Amir Roggel vs Yevgeny Karasik

From : Roggel, Amir <amir@roggel.com>
Sent : October 27, 2008 3:21:26 AM
To : <karasik@sympatico.ca>
Subject : A question in regard to your publication on the island of doctor Moreau

Dear Mr. Karasik,

I read this with much interest.

Having not noticed the publication date at the top, I quickly concluded it was written in mid eighties: some people referred there as "TRIZ leader in his city" whom I know are having an international career and contribution.

Only when I reached note on US, Israel (where I live) and 9/11 I figured it is a more recent article.

My questions:

1. Why did you write it to look as if written in Soviet Union in older times?
2. Why you consider Israel as saved from "Invention Machine" software?

Thanks a lot,
Amir


From: Yevgeny Karasik
Sent: Monday, October 27, 2008 3:44 PM
To: Roggel, Amir
Subject: RE: A question in regard to your publication on the island of doctor Moreau

Dear Mr. Roggel,

the article was written in 2002. I do not know why it looks like it is written in the 1980s. May be because I evaluate peoples' contribution to TRIZ from the standpoint of classical TRIZ, which stopped developing in early 1980s. At that time the people I wrote about were just teachers of TRIZ in their respective cities. Generally all research on TRIZ was conducted in Baku exclusively until the second half of 1970s. Only after that Altshuller outsourced further development of the register of physical effects and phenomena to Obninsk (where the Russian shuttle had been being developed and where many secret physical and chemical institutions were located).

I do not know what you mean by international contribution to TRIZ by these people. Bringing TRIZ to Israel, US and other countries is not contribution to TRIZ per se.

I did not claim that Israel was spared from IM software. But Tsourikov apparently influenced by anti-semitic sentiments prevalent in the former USSR in the beginning of 1990s due to the propaganda of the infamous "Pamyat" organization, refused to sell his software to Israel back then. Since I believe that this software is waste of money for any corporation, his act could be considered as positive for Israel, unintentionally though. Basically my phrase was a joke.

Best regards,

Yevgeny


From : Roggel, Amir <amir@roggel.com>
Sent : October 27, 2008 3:17:24 PM
To : "Yevgeny Karasik" <karasik@sympatico.ca>

Dear Mr. Karasik,

I appreciate very much your prompt and detailed response! I understand that the reference point was classical TRIZ, hence your reference is to earlier period of development.

  1. I have met several people who added components of value engineering, anticipatory failure determination and functional oriented search - who are active in the US (ex. (Zlotin, Litvin...) - which I consider their contribution significant to TRIZ. Now I met another person who claim that nothing since Altshuller's work is of any significance (Bukhman), so I have no problem to consider these as non-classical TRIZ or "modern TRIZ".
  2. Propagation of TRIZ in the world is not a contribution to "TRIZ method" but to it's adoption and growth. I believe Mr. Altshuller granted "TRIZ Master" to people who pursued TRIZ for education, which signifies certain importance to this.
  3. As I live in Israel I am quiet interested in your point on IM software. ...
  4. My own experience that software helps "amplify" person's skills. My speed of calculations grew up when I acquired my first calculator. My drawing output of mechanical and electrical schemes multiplied when I switched my Rapidograph with computer, software and printer - and so for my communication capability (e-mail software enables me to write many letters to many people I would have never heard of before, at far faster rate). Hence I assume you find fundamental difference that makes TRIZ a mental skill that can not be enhanced by software, or specifically that IM software does not do the right things for such. I would appreciate if you share with me your view on these.
Thanks and regards,

Amir


From: Yevgeny Karasik
Sent: Monday, October 27, 2008 6:01 PM
To: Roggel, Amir

Dear Mr. Roggel,

it is very difficult for me to evaluate the software which I never saw and tried. My judgment is based on general principles:

  1. the people that developed it had no experience in algorithmization of creative processes;
  2. they contributed nothing to TRIZ method;
  3. they were trying to implement the trivial idea of writing out answers to ARIZ questions not on paper but on the screen of computer;
Based on this I am positive that Tsurikov's original software is useless (for those who know TRIZ and have TRIZ books). It might be useful for those who wants to study TRIZ and does not like to read books ( or do not have them). ...

Regards, Yevgeny


From : Roggel, Amir <amir@roggel.com>
Sent : October 27, 2008 9:58:09 PM
To : "Yevgeny Karasik" <karasik@sympatico.ca>

Yevgeny,

Thank you for sharing the considerations! As a product of "western culture" I try to judge things by merit for future and not by what the person who developed them knew or did in the past before they were developed. Having seen benefit using software during my own endeavors with TRIZ (whether Zlotin software or IMC), it was not clear to me what capability was missing. Now that you raised it - none of the software packages replaces ARIZ or the thinking process it requires. Not even a text template for ARIZ. They help in "standard problems" and several other tasks. ...

Amir


From: Yevgeny Karasik
Sent: Monday, October 27, 2008 10:03 PM
To: Roggel, Amir

Dear Mr. Roggel,

on the second thought, your arguments in favor of IM software reminded me a conversation with a religious Jew from Brooklyn on the flight from NYC to Israel in 1993. For a reason unknown to me I was given a seat amongst a big group of religious Jews. They ignored me until dawn. Then they rose and headed to the plane's tail for prayer. But the one in the next seat did not go. When he was reminded by a bypassing fellow that it is time to go, he answered: "It is not required, I have got one". Then he turned to me and started a discussion on the topic whether a Jew has to look differently from a gentile. His train of arguments was as follows: a fish has to look differently from a bird. Agree ? I agreed. A bird has to look differently from a horse. Agree ? I agreed. He provided a few more such assertions to which I agreed and suddenly concluded: and a Jew has to look differently from a gentile. Agree ? I did not answer to not insult his beliefs. But he definitely thought that I was about to agree with him. "Nu, nu !" - he was piercing me with his eyes and throwing his arms into the air. But I remained unmoved by his arguments. At this point the Sun rose and the guys started returning to their seats. My neighbour ceased his effort too.

Your train of arguments is very similar: calculator increased our ability to calculate. Agree ? I agree. Computers increased our ability to perform engineering calculations. Agree ? I agree, etc. And, hence, software that purportedly automates creative process increases our creativity. Agree ? I don't. Simply because it is a false induction.

Regards,

Yevgeny


From : Roggel, Amir <amir@roggel.com>
Sent : October 27, 2008 9:41:13 PM
To : "Yevgeny Karasik" <karasik@sympatico.ca>

Yevgeny,
Thank you for the great story! I did not expect an agreement to the induction, but an explanation what is false in it :-) "Aggravation" of the argument was intended to sharpen your answer why TRIZ does not lend itself to improvement by IM... which I assume you have a strong supporting argument for such. Sorry it did not work well.... Just let me know why TRIZ can not be enhanced/enriched/used more efficiently with special purpose software...

Regards,
Amir


From: Yevgeny Karasik
Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 2:16 AM
To: Roggel, Amir

Amir,
as a product of "eastern culture" I prefer not to waste my time on familiarizing myself with products developed by people whose mental capabilities are known to be inferior, especially if I know that a breakthrough is required for such products to work. Nevertheless, it would be interesting to learn HOW specifically this software benefited you. Can you please elaborate ?
.....
Yevgeny


From : Roggel, Amir <amir@roggel.com>
Sent : November 1, 2008 5:46:06 AM
To : "Yevgeny Karasik" <karasik@sympatico.ca>

Yevgeny,
First, I have very high regard to people who received education in former Soviet Union - in my country almost 1/4 of the people are speaking Russian, and in my work place - almost 1/3 (which is pretty representative for high tech companies). I learned that environment of scarce resources encourages innovation - and Soviet Union had scarce resources compared to the US. Some of the development stories of Sukhoi [fighter jet] demonstrate how innovation overcame lack of advanced technology the Americans had.

As for software: what kind of breakthrough is needed? I know that Boris Zlotin tried to automate ARIZ but never completed this job. I get benefit from software in several ways. Mostly efficiency: reduces work quantity - like calculator saves you work with paper and pencil, unless you developed specifically your brain to do complex computations, or like translation software saves time flipping through dictionaries - unless you are a polyglot.

As you remember from "eastern education" - quantity turns into quality (second law of dialectics): I have some cases where software facilitated "phase change" like improvement in my work. An example: when I first used Su-Field, my general notion of fields changed from "physics fields" (gravity, EM, weak and strong nuclear) into MATChEM. This looked compelling but was not as instrumental. Only when I opened IM I realized there are 18 Mechanical ones, 15 EM and some others - in a very instrumental manner. This "quantity" made me recognize that at the end of the day you solve a problem by changing/adding/modifying either substance or a field. Thinking in this manner reduces the time to arrive solutions.

Amir


From: Yevgeny Karasik
Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 12:35 AM
To: Roggel, Amir

Hi Amir,

I agree that you have gaps in education because without TRIZ, IM software and the likes, well educated engineers know that there are scalar fields, vector fields, tensor fields and other mathematical fields and not only gravity, electromagnetic, etc. It is also news for me that SuField analysis talks about MatChem fields. What does this acronym mean ? What text on SuField analysis did you read ? What 18 types of mechanical fields are you talking about ? Suppose that there indeed are 18 types or even 80 types. Why is software needed to learn this ? Cannot they simply be listed on a piece of paper ? Could not you simply open a book and "realize that there are 18 Mechanical ones, 15 EM and some others - in a very instrumental manner" ? What is the role of software in such a realization ? Just a substitute of unavailable book ?

If IM software led you to believe "that at the end of the day you solve a problem by changing/adding/modifying either substance or a field" then I would not be surprised to learn that Iranians have outsmarted Israeli engineers. Cannot problems be solved by changing/adding/modifying something else than substance or field ?

Yevgeny


From : Roggel, Amir <amir@roggel.com>
Sent : November 1, 2008 11:16:18 PM
To : "Yevgeny Karasik" <karasik@sympatico.ca>

Yevgeny,
My learning of theory in different fields included some of the fields you relate to below - but I found a difference between how we learn tensors and the actual applications in Engineering of it. The 15 and 18 are example... there are probably more...

Let's run a test: assume that the desired function to solve a problem in a system is "move liquid" - and the current method used is insufficient. Please right down all the different ways you can think of for "moving liquid"- from your learning and books you can pull in the next hours or a day. I'll use IM software for same task and we compare result.

As for substance-fields, I read Altshuller books translated to English and books written by others. I consider it as a formal modeling language - and once you model a problem with it, you would expect the solution to be within the language (like Galois groups, unlike Goedel's theorem). For different ways of "modeling" problems, there are different "models of solution" - other than Su-Field. What book do you recommend to learn Su-field ?

Maybe my generation looks at "software encyclopedia" vs. "paper written encyclopedia" similar to how your generation looked at "printed material" vs. "hand scripted". We use paper written encyclopedia as "weight". I personally quit using fax several yeas ago and I no longer use land line phone. I am not saying that it is good or bad compared to use laptop or MID and cellphone instead of the former - it is only following evolution - and I am sure you drive a car rather than riding a charriot. My best friend takes the greatest pleasure from sailing a small pelican sailboat in San Francisco bay, taking advantage of the winds and streams - being a professor in silicon valley and knowing all the physics behind commercial jet planes, he is still feels awe seeing a 747 taking off... .

Amir


From: Yevgeny Karasik
Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 5:49 PM
To: Roggel, Amir

Amir,

attached please find the partial list of the possible ways of moving liquids. I simply got tired to type more.

Computer based databases of IM and Ideation have two significant drawbacks:
- they are not so large to justify use of computers (unlike banks' databases etc);
- they have to be continuously updated as science and technology progresses.

That is why for the basic list of physical effects it is better to have it on a piece of paper (even for young engineers that hate reading books). The rest is better done in the other way (I will not disclose which one).

Use of IM software to learn TRIZ is a one time event and does not justify use of computers either. Your analogy with cell phones, calculators, etc is erroneous. You use cell phones not because you are young but because they provide functionality which wireline phones don't. You cannot use wireline phone in a car, on the trip etc. I also use cell phones for the same reason.

Now I can answer what is wrong with your syllogism: computers enhanced my computational abilities, my communication abilities, etc., HENCE, IM/Ideation software also enhances my creative abilities. Computation and communication are REPEATABLE tasks. Computer make them faster EVERY time you compute or communicate. But IM/Ideation soft is mostly intended for NOT REPEATABLE tasks, such as learning TRIZ in the absence of good printed texts. You cannot twice realize that there are 18 mechanical field in very instrumental way. You do it just once.

The only repeatable component of theirs soft is database. But as I told before there are better ways to retrieve the required information on physical and chemical effects and their applications with illustrations.

And finally, all this has nothing to do with enhancing creativity about which we were talking in the beginning.

Cheers,

Yevgeny


From : Roggel, Amir <amir@roggel.com>
Sent : November 2, 2008 7:35:22 PM
To : "Yevgeny Karasik" <karasik@sympatico.ca>

Yevgeny,
attached is the list extracted from IMC software. Let me suggest that your list is quiet comprehensive, and I imagine it is a result of years of learning and practicing. I extracted IM list in 10 minutes, and another 15 minutes for detailed formulae, examples and animation of micro and macro for each example. I would suggest that while your list includes various implementations of pumps, IM is a somewhat richer - please review and judge by yourself - and let me know.

RE:"Computer based databases of IM and Ideation have two significant drawbacks: - they are not so large to justify use of computers (unlike banks' databases etc); "
I am not sure I understand this argument - I use computers for many tasks, they are inexpensive and convenient. We are not using central computers with cards or paper tape feeder. I transfer software to my son's laptop using Flash card or CD.

RE: "they have to be continuously updated as science and technology progresses."
This is correct for paper list as well, but updating on computer is faster.

RE:"That is why for basic list of physical effects it is better to have on a piece of paper (even for young engineers that hate reading books). The rest is better done in the other way (I will not disclose which one). Use of IM software to learn TRIZ is a one time event and does not justify use of computers either."
I use computers to learn every field I need - and used in past to read books. I still read many books and so do my children, but when "information" is needed, nothing brings it faster than computers - which are connected to internet these days, so the growing virtual knowledge base is readily available.

RE:"Your analogy with cell phones, calculators, etc is erroneous. You use cell phones not because you are young but because they provide functionality which wireline phones don't. You cannot use wireline phone in a car, on the trip etc. I also use cell phones for the same reason."
I agree - the function is what matters for me. Not the age. My daughter pays attention to aesthetics and uses a color cellphone.

RE:"Now I can answer what is wrong with your syllogism: computers enhanced my computational abilities, my communication abilities, etc., HENCE, IM/Ideation software also enhance my creative abilities. Computation and communication are REPEATABLE tasks. Computer make them faster EVERY time you compute or communicate. But IM/Ideation soft is mostly intended for NOT REPEATABLE tasks, such as learning TRIZ in the absence of good printed texts. You cannot twice realize that there 18 mechanical field in very instrumental way. You do it just once."
I agree that computers help repeatable tasks. I did not use IM software to learn TRIZ, I used computers to read excellent materials from TRIZ-Journal, Altshuller Institute and other sources.

RE:"The only repeatable component of theirs soft is database. But as I told before there are better ways to retrieve the required information on physical and chemical effects and their applications with illustrations."
I retrieve newly discovered effects directly from the internet, or from patents. So for "effects" in areas not covered in literature (non E=MC2 domain - such as information sciences).

RE:"And finally, all this has nothing to do with enhancing creativity about which we were talking in the beginning."
I am not sure whether creativity you refer to is "left side" or "right side" brain activity. In case it is left side, I agree with you.

Regarding Su-Field, you attributed their origination to a lady who is in Israel now. I assume she was in Baku - could you send me more details on her - I like to try to learn Su-field from her....

Amir


From: Yevgeny Karasik
Sent: Tuesday, November 02, 2008 11:30 PM
To: Roggel, Amir

Hi Amir,

it is about mid-night here and I will take a look at your spread sheet tomorrow at work. For the moment I only want to say that you mis-read info about Irina Flikstein in my journal. I did not attribute origination of SuField analysis to her. It was Altshuller's idea. She simply helped him technically (i.e. did some technical work).

I also want to say that I invented a number of things and never ever I needed to know all ways to perform a function. I can give you a test of my own: try to invent a way of computing convex hull of an N-dimensional object optically.

Cheers,

Yevgeny


From: Yevgeny Karasik
Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2008 3:08 AM
To: Roggel, Amir

Hi Amir,

I took a look at the list and have to tell that it is much worse than mine. It includes one and the same effect under different names (such as boiling and evaporation), which, besides, in themselves do not belong to the ways of moving fluids. Only the pair evaporation + condensation is a way of moving fluids. My list includes this pair (see distillation) and yours does not. Superfluidity is also not a way of moving fluids in itself. Etc., etc., etc. The list generated by IM software includes very old effects only, whereas mine includes new ones.

You are wrong in your assumption that I faired well in this competition with formidable Invention Machine software because of the years of learning and practicing. I did not know most of the principles from my list before the competition. But I just Googled various phrases such as "ways of moving fluids" and got the overwhelming amount of principles just in a few seconds (not 10 minutes as you). Then I just started writing them down for you until I got bored and tired. I could get even better results had I made search not on the internet but in the US PTO database.

All this clearly proves that IM and Ideation software absolutely useless. They are useless because:
a) the task of retrieving methods of implementing a function can be accomplished by free search engines much better and faster; and because
b) the benefits of performing the task are very dubious for solving inventive problems.
I, for one, never experienced the need of performing such a task while working on various innovations.

And the last but not the least. As you know every printed matter nowadays is produced from computer files. That is why when I asked if it is not simpler to keep the list of basic physical effects on a piece of paper, it already implied that the list is maintained as a file on a computer. You can read the file from the screen or can print it. The main thing is that maintaining such a file does not require IM software and its database.

Cheers,

Yevgeny


Epilogue: a month later Amir Roggel still had no clue as to how to compute the convex hull of an N-dimensional object optically despite working "Invention Machine" 24/7.