maverick. >> yeah. >> he was fortunate. some people wanted to sack him a few times. he actually produced the results. >> any other questions. thank you very much. [applause] general john allen you can watch this entire remarks from the brookings institution at c-span.org. >> i've known president very well for some period of time. let me take a minute to talk

about my own relationship. it's in that context i hear those comments. i've known since early i didn't '09 but got to know him very well from the time i took command in mid '11 to draw freeze from ryan's book president karzai has the hardest job on the planet. with the numbers of years he's been in place, the things that he has had to deal with on a regular basis he has -- he does have a difficult mission. he has a difficult set of challenges on any given day on virtually all issues. he has to balance a domestic constituency that is both triable and ethic, he has to balance his rhetoric with the potential for peace. he has to balance what he says

with regard to his regional anybody -- neighbors. all of that goes in to the pot, i think, what he says and how he says it and where he says it. when i was in afghanistan, my mother passed away. i didn't tell anybody. i didn't want anybody to focus on that. i didn't tell him, of course. eventually i had had a chance to come home and lay my mother to rest. and after wards my family we were having dinner, and he called me, i got a call that the palace wanted to talk to me in the diabetesser of the sheen dough -- diabetesser of -- diner of the shenandoah valley and it was president karzai and he said i learned your mother died. he said why didn't you tell me? i said you carry the weight of

the world on the shoulder. he said our mothers and families are pressure -- precious to us. even though i just learned about it, i want you to have my condolences and i want to know how shower i am for your loss. he didn't have to do that. the relationship he had he called me after i came back here just to offer his best wishes. he said we didn't see eye to eye on a number of things didn't see eye to eye on a lot of things actually. he said you did what you believe is the rest for your country. i have tried to do the best i believe i can do for my country. so with that as context, he has to balance a a lot of things in the palace, in kabul, and across the country in what he says. often those remarks, i believe, are intended to draw the

distinction between him at the leader of afghanistan and those who have supported him from the international community for some period of time. so he does appear to be the sovereign independent leader of a country seeking to move from a post conflict environment to a developing society. and sometimes that rhetoric is harsh. we don't have to agree with it. we don't have to cob done it. we don't have to like it. and on those occasions where i've publicly been confronted in testimony primarily to some of the rhetoric, i in fact reject it. i reject comments which would put our troops at risk. that would put his troops at risk. and if in fact the president truly does believe that the u.s. is colluding with the taliban, i'm here to tell you i would know. and we ain't. >> tomorrow night booktv prime

time looks at the lasting influence of three books, at 8:00 p.m. the los angeles times joins us we'll talk to harvard law school professional. later "the wall street journallers" reporters on public sector job losses and the economy. plus your calls, e mails and tweets. washington journal, each morning at 7:00 eastern on c-span.

a naturalization ceremony at the white house, president obama urged congress topaz immigration reform legislation. it's twenty minutes. ladies and gentlemen, please rise for the president of the united states. accompanied by sector gamp, and direct -- janet napolitano and director. remain standing for the national anthem of the united states. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ mr. president, madam secretary, candidates for naturalization, distinguished guests, good morning. today is a special day and i'm

honored to be here with you. my i have the privilege of serving as a director of u.s. citizenship and immigration services. the agency that administrates our nation's immigration benefits. [inaudible conversations] thank you, mr. president. i, myself, am a naturalized citizens having arrived in the country as a refew agree from cuba. before me are 28 individuals who have chosen the united states as their adoptive country. they have decided to take important step of becoming united states citizens. among them are thirteen members of our armed forces, representing all four branches of the military. their commitment and dedication to this country should serve as an inspiration to all

americans. candidate for naturalization, when i call your country of current nationality, please stand and remain standing. afghanistan, american sam moe with a, bahamas, bangladesh, bolivia, canada, china, colombia, dominican republic, el salvador, ethiopia, germany, india, italy, jamaica, mexico, morocco, nicaragua, nigeria, peru, philippines, south africa, south korea, saint lucia, ukraine. if i did nautical -- not spaws -- call your country, please

stand. i would like to like to call janet napolitano to administrate the oath of allegiance. i present to you twenty eight candidates of naturalization. all have been interviewed by an officer of the service. please administrate the oath of allee again there by admitting them to united states citizenship. >> candidates, please raise your right hand. and repeat after me. i hear by he clare on oath, i here by declare on oath. >> i absolutely. >> that i absolutely. >> and entirely. >> and entirely. >> renounce an abjure. >> renounce and ab abjure. >> all allee again and if i tel- state or sovereignty. >> state or sovereignty. >> of whom or which.

>> of whom or which. >> i've here to for been a subject or citizen. that i will support and defend the constitution and laws of the united states of america. >> the laws and of united states of america. >> against all enemies foreign and domestic. that i will be bear true faith and allegiance to the same. that i will bear arms on behalf of the united states when required by law. that i will perform nonexat assistant service in the armed forces of the united states when required by law. that i will perform work of national importance.

under civilian direction when required by law. they take this obligation freely without any mental reservation. or purpose of evasion. so help me god. congratulations. [applause] [applause] [applause] please be seated. [applause] one of the great privileges of my current position to be the first person to address you as my fellow citizens. it is -- yes. it's a great day. by becoming citizen today you demonstrated your commitment to

this country, your country and we honor this achievement. throughout our history, people from across the world have come to the united states seeking freedom and new opportunities for themselves and for their families. we are, after all, a nation of immigrants. each of you has your own individual story to tell. you have followed your own unique path to get here today. and now as united states citizens you have earned the rights and freedom that our institution guarantees. as well as the responsibilities that citizenship brings. to contribute to the strength and vitality of our communities and our nation, and it's also important recognize that these rights and responsibilities have not come without a price. i would like to recognize our newest citizens who are also members of our military. [applause]

[applause] since the founding of the united states, servicemember and women like some of you have made countless sacrifices to preseer the eye zeal before achieving the american citizenship. our nation thanks you for your service. congratulations to all of our new citizens and on your achievement today. we are proud to call you our fellow citizens. ♪ [laughter] see, perfect. and now it's my distinct honor and privilege to introduce the president of the united states, barack obama. mr. president. [applause] [applause] thank you so much. [applause] well, good morning, everybody.

secretary jample, thank you for administrating the oath and making it official. director, distinguished guests, family, and friends, it is a great pleasure to have you here at the white house. and it is an honor to be among the first to greet some of my fellow citizens of the united states. today, here in our people's house -- a house designed by an irish immigrant -- we welcome twenty eight men and women, immigrants themselves, who from this day forward have earned the precious right to call this country home. and i know this is incredibly special moment for you and your families, but i have to say, it's a special moment for the rest of us as well. because we look we out across the room, we are reminded that what makes somebody american isn't just their bloodlines, it's not just by accident of

birth. it's fidelity to our founding principle, a faith in the idea that anyone, anywhere, can write the next great chapter in this american story. that's the promise of america. and today we know it's alive and well in each and every one of you. at first glance, of course, it would be easy to define this group by their differences. they all hail from different corners of the world from nigeria to nicaragua, from the philippines it peru. they arrived here in different ways. some of you came here as children, carried by parents who wished for a life they never had. others came as adults, leaving behind everything you knew to seek a new life. but what bind you together -- what binds us all together -- is something more meaningful than anything of that. a love for this country and that all that it represents. that's what units each and every

one of you. for nikita, -- there's nikita right here. that love runs so deep it lead him to enlist our military. he came here at the age of 11 from ukraine. his mother saw america as the one place on earth where her son could do anything he wanted. and a few years ago, he decided he wanted to join the air force, so that in his words, i could. give back to a country that took me and gave me a better life. thank you. we rodely salute him not just as a member of the our military but a citizens of our country. today we salute elrina. there is she. she was born in south africa. came here as a child grew up in washington state. when she decided to join the navy somebody told her she wouldn't be able to cut it. even though she wasn't yet an american on the paper, she had the american quality of being

defiant when somebody says you can't do something. she proved them wrong. she deployed twice to the middle east, once to haiti, showcasing another american impulse and that is helping others in need. she hopes to serve her new country in a new way as a police officer. congratulations. every member of the military with us have shown incredible pay rich. the willingness to risk their lives in the defense of nation that was not yet their own. that's a remarkable act. it made each of them one of us. it made each of them, in some ways american before it was official. that kind of service and sacrifice has defined our nation for more than two centuries. in america, we look out for one another. we see citizenship not just a collection of right but set of

responsibility. that's who we are. that's what brought so many to our shores including kingsly. he came here from the age of thirty five from nigeria, pursuing his doctorate and wants to become a professor he can help america lead the world in high-tech industries of tomorrow. what he said is what makes this country great is that if you're a citizens you're part of something bigger than yourself. he's right. we're glad that as of today, he is part of it too. we're also glad to welcome pertula. she arrived in america from saint lucia at the age of 23 leafing behind her parents and seven siblings. she came to study international development and he said for over a decade to work in non-profit to type our kids about sustainable food and how to live

a healthier life by eating well. michelle obama is happy about it. today she has the gratitude of her new nation. thank you. we are so proud of everybody here. each of you we see the true spirit of america. and we so see a bit of ourselves too, most of our stories trace back to moments just like this one. to an ancestor just like the men and women here today raised their right hand and recreated that oath. the point is that unless you are one of the first americans unless you are a native american, you came from race? else. that's why we define other as a a nation of immigrants. we have always been better off for it. the promise we see in those who come from all over the world is one of our greatest strengths. it's kept the work force young and kept the businesses on the cutting edge. and helped to build the greatist economic engine the world has ever known. in think about the drive and

determination it took for each of these twenty eight men and women to reach this moment. imagine how far they'll go from here. the kind of difference that they'll be making on behalf of this country. immigration makes us stronger. it keeps us vibrant, it keeps us hung i are, it keeps us prosperous. it is part of what makes this such a dianamic country. if we want to keep attracting the best and the brightest that the world has to offer, we need to do a were the job of -- better job of welcoming them. we known for years the immigration system is broken. we're not doing enough to harn the tell lent. after avoiding the problem for years, the time has come to fix it once and for. the time has come for comprehensive sense of immigration reform. now a couple of months ago in nevada, and last month again in

my state of the union address, i talked about how republicans and democrats were ready to tackle the problem together. and the good news is since then we have seen real action in congress. their bipartisan groups in both house and the senate working to tackle the challenge. i applaud them for that. we are making progress, but we have to finish the job. because this issue is not new. everyone knows what is broken, everybody knows how to fix it. we have all proposed solutions and we have a lot of white papers and studies. at this point we have to work up the political courage to do is what is required to be done. i expect a bill to be put forward. i expect a debate to begin next month. i want to sign that bill in to law as soon as possible. we know the real reform needs continuous strength in our border security and holding employers conditional. we know that reform means providing a responsible pathway

to -- a pathway this include passing a background check an pay taxes and penalty and learning english and going to the back of the line behind everyone that is trying to come here legally. we know that real reform requires modernizing the legal immigration system. so our citizen don't have to wait years before their loved ones can join them. and attract the highly secured entrepreneur that will help create good paying jobs for our economy. let's get it done. let do it in a way that open coos faith with our history and values. no other country on earth welcomes as many arrival as we do. as long as we adopt stand tall as a beacon of hope and opportunity and the world east hardest workers, entrepreneur, men and women who making enormous sacrifice to get a better life not just for themselves but their children

and grandchildren. they're going keep on combing. -- coming and like the millions who came before, and like the twenty eight americans who are here today, they will bring with them new hopes and new dreams, new idea and new optimism about our future. that will makes strong. that's how we'll make sure that our best days are ahead of us and not behind us. i want to thank you for allowing me the opportunity to share in this moment. it's once of the best things i get to do as president of the united states of america. god bless you and god bless the united states of america. we have one last piece of business to conclude the ceremony. i would like to ask one of our newest citizens, julian, from

colombia, to lead us in the pledge of allegiance. i pledge a lee jensen to the flag of the united states of america, to the republican for which it stands, one nation, under god, ind.a. visible, with liberty and justice for all. >> congratulations. [applause] congratulations all you of! thank you! [applause] [applause] and now enjoy the white house. thank you very much.

♪ ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ this week with congress in recess we are bringing you c-span2's booktv. we'll look at bookings on innovation. we start with the "age of edson "he looks at american innovation, later the book "blackett's war" the men that defeated nazi u-boats and brought science to the art of war.

[chanting] >> mr. speaker, we put them down as undecided. [laughter] [applause] [laughter] mr. chairman, as i listen to those comments, it struck me a wonderful thing free speech is. >> donald rumsfeld was making justification for attacking iraq. we had questions we got a chance to ask him is how much money is hall burten going to make from the war. how many u.s. soldiers will be killed in the war? how many iraqi civilians will die. i would like the questions answered now. >> more with code pink cofounder sunday night at 8:00 p.m. one of the most important

invention of the late 19th century was tom edison's lightbulb. earnest freebird discusses his book in mountain view, california. thomas edison was an american original. he held 1,093 patents in his lifetime and everything from botany to the phonograph. no other american inventers has more. the collected papers at rutger's university number 5 million pages. scholars have been working on them since 1978. the final laboratory in new jersey occupies 21 acres and now a national park on exhibit there among other things the is person desk that includes a pigeon hole labeled new things. which is crammed full of papers

and notes on ideas he never got to. we can know what at least what idea might have been. he said i put my money on the sun and solar energy. what a source of power. i hope we don't have to wait until oil and coal run out before we tackle that. i wish i had more years left. perhaps edison contributed us the next best thing. described by historian earnest freebird in the "age of edison." while the electricity light is not a natural subject for the computer history museum. i invited him to have conversation because of the profound observations about the nature of innovation and inventedders. the lessons he draws out speak across the decades to a time and place here and now in silicon valley where edison's approach and the success it produced are similar. in most cases the world has changed forever because of it.

earnest is a distinguished professor of humanitarian at the history of tennessee. the author two of other books and winner of numerous prizes. the documentaries heard on public radio. please join me in welcoming earnest freebird. [applause] [applause] welcome. welcome to the museum. we thrilled to have you here. let's talk about what the book is not. what the book is not is, first of all, a biography of edison. >> right. >> it's not a discussion of the invention of the electricity. it's not a discussion of the competition between edison which is a favorite subject around here. [laughter] we're not going in to that today. ..

>> and began with the premise that shows up in our textbooks. that is what the inventor of the light bulb. interested in his role as i was and what happens when the light bulb leaves his laboratory and goes out into -- looking at what he did i think to realize the story of his invention process was much more complicated than i expected. he used the phrase about class -- passed examinations as often

being, in your words, more thorough worship of history. while i want to get into the process of inventing a moment, one a historian that makes that distinction. >> well, partly we need to understand how important it is for inventors tess self determine themselves into heroes part of what they're doing is selling their own identity. edison was really a master at this. people gave him this wizard of menlo park and the cultivated that conscientiously. it was a powerful tool for him to develop funding and to get the world to trust and that it would be a good idea to put this powerful deadly force of electricity into their houses. >> and it did turn out to be a pretty deadly force.

so the parallels to the way you talked about the evolution of evans to have edison finally perfect in the incandescent light and the way we talk about the evolution of computing, you have spelled some of these out and wanted you to talk with this for a minute. first of all, you talk about the notion that most progress since then this from a single brilliant inventor alone in that lab. there is this eureka moment, flash of brilliance in the innovation happens in that isolation and nasa much an ecosystem. all three of those things you take on orleans said that is not what happened. the top of about that and what you learn? >> is a lot more complicated to understand the competition for

relevant patents, the battles over the marketplace. it is much easier to think of these great eddy is is being passed down to less by a mount rushmore of technological creativity. and in the case of edison and a light bulb, well, he entered very late into the search for a working incandescent bulb. five or other six who held crucial patents, all recognize in the key elements of a vacuum bald and carbon film. city was interesting to have entering into a private field. he learned a lot about the mistakes of his rivals. there was a lot of battling over patents. >> u.s. was involved at the time? competitively trying to achieve the same things?

>> another fascinating character is maxxam. he beat edison to some crucial facts about how to treat the filament and work the incandescent light bulb in the field. joseph swan in newcastle in england also was working for years on developing a working libeled and put one into his house he had a patent six months before edison did. there are many people. the big test of this was in paris at the electrical expedition. he was there with five other people who also had a working incandescent lighting systems at the same time. >> were they all where? >> yes.

the first person to identify that possibility was sir humphry davy. once he demonstrated that people were trying to do this for years they did not quite have all the pieces together. converged in the 1870's. for more than half a century people were trying to create the kendis in light. >> well, i think i suspect that many other and renters, he had a sense of rivalry. his first big breakthrough was to suggest that there were all wrong because there were trying to create a carbon filament ball that he was going to create a titanium bolt.

when he announced this stockmarkets plummeted because people were so convinced. it turned out he was wrong. six months later he had to say i'm wrong to go back to carbon. >> as we get into the discussion of technology let's talk about a really wonderful phrase that you have early in the book which is that edison invented a new style of invention. he almost invented the modern way we think of innovation happening. >> his model at menlo park was to create the first research and development laboratory. it often very critical of college education and was proud of the fact that he was largely self-taught. people lens of the latest chemistry.

he also had to hire technicians who could realize his ideas. needed someone who was able to realize that various ideas. so it was the entire team working very collaborative lee, very intensively, but edison was the guiding intellect, many of them lot more about their particular specialty, but edison was the one who set the agenda and was the one you had to negotiate with the capitalists in order to get the money to pay for what turned out to be a very expensive research and development process. he called it an invention factory in promise that he would come up with a minor in mention every ten days and an amazing breakthrough every six months. he was unsure what those things were would feel that was but he was going to create. >> he is announced as to the world. >> yes. >> she had two of the things.

access to capital from the public markets and his own considerable wealth because he was making tremendous world sees of a number of other inventions but the least of which was the photograph. >> the big chunk of money you made those from the telegraph because he started this as a lowly telegraph operator, learned the business and figure out how to send transmissions, which was a very valuable patent he had a good payoff for that. up thinking it is much bigger people were pat -- fascinated but did not know what it was before. once he had seen in, what is good for? and it took awhile for people to recognize the music was the great use for it. edison to nothing about it.

>> it must of been throwing to sit and watch a photograph. >> once. >> in the other thing he had was a commercial sense. >> absolutely. he was not a scientist andrew very heavily on scientists. he did a thing which many americans were doing at the time which was to borrow very heavily from european scientists to take their ideas and find ways to make them much cheaper and more effective and put them in the marketplace. the was important. edison very often even with the electric light had to go out and was always frustrated with the fact that he had to deal with cab will support. he creates his own electrical manufacturing company and marketed this, worked out the facts and try to convince you

will that this was not stored to be a more efficient light but could be beautiful in ways that desolate could not be. >> let's talk about the technology, and drove down in just a bit. talk for a minute about what was available of the time. we will was lighting europe, america, the average, the problem that edison was trying to solve. >> people are hungry for light. moving in the city's the smoke was covering one those. the development of kerosene and gas light from coal. that is what is a stigma.

it would put up with terrible inconveniences'. and he knew those a market there. and in fact, gaslights or actually pervasive. they were throughout manhattan, pittsburgh, philadelphia, boston >> and it was a terrible technology. the gas had to be capped under pressure, large tanks often kept in poor neighborhoods that would periodically explodes. pipes leaked so that the soil became terribly poisonous. people very often asphyxiated, and even when it worked well his sucked oxygen out of the air, heated up rooms, and it replace the oxygen with notches acid

that ended that damaging furniture. you had to be wealthy enough to replace your furniture because of the damage to the lights were going to do your leather bindings and fabrics. edison was struggling in the market. everyone knew there was money to be made. >> did they come to the incandescent solution naturally? was that the first alternative that they felt really would be workable and marketable? >> well, sir humphry davy set the stage in 1810 then asserting toucans of light. he was interested in electrochemistry, not in the use of it as a commercial product. so expensive that it did not seem viable until the dynamo

chemlawn later. so he demonstrated incandescence but also the arc light which was a much more powerful bright light it uses to carbon rods and kept close enough so powerful current jobs across the gap and creates a light that is many thousands of times brighter than an incandescent bulb. >> why did edison choose one and not the other to pursue? >> someone begin to the arc light. the person who really look at downtown streets in america was on a similar trajectory in life. like many and many was largely self as a hit with access to scientific american and popular science monthly and was hungry for the surge of information. eat, following the magazines,

figured not have to make his own light. europeans or export -- experimented with this. he figured out how to make one that was cheaper, more efficient than anyone else had before. so we think about the broad -- the letting of broadway and public streets. that was all done by our clients and the and not just the american market, but the global market covered quickly. >> and the way that these were deployed is amazing. illustrations of massive towers that were built in the hearts of cities. they bathed everything from a single tower, almost like a lighthouse. >> one of the exciting things, good ideas that go that. this is clearly one of those. san jose being a famous location for one of these towers. because there were expensive and

because there were so brilliant yet he was you could create one single artificial moon above the town and that would, rather than putting a lot of lamps down low and often when you directed one use covered that it casts terrible shadows over large swaths of town where did not reach, so you had to do another and another. detroit was the sort of high water mark of this idea. they put up 70 separate towers. it worked so badly that pretty soon asserted a fall down in high wind and they just let them go. >> the individual solution was the switch with this refinement that edison and his other competitors wanted. >> to make the lights visible. it was something else to break

the light into usable pieces. when they brought indoors delight made everyone look so cadavers care every wrinkle in gray hair stepped out. >> some helen thinking of mainframes verses pcs. let's talk about the actual technology that enabled this to happen because the key development of the light bulb itself was the filament. the lighting agent. at what his science was and is break through everyone recognized that carbon was the right element to use and would

incandesce at a very high temperature they needed to have a vacuum a reasonable cost. so when he developed the film that he was working on the entire system. he was thinking not just of the missing piece the the entire integrated system decagon to the marketplace. >> the whole thing. >> even the meter. he had to figure out how to charge customers and make sure there are getting a good deal. >> was this part of what made in unique? he thought in systemic terms about big problems, not simply in the break through that would

enable something to happen in one point in the system. >> that seems to be the thing that meant that he emerged out of this contest as a person we remember as the inventor of the electric lights even though he had many rivals. he figured out how to create the market will system and had some chance of taking on the gas companies. >> let's talk about once he -- by the way, i want to talk about his idea. he called it simply light. his notion was that this bald head to be extraordinarily simple and it had to be something that any average person could understand how to use and could use easily and that it would be so the door and clean. >> yes. engineering, in many ways the most complicated technical system that existed. but for the consumer it was the on off switch.

it involved no matches, cleaning of lamps. it did not even change their own light bulb. they would send an electrician around to change the light bulbs . he recognize the fact that these extremely technical systems work best in the marketplace. >> i just think that's brilliant. there are local and modern examples all over the place. many debtors, but i want to talk about this famous showdown in 1881 the you talked about. he roughly brought the incandescent bulb to life in 1879. >> new year's eve 1879 when he made it a demonstration in menlo park. still had not protected the system but convinced a lot peabody at. a few weeks later there were all

burned out. he had not figured out by the exhibition in 1880. he had something that could last much longer. >> and what was that the figured out? >> he knew of this carbon. he had very much an inductive approach where he would try anything. i felt a million times and that's fine because i learned something each time. so he tried whatever carbon element he could find and stuffed his laboratory full of every possible element not knowing what my work and finally locked in on bamboo filament. he decided that panda would be the key to his initial success he hired with great fanfare the explorers and send them around

the globe to go find the best form of filament. a great form of publicity from him, especially when the export who went to let american never came back. the one who went to japan found a species of bamboo that seemed to make the most consistent fiber. the early bulbs or bamboo fiber. >> i love the story. it shows the extent to which he was determined to spare no expense and also to get the perfect solution and that the same time made a public relations coup. speaking of that, let's talk a little bit about what he did. i just want to read what you write in the book about how he set up his demonstration at the exposition. as you said, there were lots of people who were trying to show off their approach.

he built the 220-ton generating machine. >> the dynamo. >> and he shifted from america to paris, designed a giant display in the grand hall with two massive in electrified eaves and an electrified portrait of himself. and in that giant exhibition on the edison won the gold medal of honor for electric lighting. this was a marketing and public relations masterstroke. >> yes. >> now, in fairness he had the better system. he brought in much more complex and elaborate system. the dynamo that he brought was more efficient than anyone thought possible of the time.

>> why was that? >> he just had certain insights into the construction, took apart and reconstructed. he also had a breakthrough with the film. he recognized the fact that it needed to be a high resistance : which is counter intuitive for reasons i don't quite understand but it was counter intuitive to electrical experts at the time which proved to be the stroke that made his much more efficient than others. so partly he did when fair and square but have a great sense that this was about showmanship and then winning the gold medal was going to help him mortally when the patent for that was coming and that if people are going to invest in this new technology there would want to put their money on the man with the spinning revolving picture of myself. >> of course this wonderful ."

just crushed by this. i had them out their months, maybe even years before. why is he getting all the credit >> wherever he went and sat up people said is that the new edison light? he hated that. >> was that the knockout punch in the competition to be not only the builder of the most efficient system commercially the best for light but also putting edison once more on the matter. >> not really. it turned out to be a very thick competition for a least a decade people who found ways around the patents. the pattern wars that went on and on but control the technology. so really there were six or seven companies that were in the business that edison was a rival

with. he had an advantage because he had visibility go more capital the others. lots and lots of rivals and people were hungry for light. so there was this sort of chaotic more in the streets over who was going to get the contract. >> and he comes back to america. what is the next up? of the next decade how does this play out in his own vision for how he will roll his own system of? >> well, he has to go into the manufacturing business. he always said, want to go back to the lab and be an inventor but felt as if he never get the support from his backers to just be free to run his invention factory. so he had to go at and create a series of manufacturing companies. he had to up think about chandeliers and uses, using them

in the theater. across the board he was trying to sell all the ways that electric light was going to be better than gas. syria to do that in the contract with local companies who are willing to buy his equipment and going to letting business. as it turned out he may a lot of money selling the equipment they found it much harder to make a living, partly because there were a lot of other competitors going after the same business. >> did he have a breakthrough that really was the instrumental you can say whole sections of the city, and manhattan. >> on the streets facing manhattan, a prime place with a

lot of major newspapers. walls tree packers. this was a highly publicized place to show. it was d.c. power. we think in terms of the grid. it was a small grid. you have to have another system. the ellises model. >> less talk about the social implications you talk about the specific changes that it begins to bring to modern life. light is suddenly erupting. in there and setting the homes

of the wealthy marin away and all. an industry that invests first until the price comes down. it took decades for the average person to the will to report electric light. factories were early about this. a lot of investment in these very expensive knew machines. the possibility of keeping these running 24 hours a day was interesting. for labor there was a battle. just a point when labor unions are organizing to make the day shorter and along comes a tool that seems to a race with it, as gods, you know, a distinction between rest and work basically it looks like it's 24 hours a day. so there is a struggle over this. unions push for no network.

the compromises that working network, laborers are paid more and there was a struggle over child labor. that was one of the things that the early progressive reformers managed to battle first, not eliminating job labor but eliminating it in the middle of the night because there were an awful lot of kids working the midnight factories. >> how successful was this pushed back? >> successful enough initially to create mostly just an extended work day. some extra nine hours. especially important for the transportation industry rate it created 24 hours per day transportation delivery system. up to that point train travel was limited because passengers did not want to trust themselves to a train that could not see down the track pro understandable reasons.

terrible problems with the ship since the. new, very colorful still holds ships moving faster and colliding into each other. so they made sea travel much safer. and so things like freight depots stayed open 24 hours a day when many workers lost the electric light. clearly dangerous to workers in terms of opening up the possibility that the work they would never end. but people working in any sort of skilled occupation, so happy to not be running on gaslight that they welcomed the electric light. >> safety. you spend of fair amount time talking and bus safety. just making cities safer, making

neighborhoods safer, the fact that a lot can be brought not from an artificial are polite but the street level. >> the like to call it the police monopole. this was a wide-open of spaces so that working people, when they got off work to enjoy a parks and skating rinks and toboggan slides. open up the city and made it available in a way that was inconceivable up to that point. >> let's talk about the kinds of professions that had to be invented because it is easy to forget that as you point out in the book, there were no electricians. there were no standards. electrical engineering was an entirely new idea. architects buildings with electricity and lighting in

them. city planners. there was a whole generation of jobs that open up as this phenomenon of ford. >> one of the other things he had to do was create a school to train his employees on how to use electricity. then there was an increasing pressure on the universities to develop the first electrical engineering programs. main cities have with the cold electrical clubs worry and man who wanted to get into an exciting knew field would pay a small fee and get to hear lectures on a periodic basis than it would have to leverage our room in the back with a good try experiments. but people who were self-taught produced an awful lot of safety problems. people were learning the hard way. >> they really were. the electrical connections, the lines that were being strong were not up mike we are

accustomed to it today but in some cases not far above the average person's head which strikes me as incredible. why was it done now way? >> there were no regulations, no guidelines for the dennis. this started with the telegraph and the burglar alarm, fire alarm. you see pictures with these wires sticking out of the polls. >> this presented no danger. >> kids love to grab and break them because they give you a tangle. but once these parks started across it became extremely dangerous and there were unregulated. five or six in a given city. it did not cost that much money. they started to throw wires over houses and attach them to trees and mail them to houses.

once you put them together pitbull started to be electrocuted in very graphic ways. >> and you have some graphic examples. a lot of your research was done with newspapers of the era. of course they'll of the stories about being tied to electrified polls. >> owned by the gas companies. but what were the other things they you discovered in the media reporting of this phenomenon, not the danger necessarily, but just the one they're coming to america. >> my favorite part is going back and finding really at one point in every city, town across the country there was the night that the light came on. people show up by the hundreds into downtown streets and wait

for the flip of the ceremonial switch. speeches. cannon blasts. the whole town broken the song. serenading the electrician's for thinking and to bring the gift of electricity. people are very much aware that there are stepping into what they saw as a new era in the modern world when the electric light came on, even though it was not in their homes. for many decades electric light was something he visited. you might see in the work. you might see it downtown in the indian and parks. the city square. go back home to a kerosene lamp or gas light. >> what was the social impact of that kind of distinction between homes that could afford electric light and homes to which it came much later.

>> it was often a great democratizing invention. it was not something that the rich wanted to work to themselves but the value of it was only existent if one or more who will could be brought in one. even though it was something that was fairly expensive, much more so than gas up until the 1920's, people saw a as something that was reaching down into the middle class and ultimately into working-class homes. at the same time it sharpened the line between haves and have-nots, especially the growing division between rural and urban america. the city years when americans move from thinking of themselves as jeffersonian farmers to thinking of themselves as part of an urban nation. electric light created a sharp divide between the old world and the new.

you can see time and again, especially farmers, magazines, journals, very aware of the fact that some are out there their cities are people are staying up late in going to night baseball games. a whole world they're missing out on. that distinction was there from the start with. >> and what is happening at this point? is he being held as the genius of the age? now the democratization, making his own image in a much greater. >> it is an interesting story because he was so committed to the power system. that is replaced quickly. westinghouse takes over and edison himself because he bet on the wrong horse loses control

and becomes general electric. so he is barely out of the business within a decade. the fact, as he is leaving the business, he gets a very nice pay off. i'll take my money, go back to inventing and come up to something that is so amazing that no one will remember that associated with electric light which did not happen. >> this burned entrepreneur kicked up his own company. >> yes. so he continues to be remembered as the great expert on electricity and spent the rest of his life as a scientific pundit. everyone wanted to know what he thought about whatever new technology chemlawn, and he was having to play level. >> how vigorous was his fight on this will direct verses alternating current battle?

>> most famously known for pushing the idea of using the electric chair for prisoners as a way to discredit. he insisted that if you're going to do that yet use westinghouse's the system because it will work best to kill people. and to demonstrate this he would -- he had an assistant who would round up stray dogs and any journalist to be willing to watch, you would like to keep them in order to demonstrate. >> that's the side of and that we're not that familiar with. >> he was a ruthless competitor. at the time he taught that these people were being electrocuted in the streets. they were dying from these are flights. edison felt that ac power was reckless and would discredit the electrical industry entirely, soviet up personal, vested

interest, but at the same time there was no such thing as effective wire insulation. basically they would put cloth and paint on these high power wires and hope that would work as insulation. many people were very disturbed by these public deaths that were happening in city streets. edison felt that if ac power continued ultimately the public would reach a point where it was now willing to go forward with electricity. european engineers came to america, saw the chaos, saw these people being fried and said how can you put up this. and they said, local we have more light than you do.

>> looking at the questions t3 >> looking at the questions that have been passed of. when -- i'm going to ask you a couple yes star with the technology. it was the filament and the light bulb, was that standardized quickly once the more less perfect technology had been decided upon? >> it was an evolutionary process. his bamboo filament won the day. he had to borrow a patent in go into partnership and figured know how to use and gasoline treatment to flash creased the bamboo which was necessary to make it last much longer. another one of his rivals

pioneered the nba of creating a cellular space the made a much more consistent element which ultimately replaced. so this is an evolutionary process. a lot of people working on this. that got better and better until it culminated into was developed in germany initially and then pioneered in this country by general electric which totally changed everything because there were so much more efficient than the old carbon filaments. that was really the break through that allow the electric light to compete against guess. general electric said, this is his dream finally realized. this was three decades after he launched the ball but promising this would be an abundant and cheap form of light.

a similar entry price. there would exchange the balls for you. you have to pay buy heroin. that slowed things down. it was so much more efficient. within a big dinner so their modern parallels. penetrated broadly. just as true for a like to city. >> 1930. there were wired for electricity it took that long.

that's 50 years to get the wire into people's houses which was created by the building boom. many people were reluctant to retrofit houses, a terrible and installed. so was new housing byke 9230 electricity was considered to be the standard. >> you touched on the very next question i was going to ang to which is coming is that true that some people are actually afraid of wiring homes? something that held this back? does it have something do with people not wanting electricity? >> although everyone recognized how nasty gaslight was, in comparison people were seeing electric light as a cleaner and safer but there was resistance to put in this deadly force in tear house.

one of the early adopters was one of the vanderbilts. they installed this rather than ripping up the walls that would trn the wires up along he ordered a specially designed plan. have a short and burned his desk to senders. >> a major booster even after that. the kind of investor that you want. [lecaghter] >> allow you one mistake. >> absolutely. edison's management style, of

want to touch on that for a minute to the extent to you uncovered that in your research. he is at the center of this but have a factory that employed thousands of people. his laboratories were populated, as you said, with many researchers, a brilliant individuals working under him. how did he manage that? >> it changed. when i was focusing on, but that was a fairly small group. about 20 people working within. he had a very personal and intense relationship working essentially 24 hours a day. he was a famous napper. he would sleep on hours here and there. on that long you would be woviding. his entire team was expected to be working within. almost all of them, they knew a

lot more about the scientific elements of this always credited edison with being the guiding spirit of enterprise. he meant to create a kind of spirit of teamwork. >> one of the questions those going to ask, the sort of mystical idea that this was fire inside a bottle, did you run across that at all? there were also people who were intrigued by that or who were afraid of that, both here and in your? could you run across that? >> what i was struck by was time and again journalists trying to explain to readers what in incandescent bulb would like. they found it to be incredibly

beecatiful and used a lot of organic metaphors. it looked like a flower. there were drawn to its beauty above all else and they loved to look at it. the problem came to me you're not supposed to look once you get the metallic element which was a part of the story had not expected to finzed it was so bright that letting reformer said to teach people to use lampshades. people saiaid why should that be paying money for light. they had to say, is not good to stare at the light. of course it's uncomfortable. it is not meant to do that itia3 there mandivls that would show you. put it here in cash in on your bors. this is how you do this. a real concern that the world

become so bright that people's eyes were going to be damedied. a lot of complaints about this, booming business for populous. >> the most surprising thing. you did the research. what were the things that su-erise to the most the did not expect to uncover. >> said think was the development in this letter time of this movement of elimination and engineering. in the earlyenti0th-century peoe decided there was too much light the entire focus had been on maximizing the amount of lere ae for the minimal amount of coal burned. suddenly there are so much like the people were beginning to think differently about shipping the light, and it was at that moment the whole other level of invention of the electric slide occu teed as elimination enmovneers try to work out the details of what each interior space that we meaue in and out f what to feel land

so this is when when the designers, for example, figured out how to use light and are to make different kinds of goods book as alluring as possiribe. artist thinking about using these new metallic balls to create all sorts of facts that have not been possiribe for. and you get strange moves like in the 1886 sell the restaurant was fancy bececase it was brilliantly lit. by 1920 did tell a was a great restecarant bececase it was dar. so we moved in and out of the vocabulary of light that was care bully wovided out by the elimination engineers. they had to think about things like what should a chucovh land catholics have different ideas. protestants. mormons. what led up to look land sacred and whether not like --

electric light was an int trsion on their sacred space for way to enhance. i found all of these things something that i could -- the field agree completely taken for granted. we move into a rooboom very omen is carefully designed to make us feel a particular way without stopping to thiure about all the intention ldl is involved. >> the industry. this is a great question. one that i'm glad someone set up. the that developed to between edison and henry ford to meet talked about that in the book. can you go into that? it's fascinating to thiure of edison and fort existing side by side, bringing so much changed society. >> for deeply admired edison and a one. edison mentored ford at a crucial time in his development and encourage him and he was always grateful for that and really when he created his

ayiseum in dearborn michigan he not only get everything he could find, but even die of the to to toil and carried it over o lay it in michigan. in toward the end of the lere at would go on camping trips in a with a boat to announce the modern world that they have done so much to create. warranty away from all. the world is too bright and hectic. webooe just going to go fishing. of course it became a celebrity event with a huge entourage, of specially designed trucks to carry the camping equipment and electric lights to go into every -- so they could not quite let go. >> did you track thaou was there for a ship, was that an important part of the social history?

>> really moreawaust thiureing about a wide movement that for then edison of particiher nted n to sing. country had gone too far in creating these artificial systems. that was the part that interested me the most. and he certainly did everything they could to cement that image as the great hero that we serve our conversation talking about. >> so we are coming now to that point where, as you said, edison thes to reflect bacere,on these things. there is this great "in the book the talk of a thing going unease vacations. i don't want to be near electricity. one old suit, old hat, a few heyesh knowledge of a fishing rod. it was as if he seemed to long for that simpler time or wanted to get away from the more complex age and just beyond self

ediain. >> and many people were grappling. there were a lot of critics as electric light. as much as a creative these wonderful public spaces and may wovid sy 1er and more effective, many people are disillusioned. first of all, they said this was a terriribe trade. a much more beautere aul night time, but we have made in a much of there daytime. poles and wires and of the signs what would we trade day for night. many people were concerned about that. also concerned about the psychological effects. peoples of e teor staying up too late. things we know now about the destruction of the circadian rhseuhm and sleep. people are more energized but also more exhausted. many people sta. theed to be romantic about candles and the good old days. the con eonial rev theral meauement as

an attempt to sort of in this feeble to turn off the light and live with canke uelight a little bit so that they could get more in touch with something that has not lost in the modern world. the pvichologist was particularly interesting. his argument was that guch w h a desilight ted twilight as a wayo cultivate the spiritual creative it is in that zone that people dream and contemplate and that limiman bas themse a pes olivice says it cod start in clip on light. we dcadrive ourse a pes a hon eo kamal pmicce of the human experience. he studied children and fell like children who were l thering in it too much artificial light became irritable and lacere,the kind of spirive al dimension. >> is you find any indication that edison at the end of his

life was reflecting back on that? was little is for and just about stushing forward, the next great thing. >> a great defender of artificial light. he said he put som goiuch wy ine and a. theere aicial light and it will improve. somehow it would make you a bed oler person. more energetic. never was clear on exactly how, but it was pred oly convi, aed t it would. he was a salesman to the bitter end. >> so he has been called the ritaeatest innovator of his age. would you agree? >> he certainly deserves enormous credips but the book is designed to light think, to puggest the fact that the age itse aw is more interesting and in some ways it is the ace and invented edison. obcleously an important figure, but in many ways important because he is rcadresentat there of a much more bro ea entlimisiasm

about an mention in the sense that invention is notawaust something that comes awilng o, e bob you can create a factory and churn out new ideas son eiton. impo. theant, but nnta uni . it. >> that one final point, he created what you call the kind of ep oectation of perpetual innovation. he did nnta personally created, but the s20 tntaal of the sage was that we would then be moving into an era when inneauation wouldawaust be something we woud be living with day after day for the rest of our l theres. an entirely new conces. . >> and americans particularly embrace this. enthusiastic con pumers of the new technology but also very proud of their growing restutation as a nation of inventors. consider this to be particularly

in expression of democratic @ tmayes. ere a you educate people broadl, if you create in ( system that encouredies itueauation, if you remove barriers between workers and thinkers that edison seemed to eould >> to do bntah , this was, in a sense, america's gift to a history, nna high culve re, not literature, but things. greg machines. >> thank you so much for bas with us. >> in a moment we will continue with c-span. in his book helix of american inno@ ttion. later.

>> the u.s. supreme court will take up to cases of ginritaich. co ofidering whether the u.s. constitution protects the right to get a marriedie. a n20ber of rallies a taking place on the issue. tomorrow the group united for mayors the s ofipo. thes gay marriage holds a rally of the supreme court. live ceaueredie sta. thes a 9:00 a.m. eastern here on c-span2. later in the day the core will release the a ouio from the days oral argument on proposition eight, a 2008 voter purge measure that banned gay marriede in california. c-span and c-span radio coverage bemov of a 1taki3 pldiathe i eastern. the idea from the argument will be here on c-span at 8:00 p.m. eastern. >> next on cianher neca, the contributions to our society

made by modern-day benjamin heyanklin, then thomas edisoqu from the west for the library in connecticut .. >> in the contemporary world

but also touches on history. but more specifically it talks about the ideas behind being a tinkerer and the mindset of a tinkerer. what is one? and how does a tinkerer differ from the hacker or other indicators that we know in american society? typically set term had negative connotations. the crackpot puttering around in the basement and not really know what they are making but with spare parts but that at the heart of what tinkering is about because a tinkerer is a dilettante and a good way as trained engineers are

specialists but hysterically in this country a tinkerer were not specialists but generalist. but it typically they are doing this in there spare time when they are not network. -- at work. i have talked to people about this. tinkering looks at the things around us and thinking about new things to make from existing things and keeping your eyes and ears open to new possibilities. they try to solve problems but solve completely different problems but that is okay to pursue their passion it could turn into a huge corporation some day but that is not how they got into it.

we talk about education and whether we teach our kids the right things and people wonder how do we get the tinkering spirit back into the schools? but i would argue it is not a bauhaus teaching kids how to tinker bell's kids know if you give things to them they will try to figure out how to make them work. with the test taking culture we forget that good teachers teach to the test to show higher scores for the district i don't think we need to teach kids how to tinker but just make sure we don't squash the spirit too early.

might story begins as my own experience and that is when i sat on my block period. [laughter] getting into the car i realized quickly i had damaged the screen and i also realized the phone was still working but i could not read anything on the screen. out of frustration i did a google search and found

videos on you tube, this one will not work. sorry. technical difficulties. in any case i will explain it. it is the video that literally told me how to take apart by blackberry blackberry, remove the screen and put in a new screen. i went on nine and got a special set of screwdrivers and ordered a new screen and follow the video to the letter. to my surprise there were

five pieces a keyboard, a circuit board, put the new one in and put it back together and it worked. that was my tinkering realization we live in a culture now we are intimidated by a the high-tech devices and feel we are not supposed to open them. companies tell us that because you void the warranty but frankly i figured if i throw one out anyway i might as well give it a shot and it wasn't difficult. and theoretically it should not be that difficult we figure out how to replace the screen. the idea for the book came from the time after the big economic crisis of 2008. a lot of white-collar workers losing their jobs

and worrying about what they actually did, realizing we had become a huge service economy but the united states used to be a country that could make things. did we make anything anymore? site learn to research that united states is a huge manufacturer but most of what we make our high and electronic items but the difference is we don't need as many people to make those things that we are a manufacturing hub and there has been a trend even kugel and apple trying to manufacture devices on american shores again. so that was a little bit of a misnomer. i tried to boil down what tinkering meant to put the book together but also if we

as a country had lost the tinkering spirit over -- or whether it needed to be refreshed or reawakened. as mentioned before, a tinkering is not a specific set of technical skills, it tends to be an instrumental view of knowledge but if you pick up enough knowledge on electronics, textiles, of metals, paper folding, a figure out what you want to do. and try to come up with something new and certainly skills are important, but it is a means to an end. mastery is the point* to come up with something new.

before i go back into history i want to point* out things going on in the culture right now that shows there is a renaissance going on with tinkering. most people have been to a maker fair. some ninny maker fares have been arranged for the westport library. they are wonderful festivals' all sorts of tinkering, electronics, art, music, another thing going on is this so-called tinkering workspaces are you can go in and there are high tech equipment to play around with. this tries to address the problem that in the old old-- when tinkering was not so high tech most people had a workshop in the basement

and had all the tools they needed to do anything. today people cannot afford the high tech things that may be needed but you could visit one of the shops for a day and try the equipment. hackers have come up in contemporary culture. the one that i focused on in my book is a young man named george who broke into the eye phone and a few years later in to the sony play station and sony tried to sue him but eventually they hired him. [laughter] to help them out and figure it out. that hackers can be tinker's to.

some are more thieves but they certainly intersect at some level. i think the main thing that is most important about tinkering is there's a certain amount of humor to it. this was dead before it was made into a mouse. [laughter] but all the best tinker's will tell you they did what they did because they were enjoying what they we're doing. that is a key element stephen contemporary tinkering is important. now i will go back and i try to go to the beginnings of

american tinkering and we can talk how american tinkering differs from around the world that there is something about this country and our founding fathers that's pate tinkering in to the original history. ben franklin held up as a great original inventor and a tinkerer his bifocals, and all sorts of other things. he was also considered a huge source of wisdom, which is great as an interesting figure but he raised the bar high and nearly. he made tinkering seem like a daunting thing. another thing about franklin , this is a way to open things up how i looked

in the book a little bit but as they understand it tinkering is a mind-set as the results. i argue in the book in some ways the u.s. postal service was his greatest tinkering project because it had such an impact on american society but he had to work out in his head over a long period of time before it ever became a reality. we will see in contemporary examples how those virtual tinkering examples can be as beneficial. but the other thing is about franklin he was not the only founding father that was a tinkerer. looking at the original founding fathers of this country were lifelong

tinkerers with george washington being a the biggest of all. as a young man he pursued cutting edge farming techniques, he wanted to find the best fertilizer fertilizer, prevent plant disease, he owned of lot of lee and so there was a need but he pursued this throw his life. also was the building of the potomac canal. he was assessed through his presidency through the rest of his life he actually died with the canal not finish. he hired engineers to help in building it during that time there was no trained engineers. they had to consult the engineers in england and the

technique see developed were wrong. they did not work out and eventually it was built with another technique but he pursued it because that is what he was interested in. of course, thomas jefferson, the macaroni machine, this whole share. [laughter] james madison invented a walking stick with a microscope to observe organisms on the ground. he was 5-foot 2 inches so it was too short for most people. [laughter] and alexander hamilton was the original financial tinkerers as he founded the financial reserves but they were founding a country and had better things to do but at that time they pursued tinkering figuring on

solutions to problems throughout their lives. i dunno of television change that but benjamin franklin was not the only tinker of his time but to jump to contemporary tinkering i eight identify dean kamen as our contemporary tinkerer. a serial inventor, he made his original fortune with infusion pumps including the insulin pump to allow patients to receive medication around the clock without having a nurse present. he also identified data walking wheelchair but it it

was the gyroscopic technology that you might want a wheelchair to climb a curb or stairs said he invented this very ingenious technology to do that. there were very expensive and did not catch on. he is best known for a segue best -- built on the same technology as the walking wheelchair. it was a running joke and i don't know if you remember when it came out it was hailed as the future of transportation and would change the way we've would lift but many cities bandit on the use of sidewalks. there is still a use i think

amazon uses them and there were house there is a lot of said way tour in some cities you can visit the city. it is around in the future but the point* is dean became wealthy off of his invention but if you look how they track overtime you cannot put them together. he knew exactly what he was doing the you first get into tinkering by building light shows that were synchronized to music and he could solve some technology as a teenager at the planetarium in new york. tinkerers don't necessarily know where they're going but do great things.

i also talk about thomas edison. of course, , the inventor of the century, he was hailed as the wizard of menlo park. the fraught -- probably the same issue that he raised the bar so high with people thought of tinkering seemed other worldly. but i tell the story in my book of the intention of the device in this photo that was not the office dictation machine but was the photograph. he came up with the first one that was workable and easy to produce but edison hated music and he could not fathom why anybody would want to listen to this

device and spend their leisure time listening to music. it did not make sense to him. he spent a number of years pursuing the real market as the office dictation machine. but the phonograph did not work out that well. he had other successes but he never really made much money off of the phonograph. it is interesting to think of that the time and people did not understand electricity so they just regarded it as magic they really thought he was a wizard. but he represents the connection between the origins of tinkering in the u.s. and the contemporary version because he was a great man.

he had great ideas that spewed out of his head then he would have his assistance figure out how to make them work. that was the new archetype how to tinker and innovate. in fact,, you could argue his lab was the first research and development operation in the modern sense. but he could not understand why people would want to listen to a phonograph for entertainment purposes but that company that eventually did included alexander graham bell as a partner which was a particularly upsetting to edison because he did not see the telephone is being a worthwhile device

either. my point* is to say if edison always did not get the right to, he was muddling through then surely that's okay for all of us as well. if you read the accounts how his most famous inventions were realized, as proposed with very frustrated assistance and it was not particularly easy but he was having fun. back to the adm of tinkering and something conceptual starting in the world war ii era i became intrigued with a guy named thomas mcdonald

who was a career bureaucrat he grew up in the midwest in iowa in a farming community and watched throughout his childhood in farmers struggle to transport crops on road somebody sometimes it would stay home for weeks at a time until the roads would try so they could go out again and transport the crop. after going to do agar patrol college he became under the spell under and sent at -- that was a dean at iowa state the a good roads movement was intended to promote the use of bicycles. the ada was to build more public roads of people could ride bicycles and eventually

cars became popular and and later created the highway education board. the reason i think of him as a tinkerer over a period of years there is the idea if there had to be a way to construct and facilitate the interstate highway system. the big revelation is it had to be a federal state hybrid to build roads where people we're going to go or were they wanted to go as opposed to where they were already going. before that there was corruption most were built by the states and there was a lot of corruption and nothing got done and in fact, it was a conceptual

idea he came up with that made the interstate highway system have been. only the two great programs of road-building were the roman empire under julius caesar and as napoleon i of course, are easily built under a democracy but there is something about the idea of bringing a series of highways to intrigue me to make realize tinkering innovations in the latter part of the 20th century going into today's society started with ideas. sometimes they spin out to

seeing some change our lives. it changed the game theory that change the organization founded during the cold war to protect national security to come up with the intriguing ideas how to tinker with ideas that would protect us better from the a.d. is we already had and tried to apply the mathematical approach. later in the '70s xerox famously that was based in stamford connecticut at the time famously created that palo alto research center.

it was known as parc known as a great research and development experiences experiences, experiments. i'm sorry. to fund research without any product in mind just to see what came out. why would you spend corporate money on something you did not know what would happen? it was a fruitful experiment it had former academics and one of my favorite stories about parc there was an old winning strategy for the game of 21 but used it to

toss around ideas with these mustard colored bean banks -- beanbags and somebody would present the ada and they would explain why it was wrong and it is a big departure from what edison did in his lab to say you do a. it was team tinkering. and great things came out of the. at what some consider the alto the greatest personal computer it is similar to what we have now and had windows like software elements. and icky matter of tinkering

sessions from parc but when they showed it to the suits back at stanford they said it did not make any sense we do not see an application for business. at the time most computers typically you would submit your request and would execute it for you. and steve jobs famously went into wheeled his way in and he wanted a look at it and created some shares of his young company apple to have a look at what they we're doing. he said i know what i can do with that.

with that. so they didn't make much money off of falco but steve jobs did. in the corporate cents it is not enough to have an idea but but to become realized and commercialized to make it happen in. there is some serendipity even if you try to plan it with -- which is worth the acknowledging. another tinkerer for the book the first chief technology officer fat left to the early 2000's and did

well to do interesting things after that. some people may know him from the cuisine cookbook he put together. he developed a whole school of scientific cooking to apply the science in the book is $450 but it is a whole new way of cooking. with intellectual ventures he tried to address the issues that parc was such a problem in the '70s how 0du commercialize great idea is that great tinkerers can come up with either having them go elsewhere to develop

because the corporate climate isn't right. it is not a venture capital firm but it is the inventor capital firm he gets types of different fields together and they come up with solutions to the world's big problems. one is the laser of sapper. seville and melinda gates foundation have gotten involved because parenting it is effective it is a novel solution for addressing some of change with power solutions so it

is an interesting model. to see if it will grow into something big but it is interesting. i mentioned him as soon as the original financial tinkerer. think if you think of a couple years back in a positive sense, and they are obviously horrible things that came down of some people on wall street but things like the credit defaults swaps were initially intended to solve problems not to create them and in the case of the collateralized debt obligations, looking for new

ways to offset risk that is where they try to pull together the mortgages to slice them up and sold them as securities. but probably the darkest part of the financial tinkering was the people that came up with it did not understand it to. that is what we deal with a lot in contemporary society when you tinker at a high level financial or technology, when there is that gap to understanding what is being done and the average person can comprehend creates problems. but remember edison, when

the electricity was magic. so there is a learning curve not that they can't catch up. another i interviewed for the book a young tinkerer named sol trained as it m.i.t. from australia australia, founded a lot of companies with interesting things including some interesting wind turbines that float in the air as opposed to being on a post that allows them to get into a much stronger your courage and be more efficient. and also has thought about how to make tinkering war front and has come up with

interesting websites. one of my favorites is where the mouse experiment came from. but a lot of these sites are interesting because there are all sorts of projects on there you can download and some are very basic and high-tech see you can attempt them. i mentioned before american tinkering and tinkering around the world but to look at is if there are things outside the united states that we could learn from? people that i talked to that is not american, he is the

father of the mp three to create a revolution and up and did the recording industry. what's interesting how he developed the technology for the indy three file is in sharp contrast to how we do things in this country he worked for a long time at the institute in germany which is a series of institutes all over the country that have interesting public-private hybrids. they get public money but also they have to earn there keep he was up professor in also working on projects with money-making potential. but the mp3 technology the

original goal was to find a way to transmit high fidelity music over a phone line. i'm not sure why. but that's what developed. is impression technology to get high fidelity music into of smaller file to transmit more easily. and the aftereffects of that's -- that is what created a lot of confusion and unhappiness in the music world and in the united states and recording companies try to shut him

down and they succeeded with master -- napster to ban the and the three files which that technology is still the most common form of music sharing technology. my point* looking at something like that there was federal money that went towards research and development but there is less now compared to other developed countries that means looking into. then i looked at different conceptual tinkering this woman's name is gene. she is an architect and

chicago she has the building called the aqua building which is a residential condominium. those are air regular concrete balconies said give the fact as the building is on lake michigan and but it is very cool and how it is developed her firm works as a collaborative tinkering and firemen where they worked in small groups and she works in an office that is only slightly secluded says she can come over and i have seen other companies doing this with computer software with two engineers at a computer at the same time and they both have to be working at the same time to get anything done. you don't know what you will stumble upon and it takes to

to make sure you capture all of that. ha also looking back overseas the creators of angry birds a company started by a young man named nicholas and angry birds was developed by guys trying to start their own gaming software company that they could not afford to spend all their time developing this new game so they would take on projects for their company and only work on angry birds in there spare time but instead of market research, they just kept working on it basing it solely on what they thought was fine. it took a long time that it was a huge success.

i get the idea there's a reason why start-ups typically perform a lot better. sorry, this is not his fault. we had to change computers and took the connection to the video off so we will play that separately.

>> what i was saying there is a reason why start-ups come up with great innovations and not large corporations but there is how we have the start of spirit. ♪ [inaudible conversations] this the bank i am the founder of what is called tinkering school a summer program to help kids learn how to build the things that they think of. i do put power tools into

the hands of second graders. if you think of sending your kids they do come back bruise, scraped, and bloody. this is by dangerous things. number one, play with fire learning to control one of the most elemental forces in nature is a pivotal moment in any child personal history. whether we remember it or not, it is the first time we get control. there only reveal to those who can play with it. says one of the great things but they learn basic principles about fire intake , exhaust, the three working elements of fire.

and to think of the open and it five-year. you don't know what they will learn from playing with it. trust me, they will learn things that you can get out of playing with the door of the explorer toys. [laughter] number two. own a pocket knife. they are drifting down of the cultural consciousness that i think is a terrible thing. >> there is. >> pretend that did not have been. ♪ welcome to five dangerous things you should let your children do. i don't have children by barrault my friends' children.

[laughter] so take this advice was a grain of salt. i am the contract computer scientist by a trade that i and the founder of the tinkering school that is a summer program helping kids to learn and to build the things that they think of. i do put power tools into the hands of second graders. of you think of sending your kid tousing during -- tinkering school they do come back bruise, of scraped and bloody the book is called 50 dangerous things. number one, play with fire. learning to control one of the most elemental forces in nature is a pivotal moment in any personal history whether we remember it or not, it is the first time we've really get control of.

these mysteries are on the repeal to those who can play with it. playing with fire is one of the great things and from there they learn basic principles of fire of intake, combustion and exhaust this reworking elements of fire and to sink of the open end it fire as a laboratory. and trust me they will learn things that you cannot get out of playing with "dora the explorer" toys. [laughter] number two comment on a pocket knife that is drifting at of our consciousness.

i think it is a terrible thing. [laughter] your first pocket knife is like universal tool you are given. it is the spatula, pry bar and a blade and eight empowering tool. lot of cultures give knives as soon as they are toddlers these are children cutting whale blubber. it left a lasting impression to see babies playing with knives. kids can develop the extended sense of self at a long -- young age. always cut away from your body, keeping a sharp never force it and these are things that kids can understand. i have terrible scars on my legs where i stabbed myself but they are young and they heal fast.

[laughter] number three, throw a spear our brains are wired for throwing things and if you don't use parts of your brain they will atrophy that when you exercise them it adds strength to the whole system. practicing throwing things has been shown to stimulate the parietal lobes and a three the understanding and structural problem solving. with their predictive ability. throwing is a combination of analytical and physical skills.

it helps do develop attention and concentration skills. number five, id construct appliances. there is a world of interesting things inside the dishwasher. the next time you are about to throw out the appliance take it apart with your kids or send them to my school. even if you don't know the parts puzzling about what they could be for is a good practice to get a sense they can take things apart the matter how complex, they can understand parts of them and eventually they understand all of them. so the black boxes are complex things made by the

other people and you can understand them. number five, a break said digital millennium copyright act. [laughter] [inaudible conversations] >> he is an interesting guy and founded this summer program called the team during school and the kids go for a few weeks and use real tools and build suspension bridges and

working rollercoaster urs and cool stuff. he became well known for this talk called by dangerous things you should let your kids do. the last is what we were talking about with file sharing and the other was let your kids drive a car. he talks about the kids. now he has co-founded a private school called bright works that is immersive learning while you learn out of text books you can learn this if it is the physical experiment you can do it

simultaneously. not to teach them how to tinker but encourage what they want to do already. so back to the contemporary world it is amazing every single day the indication that takes on the air markova mass phenomenon. part of the zero rise of the media empire is a prequel magazine that has all sorts of experiments but kickstart

your viewer not familiar it is a web site where tinkerers and inventors can post projects and come up with a video pitch and people can crowd fund that innovation which has created a system that has never existed before. you take out the middleman that people traditionally needed to get the idea is to realize with commercial projects. some amazing things have happened. over the last week there was an amazing campaign there is a three the printing and but

you could draw 3d objects with them but they had a goal of $30,000 to raise to make the product a reality and we did the screen grabs today and you can see what they're up to now. people to go on to the site can pledge a certain amount of money either they will get their product when it is finally made are sometimes there are prizes that are too expensive but it is an amazing phenomenon and kickstarter has grown into a large company over the last few years. there are other innovation websites out there.

bet you are seeing more and more of the tinkering incubators' going on line that seems to supercharge and that is the cutting edge trend right now. i mentioned three the printing and the westport library is ahead on this they purchased three the printers now there is another in the works and it has become the new symbol of today's tinkerers. if you have not seen one inaction the ada is you can design the three-dimensional object on your computer then print it out. this 3-d printer will make gave prototype and plastic

it is an amazing thing for inventors and it can create a prototype cheaply and kids enjoy them all lot. in the top corner of stairs in the maker space we have some young tinkerers assembling a new 3-d printer the library just purchased that is cheaper than the previous one but the trick is to put it together. [laughter] they know their audience. i just wanted to talk a few minutes more about what is going on here at the westport library because by sheer coincidence as i was working on this book, the westport library was delving into the tinkering phenomenon to bring the

movement right into the library so upstairs there is a maker space where all sorts of projects are being realized on a daily basis. it has been a great resources there other plants in the works and the library staff has gotten involved. these photos are from recent day at the library where staff members learned how to sadr, you would not usually connect that with the library and soldering because knowledge king come from different directions. you need to know how to do that if you put technologies together.

also westport posted done many maker fair and another coming up in april, a great way to see what people from different walks of life are working on. i went with my kids to the last one and we saw all kinds of things and here are photos of the three printers kids were making fun stuff with. the big hit was the basketball playing robots which were astonishingly accurate being controlled by high school students that built them with laptops. actually they were built as part of the first robotics composition that dean kamen founded. again,