Talk:Oliver Evans

Oruktor Amphibolos revisited.

It appears that this section is written with extreme bias against Oliver, and that might be the disconnect others are seeing. The plans for this appear to have fell into the hands of "Vivian and Trevithick", and this company clearly stole the plans insted of helping to patent them in England. If the 1900 book is to be believed. Clearly Oliver, is the most inept business man according to this summary, but an excellent inventor. http://books.google.com/books?id=kl4oAAAAYAAJ&dq=the%20watt%20of%20america&pg=PA66#v=onepage&q=the%20watt%20of%20america&f=false His patents which failed to be patented, are also picked up by others, who tweeked them and profited. NormBograham (talk) 18:47, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

If you find usable, reliable sources for this can you make sure that they are added to the Richard Trevithick page as well? The allegation has been marked {{cn}} there for a very long time, and this contributor has despaired of finding confirmation. --Old Moonraker (talk) 18:53, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Moomraker: I mentioned the source. The conflict, is that one of the guys who might have "stole" from him was in the publishing business. So, you and I are trying to find some truth in history, but diffrent truths. I find the conflict to be head spinning with "Perkins", since he was in the publishing business in America (his brother ran it after he left for england), should he be running to the patent office after seeing others technical articles? I"m not sure if it was stealing, patent trolling, or just an enhancment to the idea. In one case, just taking the idea and putting a box around it...that's an auful trivial enhancment. Perhaps we keep looking for a conflict which was not there. lol. But, Perkins appears to give credit as in the case with Asa (invented spiralgraph, used in making money more difficult to counterfit, and now is a nice game for the kiddies). But, everyone who "writes" about him, keeps trying to call Perkins the inventor, even encypledia articles, which are clearly false. This is the "discussion" page, and I did not alter the article. I'm still looking over older documents, but we likely only have access to 1% of them. Fyi: The Royal Society had discussions about Jacob Perkins before inviting him out to England, so, you might be shocked to find something there about Oliver Evans. History "facts" always leave questions and our conclusins are sometimes wrong. Jacob Perkins is not the "inventor" that history keeps trying to credit him as, he's the guy who kept running to the patent offices for the "family business", and he bought some ideas.. While the "royal society" is well documented, there is even evidence that they were not well respected during their time (or perhaps it's just envy.). NormBograham (talk) 19:44, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Perkins patented his idea?

My how quickly an opinion might change. I see that Perkins was a publisher. He used a waterwheel in his invovations with nails, and thus was able to apply some of the same principals to publishing (with a wheel). There is also several "chance" interactions with Oliver. From what I'm suspecting, the patenting of ideas was rather new. You see Perkins give testimony to the Royal Society about Oliver, in 1822, and admits he's never been on a steamboat, but appearently this doesnt stop him from patenting "new" ideas, or giving testony and answering their questions. lol. Perhaps Perkins was more of the "Bill Gates" of the day (and I'm not sure that's a compliment), where he was smart enough to understand your ideas, and tweek them and patent them himself. (Note Perkins was also in Philli, as a publisher). Also, note: Perkins publishes his own findings about the waterwheel, and this might be a bit of self-stroking. Perhaps patent troll is a bit harsh, but hey, their might be a new term that could be applied, to both of these guys. They were racing to the patent office, and they bought some technology. You also see Jacob Perkins might have inflated his title in some publications, "esq", where he's still refered to "Mr", by the Royal Society. ("Mr" is a title below that of "esq".). I'm smelling some problems with publishers writing their own history, bio's.

Watch out! There are real problems with history, with those getting too close to "Charles Heath", "Jacob Perkins" and there appears to be some exagerations. (I dont know if this was intentional or unintentional). Unfortunatly, this was the period of time where the huge innovation was "printing technology", and you see Jacob Perkins going from metalergy to publishing (both use waterwheels, and both use metal). So, Perkins and Oliver have several interactions (water wheel, both in Philli at same time, Perkins mentions Oliver in his presentation to the Royal Society). (Perhaps they were drinking buddies, lol, but they clearly met). While one might argue that there is some "self stroking" going on, I'm suspecting we create the same problem today. We keep trying to give Bill Gates the credit for everything today, when some technology he actually bought (And Perkins bought some technology from Asa Spencer, but history keeps trying to erase Asa). So, there are some exagerations. This might be compounded with Oliver, since some of the articles might be more "self stroking". And no claims appear supported.

NormBograham (talk) 18:59, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

"History is written by the winners"....lol....Or in this case by the publishers. Printing was the "dot-com" of the 1800's, clearly taking off about 1820. But this causes a conflict between so called "innovators" and "written history". This might be compounded with the new "patent offices" of the 1800's. (Run to the patent office, I just read an idea!). Unfortunatly, the more conflicts you "prove", the more you wonder what's going on with flawed written history. If Oliver had a facebook account, he would be a first degree friend with Jacob Perkins. (Water Wheel, Phili ventures, and steam engines, Jacob's brother, presention to the Royal Society, Drinking Buddies?-ok I made that one up: but it looks like a real possiblity.). Therefore: Oliver does get some credit, but he also appears to be stroking his own acomplishments. Warning, Warning: Too many facts surrounding Charles Heath, Jacob Perkins can be proven to be wrong, but they are published and quoted! There is a danger in the inventors being publishers and writing their own biographies or those of their friends.(lol).
Here is the conflict, which is under doubt: The plans fell into the hands of "Vivian and Trevithick".
Where is the proof of this statement? http://books.google.com/books?id=kl4oAAAAYAAJ&dq=the%20watt%20of%20america&pg=PA66#v=onepage&q=the%20watt%20of%20america&f=false NormBograham (talk) 18:47, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

If you find usable, reliable sources for this can you make sure that they are added to the Richard Trevithick page as well? The allegation has been marked {{cn}} there for a very long time, and this contributor has despaired of finding confirmation. --Old Moonraker (talk) 18:53, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Moon: With your question, and my questions, I think the problems are jumping off the page. History is flawed, as was reported (or perhaps it always will be). This is really clear with Perkins purchasing technology from Asa, as everyone keeps trying to give Perkins credit for inventing it. There are also conflicts between Perkins and Oliver. When I went back and reread, I think I agree, your reading "Olivers" statements, and this might be one sided. While there were "historians", they were edited! 74.46.14.142 (talk) 16:50, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

To All: Please remember that this is a talk page for discussion about the article, it is not a general forum about Oliver Evans. The effort spent discussing loosely related matters here would be far better spent improving the article.

EdJogg (talk) 21:21, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Not a "Visionary".

Early Engineering Reminiscenses (1815-1840) of George Escol Sellers U.S. National Museum Bulletin 238, includes an article by Sellers on Evans. Sellers recalled a first hand experience, a carriage ride about 1818, in which Sellers related Evans' accounts. He very specifically mentions that Evans denounced Benjamin Latrobe for a 1803 report on prospects for steam-powered transportation, and said Latrobe "alluded to him (Evans) as a visonary, siezed with steam mania, in conceiving and believing that boats and wagons could be propelled by steam to advantage." Looking in to it, in Evans time the term "visionary" was essentially equivalent to "delusional". I have accordingly substituted one word in the article, which I hope Evans would appreciate more. Evans believed the Latrobe article proved to be a great hinderence in the adoption of steam power.

The Latrobe article is available on-line as a .pdf of the original imprint, found in Transactions of the American Philosophical Society, 1809, vol. 6, pp 89-98. The article will reveal an association with Nicholas Roosevelt, who built engines for Fulton and Livingston that disproved the Latrobe thesis prior to the 1809 publication. Tomligon (talk) 21:52, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Source of the Railroad Quote, ca 1814

Writing under the pseudonym of Patrick N. I. Elisha, esq,, Oliver Evans published Patent Right Oppression Exposed, or Knavery Detected, publication listed as "Philadelphia booksellers," 1814. The book is a satire, occasionally compared to Mark Twain. From this comes his famous quotation predicting railroads, often dated as 1812 or 1813. I am in the process of trying to find an affordable copy to verify the source of the extracted on-line versions of this famous quotation. The full version apparently runs four paragraphs, should be nicely past copyright and in public domain, and is so wonderfully visio .... ooops, prophetic that it should be available in the main article so that a solid referenced source is finally readily available. Tomligon (talk) 22:04, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Refrigeration again

@Unus Multorum: I'm curious as to why you deleted the Refrigeration section. I have no axe to grind either way but the info had a reference and seems germane to the topic. ► Philg88 ◄ ^♦talk 16:02, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

@Philg88: Hi Philg88, actually I did not remove the section on refrigeration as it is very interesting, but I moved to be a subsection under the 1801-1806 period when he first developed the ideas, and added a few more sources to verify the information. Thanks for your interest, I'm going to work on this to get it to GA and perhaps even FA status, so I hope you like the way its going so far! Unus Multorum (talk) 22:13, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

@Unus Multorum:: Ah ... I see. I've left a comment on your talk page. Cheers, ► Philg88 ◄ ^♦talk 04:11, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

"The Watt of America"

Is there a citation for this quote? I see him as very different to Watt and really rather closer to being "the Trevithick of America", with their shared push for higher working pressures. Andy Dingley (talk) 13:41, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Yes, if you have a look at the uncropped version of the portrait you will see the phrase at the bottom there. I have no information on who exactly first coined the term (after my work on Evans I would not be surprised if the inventor himself suggested it), but nevertheless if you Google "The Watt of America" you will see the saying has stuck and it's even an official variant term for Evans at the Library of Congress. Regardless of the fact that you are quite right in that it is probably not a very apt comparison. Unus Multorum (talk) 21:16, 7 April 2014 (UTC)