Film and Media Atlas

How Stories Are Broadcast
Open Questions

Who actually deserves credit for the vacuum tube's amplification mechanism: Lee de Forest or Edwin Armstrong?

Citation Formats

General Reference

APA Style

BibTeX

Facts
Why It Is Open
De Forest patented the Audion triode in 1907 but, by most engineering historians' account, did not understand why it amplified a signal. Edwin Armstrong worked out the regenerative feedback mechanism that explained and dramatically improved that amplification around 1912-1913. De Forest then filed competing patent applications claiming he had found regeneration first, based on a 1912 notebook entry, and the priority fight over who actually understood the mechanism reached the US Supreme Court in 1934, which ruled for de Forest on narrow patent grounds even though most engineers and historians credit Armstrong's account of how and why the tube amplifies. 1
What Would Resolve This
The dispute is over documentary interpretation of surviving notebooks and patent filings rather than new data; a historian's definitive reassessment of the 1912 de Forest notebook entry against Armstrong's own dated laboratory notes would be the closest thing to resolution the field could produce. 1
Discipline Needed
History of Technology, Electrical Engineering History 1
Question Kind
Mechanism 1
Question Status
Open 1
Reader Facing
Yes 1
Open Question

De Forest patented the Audion triode in 1907 but, by most engineering historians' account, did not understand why it amplified a signal. Edwin Armstrong worked out the regenerative feedback mechanism that explained and dramatically improved that amplification around 1912-1913. De Forest then filed competing patent applications claiming he had found regeneration first, based on a 1912 notebook entry, and the priority fight over who actually understood the mechanism reached the US Supreme Court in 1934, which ruled for de Forest on narrow patent grounds even though most engineers and historians credit Armstrong's account of how and why the tube amplifies.

What would resolve this The dispute is over documentary interpretation of surviving notebooks and patent filings rather than new data; a historian's definitive reassessment of the 1912 de Forest notebook entry against Armstrong's own dated laboratory notes would be the closest thing to resolution the field could produce.
OpenHistory of Technology, Electrical Engineering HistoryWikipedia
Cross-Tradition Connections

Question On

Sources
1. Wikipedia
Wikimedia FoundationEdwin Howard Armstrong, Regenerative circuit sectionView the Source
Comments (0)
No comments yet. Be the first to share a thought.
Reader Challenges (0 open reader challenges)
No disputes yet. Spotted an error or a better source? Open the first one.

View At A Past Year

The atlas records no dated fact of its own for this entry, so there is no other year to choose.