The Laws of Tech. Systems Evolution: a kangaroo court

G. L. Filkovsky,
Nomura Securities International,
New York, USA

I've looked at the TRIZ laws/lines/patterns/principles of technological systems evolution, and their examples, as they are presented on the web (in,,, for example), and have found them so ridiculous, that I was inspired to come up with more of such. Here are a few (that I have discovered after analyzing 275,000 inventions, of course):

Pattern: Decreasing a distance between system and human body.
1. Development of computers from computer-room type (walking distance), to desktop (arm-length), to laptop (touching one's knees), to palm (touching one's hands, which are much more important part of human body).
2. Development of music playing systems from orchestra (walking distance), to turntable (arm-length), to walkman (touching ones body).
3. Development of spaceships from "sputnik" (very far from a human body), to dog carrying (Laika; mammalian body but not a human yet), to carrying one human body (Gagarin), to carrying two human bodies (Leonov and Beliaev), to carrying multiple human bodies (this example also demonstrates the principle of evolution from mono-, to bi-, to poly-system).

Pattern: A subsystem of one system becomes a subsystem of other system.
1. An air-tied zipper developed in NASA for space walk, used in dry suits for scuba diving.
2. Punch cards developed for mechanical sorting machines, used for input information into computers.
3. Iconic symbols on cave walls developed to visualize goals (like killing a big animal), used on wood panels to visualize hidden powers (like religious images), used on computer displays to visualize purpose of available program functions.
There are more, many more...

And, finally, my favorite:
Pattern: Soft-to-hard transition of system.
1. I'll skip the well-known example #1 - too obvious.
2. Development of electronics from using gas tubes to hard silicone crystals.
3. Development of transportation vehicles from horses (about 80% water) to metal cars, especially hard and heavy tractors; from wood-ropes-and-fabric ships to metal ships; etc.

A serious hint to professional TRIZniks: when you think of arguments against the above patterns and their examples, think whether the same arguments are not applicable to the patterns and examples you present.