Thinking - The Invention Engine

These last few weeks have found me often running the same question through the invention engine to see if I can contribute in some way to getting the power requirements of an aquaponics system down low enough that it becomes viable to run from a solar panel, or at least to try to make it cost as little atmospheric carbon as possible.

I just keep running the same question through the invention engine with the new parameters. ie "NOT all the stuff that's been thought of before".

I remember reading about some design software that made TV antennae that I think were built into the TVs and were created using a printed circuit board that had a zillion lines that related to harmonics of the frequencies (or something - it may have been a dream - and if so, I just had an idea) But the result was you couldn't patent the design, or rather there was no point, because there were a zillion combinations of lines that would work just as well or better than the first one the design software would spit out.

All the opposition would have to do is run similar software with an additional "NOT that one those other people made" bit of code and they would have a brand new invention that worked just as well but was very different.

The people who made the software would use it to solve problems (like the travelling sales[person] problem for people.

The travelling salesman problem has been around for a long time, and there are a lot of different approaches to solving it. This made me very aware of the "NOT that one approach".

Often I'll come up with a solution, just for a plumbing problem or something, and run the problem again with the "NOT that last solution" added into the thinking process, just in case there is another option.

So far, every single time I've tried it, there has always been more than one solution to even complicated ideas and inventions.

It makes me want to put the invention engine through itself with the "NOT that one clause" added.

That should be it's final test. The downside being that I might have to start testing again from scratch.

120 Things in 20 years is now a place where I'm thinking you may soon see me get stuck in an endless loop of testing the invention engine process by re-inventing the invention engine with the invention engine, then re-inventing that with the new invention engine. Forever.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Popular Posts