Talk:Incandescent light bulb

Timeline Edit Request

The timeline shows that Lewis Latimer was responsible for "Better Filament Production". However, his contribution to the production techniques of carbon filaments during that time were among hundreds of advancements in carbon filament manufacture. He is mentioned in this articles purely for bias and POV, as Mr. Latimer is cited by many black-supremacy groups as not only being influential to the development of incandescent bulbs, but in some cases cited as having been the actual inventor of the bulb itself.

If his name is not removed from the timeline by 11/10/2011, I will add to the timeline the name of every inventor who holds patents for the manufacture of carbon filaments for the incandescent bulb, since it's so obviously important that we mention Latimer's near-insignificant process. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.119.76.228 (talk) 11:58, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Okay, it's the 11th. I forgot. But later today, I'm going to be doing exactly that - adding at least a dozen inventors names to the timeline for "filament production techniques." Seriously, does no-one have any thoughts on this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.119.76.228 (talk) 06:22, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

The timline is not compatible with the information in the article, For example it says William David Coolage invented Tungston fillement 1910. But in the article it says "On December 13, 1904, Hungarian Sándor Just and Croatian Franjo Hanaman were granted a Hungarian patent (No. 34541)..." Which is not mentioned in the timeline. This is only one example. --upulpp 04:42, 14 December 2011 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Upulpp(talk • contribs)

Feel free to edit the article text or the timeline to be consistent. The timeline can be edited at Template:Early evolution of the light bulb .  Stepho  talk  09:44, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

The history of technology is full of "rival claimants" who worked on something before the inventor who actually invented a practical or commercially useful device. Addition to a timeline of dozens of tinkerers who were unsuccessful would be disruptive editing, and is not recommended. We look for reliable secondary sources, such as books on the history of technology from respected university presses, rather than original research by people who found a patent somewhere and infer success it does not imply. In the case of Just and Hanaman, the reference cited is from a Hungarian branch of GE, and does not rank high as an "independent and reliable source." But taking it at face value, note that it credits Thomas Edison with the first bulb useful for illuminating purposes, in 1879. Then it says Just and Hanaman made their tungsten bulb by plating a similar carbon filament with tungsten, then the carbon was removing by heating the filament. The document says the patent wasn't issued until December, 1904, not that the bulbs were offered for sale in 1904. It says the Tungsram trademark was not registered until 1909, and the Russian Tungsram poster dates from 1910, not 1904. It does not say the lamps were filled with inert gas. It does not say when Just/Hanaman tungsten lamps were first manufactured and sold, but it may have been a couple of years later. A snippet view of a journal article [1] says that the Just/Hanaman lamps were first produced in 1906. The Just-Hanaman lamps were "too fragile for general use." The resulting filament was brittle. In 1905 the factory was "unable to produce lamps free from faults". The company using the Just-Hanaman process "in practice had failed to produce a lamp of satisfactory quality.." and they fired Just and switched to a different process in 1909. A book says the Just-Hanaman lamps were "inferior in terms of quality." This is a poor way to make filaments. It was replaced by Coolidge's superior invention of starting with powdered tungsten and making it ductile, and drawing a tungsten filament, and making it into the tight spiral familiar a century later. I found a timeline in [2]"The fundamentals of nuclear power," M.W. Hubbell," Authorhouse, 2011, ISBN 978-1-4634-2441-1, page 31, which credits Just and Hanaman, 1904""..granted a Hungarian patent for a tungsten filament lamp, improving the light bulb." If we search for Coolidge and "tungsten filament," there are scads of reliable sources giving him credit. See Palombi, page 153-156]which discusses the contributions of Just& Hanaman(1904 patent for tungsten filament), as well as Coolidge ductile tungsten filament, 1910 and Langmuir (nitrogen added to bulb with tungsten filament, and coiling the filament, 1913. We must beware of giving undue weight, or of implying in a timeline that Just and Hananam did more than they accomplished. The "drawn wire tungsten filament" was a truly big deal and came from Coolidge's success in 1910 and Langmuir's in 1913. So far the only addition I recommend to the timeline is for the "First patent for a tungsten filament lamp, Just and Hanaman, 1904." Edison (talk) 15:27, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

I added Hanaman and Just to the timeline, along with Coolidge.Edison (talk) 17:33, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Please note that I said the article text and timeline should be made consistent but that I did not specify the exact details of which should be altered. If the timeline is the more accurate representation of major events then the article text should be made also make the points you mentioned above - ie specifying which events are major events and which are just intermediate steps. I'm not an expert in the field, so I'm reluctant to do the editing myself but I'm happy with pointing out WP tips (people seemed to have trouble figuring out how to edit that timeline). Cheers.  Stepho  talk  23:02, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from 1000bulbs, 17 February 2011

{{edit semi-protected}}

Comparison of efficacy by power (120 volt lamps)

I think that the table comparing efficacies of light bulbs by power is very nice and informative, however, it will be nicer if it includes 240V lamps as well. Does anyone have a source for the efficacies of 120V lamps or 240V lamps? BloodIce (talk) 20:50, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

Joseph Swan

It is interesting that this article states a historical resource which states that twenty-two people may have been able to lay claim to inventing the electric bulb prior to Swan and Edison. It has long been my view that of Swan and Thomas Alva Edison, Swan was the true pioneer, as his bulb dates to 1860, predating Edison's bulb, which dates to the 1870s. This information was something I read at school in the Oxford Encyclopaedia. ACEOREVIVED (talk) 21:19, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

Swan and Edison were the first people who made a business out of selling light, not just bulbs. Swan initially couldn't get enough life out of his lamps until the Sprengel pump came along in 1865. Mad scientists in secret laboratories, torturing platinum filaments in bell jars with ranks and ranks of zinc plates fizzing in acid, don't count. --Wtshymanski (talk) 15:24, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

If Swan had demonstrated a practical light bulb in 1860, scientists in 1878 would not have said Edison was on a wild goose chase trying to invent a practical light bulb. Early bulbs did not last beyond one evening's use, and then the filament burned out or the bulb became too darkened on the inside to let light out. Early "true inventors" are like all the men who built airplanes which wouldn't fly, pre- Wright brothers. Those early "true inventors" were basically replicating work of Volta and Humphrey Davy in the first decade of the 19th century: electric current can make wire or carbon light up for a while, before it burns out. In fact Joseph Priestly published his demonstration of this phenomenon in the 1770's using current from Leyden jars to make wires glow and melt. Edison (talk) 19:10, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

"Practical" is indeed the word here. There were lots of horseless carriages before Ford, lots of steam engines before Watt, lots of radio before Marconi, lots of telephones before Bell, lots of steelmakers before Bessemer, etc. etc. --Wtshymanski (talk) 19:21, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Cost of Light

The Cost of Light Considering the value of energy savings and lifetime may allow a modest premium over the initial cost of traditional technologies. Life-cycle cost, the effective “cost of light,” can be estimated by including lamp cost, energy consumption and maintenance over a lighting service period. The units used for this lighting service period are dollars per kilolumen-hours ($/klm-hr):

Cost of Light = 1/LampLumens * { (LampCost + LaborCost)/Lifetime + (EnergyUse x EnergyCost) }

Where:
LampLumens = the light output of the lamp measured in lumens
LampCost = the initial cost (first cost) of the lamp in dollars
LaborCost = the labor cost necessary to replace a lamp in dollars
Lifetime = the useful operating life of the lamp, expressed in 1000 hours
EnergyUse = the power consumption of the lamp, expressed in Watts
EnergyCost = the cost of the electricity necessary to operate lamp in $/kWh

By this measure, it can be argued that LED-based illumination is already a viable economic alternative for many applications. For instance, although incandescent lamps have a very low cost and high lumen output compared with LEDs, the LED source has a much longer lifetime and consumes far less power. In fact, using the equation above and looking at a finite quantity of light emission (one million lumen-hours), typical LEDs already have a slightly lower “cost of light” than incandescent and halogen sources today.

And your point is? Cite it and write it. A 40-lumen bulb that lasts 40 years is not going to replace a 1000 lumen bulb that you change every three months. Power density is a real issue for solid-state lighting. --Wtshymanski (talk) 13:23, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Incorrect Dates

Under “History of the light bulb,” there is a passage:

“In 1840, British scientist Warren de la Rue enclosed a coiled platinum filament in a vacuum tube and passed an electric current through it. The design was based on the concept that the high melting point of platinum would allow it to operate at high temperatures and that the evacuated chamber would contain fewer gas molecules to react with the platinum, improving its longevity. Although an efficient design, the cost of the platinum made it impractical for commercial use.[10][11]”

The two citations both list de la Rue to have created this invention in 1820, yet the article says 1840. This is incorrect. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kmurg69 (talk • contribs) 19:05, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

The two citations should be removed, since the websites are clearly not reliable sources. They say Warren de la Rue was doing complex experiments in 1820, when he was only 5 years old, per his biographical article. I have never found a primary source for de la Rue or de la Rive, both of whom get cited, for having done such an experiment in 1820 or in 1840. De la Rue in 1840 is very possible, since he was an active experimenter by that time.I will remove those citations. Edison (talk) 22:52, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

The two references seem to back you up. Feel free to change the date and shift that paragraph up higher in the article.  Stepho  talk  23:05, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

I take it back, user:Edison has pointed out that those references were wrong.  Stepho  talk  23:10, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Political Leaning Statement

The section talking about banning the light bulb has a very political overtone to it (in bold): There has been consumer resistance to phasing out of incandescent lamps, preferring the quality of light produced from incandescents[44], the Libertarian political theory of free markets as somehow precluding national interest as a reason for regulation, and concerns about mercury contamination with CFLs. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bjstigall (talk • contribs) 17:29, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

"metal filament wire"

Didn't early light bulbs use a carbon filament? If so, this phrase from the introduction should be changed to remove the word "metal". -- 77.189.55.229 (talk) 15:42, 15 January 2012 (UTC)