Would there be a smartphone today without Einstein's discoveries?

[zoki85]

Come on guys, Tesla invented or predicted all that

 

[Borek]

the question was not about Einstein, but rather about his discoveries. If those discoveries were never made by anyone, the situation would be very different.

I don't see how it could be that way. The experimental data that was showing we are missing something was already there, if not for Einstein someone else would find out what is going on.

Many things were discovered independently by different people, hard to believe anything could be discoverable by one person only and completely missed if that person never existed

 

[Baluncore]

I don't see how they can be so neatly divided as if there was no interdependence. If the theory doesn't work, the devices built on it won't work either.

If the calculated values do not work as expected, the engineers make many with a spread of parameters/topologies, then log the actual characteristics. From that, empirical equations are created at the leading edge by the engineers working to make it function. The leading edge technology has usually been made to work before the theory has been published.

And a theory is more than just a an organizational or communication strategy; the equations describing the phenomena are part of the theory.

Those reliable equations are only available for use by those who follow later. They are based on the empirical work of those at the leading edge.

 

[russ_watters]

If the calculated values do not work as expected, the engineers make many with a spread of parameters/topologies, then log the actual characteristics. From that, empirical equations are created at the leading edge by the engineers working to make it function. The leading edge technology has usually been made to work before the theory has been published.

It can happen that way, but in several of the provided examples it didn't happen that way.

Those reliable equations are only available for use by those who follow later. They are based on the empirical work of those at the leading edge.

Again, sometimes the equations follow from the discovery of the phenomena before (sometimes leading to) the theoretical explanation, but in several of the examples we're discussing it didn't happen that way.

You see this:
experiment->theory/equations->application
...more often than this:
experiment->model->application->theory
...and in the case of Relativity:
theory/equations->experiment->application

But in none of those cases would I consider them to be separate tracks/pursuits. They are always related, even if the order sometimes changes.

 

[FactChecker]

I don't see how it could be that way. The experimental data that was showing we are missing something was already there, if not for Einstein someone else would find out what is going on.

Many things were discovered independently by different people, hard to believe anything could be discoverable by one person only and completely missed if that person never existed

I agree with that, but I don't think that was what the OP was asking. Someone said that the smartphones did not depend on the knowledge and facts that we got from Einstein, not on Einstein himself. I interpreted the OP was asking for examples of technology and science that the smartphone depended on.

 

[mpresic3]

I agree mostly with what Merlin1389 writes.

I could be wrong but it has been stated Ito various degrees) that GPS uses general relativity etc.
I know GPS does a relativistic correction. I am not so sure as was stated that GPS RELIES on general relativity. I know GPS might not be as accurate without the relativistic correction. Maybe more satellites would be needed in the constellation, or maybe the ephemeris would need to be updated more often, but I'm not entirely sure the system could not work without GR. In any case the point is moot.
First Einstein contributed more to physics than SR and GR. His Photoelectric Effect work with Quantum Mechanics and his Brownian motion papers were also influential as well as many other papers. Without any of this could cell phone technology exist or advance? Well clearly if Einstein did not live, much of physics would have different names attached to it, but it would have been discovered.

 

[sophiecentaur]

This thread is taking on the nature of the Pro and Anti Tesla threads, for which there is a lot more excuse.

 

[Klystron]

As a child after repairing a vacuum tube television with my father, I asked who invented television. My father replied that it was a group effort, that no one person invented TV. When pressed for an inventor, he explained how theoreticians, applied scientists and engineers, among others, contribute to projects and innovations.

We deconstructed the television into primary components such as CRT display, RF receiver, IF amplifier, tuner, power supply, antenna, etc. and eventually I studied books on each electronic component; theory and application. Children need heroes -- Einstein was certainly one of mine -- but adults understand complex devices and ideas derive from multiple contributors.

 

[Sooty]

Yes, but the question was not about Einstein, but rather about his discoveries. If those discoveries were never made by anyone, the situation would be very different. We should also not forget that Einstein was a major player in quantum theory, which has a role in making the electronics so small. We might have smartphones that do as much, but we might have to carry them in a 50 lb. backpack.

'A 50 lb. backpack'? Ah no... probably wouldn't have to be much bigger than a brick... :D

 

[cwill53]

This is all a matter of opinion, but I’ll say that at any point during the late 19th and entire 20th century, there was no shortage of brilliant minds working on the things that certain scientists get famous for.
The notion of a necessity for a “legendary scientist” kind of forgets the conditions in which such a person was able to do the things they did. They didn’t do it alone. It’s all a collective effort.

 

[sophiecentaur]

This is all a matter of opinion, but I’ll say that at any point during the late 19th and entire 20th century, there was no shortage of brilliant minds working on the things that certain scientists get famous for.
The notion of a necessity for a “legendary scientist” kind of forgets the conditions in which such a person was able to do the things they did. They didn’t do it alone. It’s all a collective effort.

This discussion is of questionable value except as a way to 'count our blessings'.
Forward steps in Science usually come as a result of advances in technology or with a history of other work. There has always been a 'cloud' in which people have worked so, apart from isolated bits of individual inspiration and the results of chance, we would be 'here' anyway. Possibly it could have been a bit sooner or a bit later and it's always subject to politics and even religion, in some cases. Science seldom goes backwards with respect to the general positive drift.

There can be big gaps in the time lines of some work, for instance Fermat's last theorem (In fact more of a 'conjecture', than a theorem) which waited from 1637 till Andrew Wiles actually proved it in 1994 but there was still a positive slope there.