![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 |
The Edison patent is for an "electric lamp" as I would suppose most of these inventions would have been called at the time. I think the current discussion using the term "light bulb" is appropriate as this is the common term used today. However, I also believe it would be interesting to know when the term "light bulb" was first used, or came into common usage. Jbottoms76 ( talk) 08:21, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
In 1906, the General Electric Company was the first to patent a method of making tungsten filaments for use in incandescent light bulbs.
Wasn't this patent bought from Lodygin? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.131.194.102 ( talk) 10:29, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
Yes, It was...see http://www.geocities.com/s_fedosov/history/texno.htm —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.255.179.188 ( talk) 17:13, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
I have fluerescent lights everywhere in my home, *except* my room. Because i work all the time with the computer and look at the monitor, and fluerescent lights make my eyes ake and makes them wet when i look at the monitor 10 minutes or more. Yes i tried to replace light bulb in my room with fluerescent light already so many times. Yes the vertical frequency is the highest, 80 hz, yes the monitor is lcd. But why no one thinks about the simple fact that the fluerescent lights flicker, and the monitor screen flickers as well, and together they generate much more intensive and lower frequency flickering, while banning light bulbs or advocating against them. When they ban light bulbs in EU, would there be any possibility for me to get a light which doesn't flicker? Are there any alternatives, or anyone even ever thought about it? Are there some special lights which are made to flicker less? I think these concerns have to be mentioned in the article for it to be neutral point of view, instead of writing there only the fluerescent lights advocacy, that the light bulbs would be eventually replaced with the flurescent lights, and this is only good. Please consider that, thank you.-- Tkorrovi 17:39, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
Tkorrivi, There are other bulbs, known as LED bulbs that are somewhat expensive, but last longer than cfls (Also known as fluorescent bulbs) and use less energy. But, these bulbs do not produce as much light. N:vision cfl's do not flicker. (At least, I think so.) —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
75.166.211.132 (
talk)
03:33, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
When I reverted the Nickroxvote3 vandalism, I used "Humphrey" Davy for the spelling, but that was later changed to Humphry. I only came by because Nickroxvotex vandalized one of the sites I monitor so I was curious about what he did here. I also got curious about this Davy guy and did some Googling on him and noted that his named was spelled as Humphrey here and there, which is why I ended up spelling it that way. Whatever. Just some FYI. -BC aka Callmebc 14:10, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
Hi, I just googled to find out exactly what an 'incandescent bulb' [as opposed to "a bulb"!] is as they have just been banned in Ireland, and I read the above discussion. So here are the links confirming their banning in Ireland last week. Greenpeace wanted the ban to start in 2010 [1] but the Irish government is banning them from 2009. http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/breaking-news/ireland/article3229273.ece; http://www.greenpeace.org.uk/media/press-releases/ireland-legislates-to-ban-inefficienct-light-bulbs-by-2009-20071206; http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/WO0712/S00420.htm; 213.202.170.60 ( talk) 23:58, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
Is Ireland now the first state to ban incandescent bulbs? 213.202.170.60 ( talk) 23:59, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
Someone changed the text recently to say Swan was born in "Sunderland, England" rather than "Sunderland, United Kingdom." What is the preferred usage? Is the present like saying someone was born in "Philadelphia, Pennsylvania" rather than "Philadelphia, United States?" No strong feelings on this, but input from Brits or Manual of Style wonks appreciated. Edison ( talk) 23:33, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
A diagram in this article identifies insulation at the base of a lightbulb as "vitrit". What is this stuff? A Google search brings up nothing, other than a site that requires you to pay to access it, which identifies it as a mineral:
http://www.mindat.org/min-23479.html
These links seem to be associating it with coal:
http://www.kgs.ku.edu/Publications/Bulletins/102_1/03_class.html
http://www.oxygentimerelease.com/A/Therapies/Germanium/b7.htm —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.232.126.158 ( talk • contribs) 21:51, 19 December 2007
Response copied from Wikipedia Reference Desk: Miscellaneous: :::"The Electrical Engineer" for Oct. 25, 1889 p 322 [2] talks about the "Vitrite Company" as making the insulating glass used in the base of light bulbs. I find a description of the base of the bulb, inside the brass screw-form base, being filled with "vitrite" in pp 68-69 of "Electricity in Mining" By Sydney Ferris Walker, Van Nostrand, New York, 1907, viewable at Google Books [3] . Before vitrite, porcelein was used, and before that plaster of paris, which absorbed moisture and which crumbled from the heat. Vitrite is described in "A Dictionary of Chemistry and the Allied Branches of Other Sciences" By Henry Watts (1869)as another name for vitrinopal, "a matrix of Bohemian pyrope, related to pitchstone, and being 83.72% silica, 3.58% ferric oxide, 7.57% lime, .67% magnesia, and 11.46% water. Unfortunately this adds up to 107%. The 1911 Britannica article on electric lamps [4] calls it "vitrite." Numerous other sources found from Google Book search spell it "vitrite." I have corrected the spelling in the Incandescent light bulb article. Edison ( talk) 18:20, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
I wish this article had a little more on the physics of the light bulb. I came to it hoping to solve something. It's common knowledge of course that electricity running through the resistance of the filament causes the filament to get so hot it glows. So the resistance is what makes it work. But then it seems to me, from Ohm's law, that for a given voltage, a lower resistance would pass more current, and therefore the device would operate at a higher power. So it would seem that to get more light output, you'd use a filament with a lower resistance. It's a paradox I've been wondering about for some time. 140.147.160.34 ( talk) 19:31, 31 December 2007 (UTC)Stephen Kosciesza
[5] Contains a reprint of "Invention of the Incandescent Lamp", Electrical World and Engineer, Vol 35, No 15, Apr 14, 1900, pg 540" which cites predecessors of Woodword and Evans who had superior lamps, and debunks some of the claims made for their priority. I am still trying to figure out the significance of the claim that "Edison bought their patent then patented his bulb." Thisoft-repeated claim makes little sense. If his patent were the same as an earlier patent, then competing and infringing manufacturers would have cited that fact in the litigation, which Edison eventually won, and they would not have been counting down the days until his patent expired. You don't buy a patent from someone then re-patent it and claim it is your own. Edison ( talk) 23:06, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
I've taken a look at the artice, Lamp (electical component) and there is a little information that I'd like to add to this article. Where the article states: "The same year, Canadians Henry Woodward and Mathew Evans", I will add: ",working for the Morrison’s Brass Foundry on Adelaide St., West Toronto, Canada" and at the end will amend it to say "obtained a US patent for their light bulb," so in full it will read:
"The same year, Canadians Henry Woodward and Mathew Evans, ,working for the Morrison’s Brass Foundry on Adelaide St. West Toronto, Canada, obtained a US patent for their light bulb."
Within the Lamp (electrical component) article, there is a rather subjective section entitled 'A Brief History' which, whilst not suitable for an encyclopedia, does contain a line or two of useful information. If there is a better wording that anyone can thing of, please don't hesitate. I'm still rather new to editing documents on Wiki, especially in a scientific article. Daniel-James 01:51, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
I've corrected 90-95% heat output statement to 98%. See the table already in the article, which already confirms this figure.
I also removed the existing reference http://www.homefamily.net/index.php?/categories/consumersmarts/light_bulb_energy_efficiency/ because it is
Tabby ( talk) 07:09, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
Edison wrote: "The reference you deleted cites a Canadian government site [6] for the 5 to 8% figure. Such a source is not so easily dismissed as that for being "wrong," i.e. not agreeing with your opinions."
If you want to cite the CDN govt site, then great, but citing the article with basic errors I removed is not a step toward the solution, as that sort of material is not fit for citation. It is neither correct, accurate, scientific, nor written with any particular care for the facts. I don't know if we'll agree on that, but I hope at least you appreciate why I removed it, and why others likely will in future if reinstated. Tabby ( talk) 20:46, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
There is an inconsistancy in the article between the "10%" light 90% heat" for incandescent lamps and the later reference to "9% efficiency" for halogen lamps, which was recently modified to 25%. If we are still thinking about the ratio of light to heat 25% is impossible. I believe 9% for (the best) halogen lamps is about right and the GE reference to "approximately 10 % is rather optimistic for ordinary domestic lamps. A 120V 100W at 17 l/w corresponds to a colour temperature of 2900K . A black body at this CT has 5% in the visible. For 9% the CT would need to be about 3200K. Tungsten filaments are not perfect black bodies, generally giving slightly more light, but my figures indicate roughtly the comparison. The figures in the table for efficiency, related to the perfect conversion to light aren't very relevent for other than academics and probably just cause confusion. ( Redcliffe92 ( talk) 21:06, 27 March 2008 (UTC))
The diagram lacks ballotini fuses
GLS filament lighting is normally 2700K Tabby ( talk) 07:21, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
Agreed. Patent reference to ballotini fuses added to the article.( Redcliffe92 ( talk) 16:14, 10 March 2008 (UTC))
As there is a section on the Edison screw type socket, we should probably include a reference to Edison_screw which as an overview. Alternatively, Edison_screw could be merged with this article (which is getting very long). Moaltmann ( talk) 00:02, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
I've rephrased US policy to international, as the US only accounts for 5% of the world population.
/* Luminous efficacy and efficiency */ Most -> Some safety codes. Most is unrealistic for a worldwide wiki, even among the wealthier countries only some do.
Same applies to mandatory use of LEDs in emergency escape signs, here in UK we usually use fluorescent, claiming LEDs are mandatory does not describe the world situation factually.
If someone is going to revert this to describing only US practices, please give us all a good reason here. Tabby ( talk) 21:04, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
In the description of Lamp Construction it is stated "filled with an inert gas to reduce evaporation of the filament and reduce the required strength of the glass". I do not believe "reduce the required strength of the glass" is correct. During manufacture the gas filling is introduced at just below, or even above atmospheric pressure. When the lamp is lit its pressure will rise, so the glass envelope will be under tension. Converesely, in a vacuum lamp it will be under compression. Glass fails under tension, not compression. Even with a wall thickness on 0.7mm in places the bulb is very strong, and bursting is not an issue, (unless it receives a thermal shock). Gas filling does create higher temperatures on the bulb, particulary where the convection stream from the filament reaches it. This has to be taken into consideration when sizing the lamp, for example to keep the base temperature within limits. Does anyone object to the removal of "and reduce the required strength of the glass" ? ( Redcliffe92 ( talk) 19:40, 11 March 2008 (UTC)) No comment, so deletion made. ( Redcliffe92 ( talk) 20:50, 17 March 2008 (UTC))
No comment on the article. But inviting opinions on whether the lightbulb is an ohmic resistor. I will keep my opinion to myself for now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.238.49.65 ( talk) 21:45, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
The resistance of tungsten is temperature dependent,with a posative coefficant, but this does not mean it is not ohmic. The cold resistance of gasfilled lamps is about one fifteenth of the hot resistance, higher for higher efficacy lamps. Carbon has a negative coefficient. ( Redcliffe92 ( talk) 22:33, 18 March 2008 (UTC))
-- Wtshymanski ( talk) 22:45, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
Can someone fill me in on the details of tungsten oxidation in air? See Talk:Tungsten#At_what_temperature_does_tungsten_burn. — Omegatron 23:49, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
While it's good to go back in the edit history to make sure you've caught all the vandalism, it's probably not a good idea to rewind the article from May 15 back to February 28. It's necessary to keep the good edits as well as getting rid of the bad. -- Wtshymanski ( talk) 16:48, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
Great picture but I'd be surprised if these were actually incandescent lamps; though some of them do look a little orange in the picture. -- Wtshymanski ( talk) 13:58, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
The photo would fit well in Floodlights (sport) - JWGreen ( talk) 02:10, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
Nitrogen is sometimes used as a fill gas in light bulbs. See Britannica online [9] and the IEE site on light bulbs [10]. The article said neon and argon were used, without mentioning nitrogen. Edison ( talk) 23:49, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
How is mentioning that in Australia "light bulbs" are commonly called "light globes" unencyclopaedic?
If this is true, then mentioning that the term is used in the theatre, television and film industries is also unencyclopaedic (and unreferenced). So I've removed that line and moved the term to the introduction line, because it is used not only in the entertainment industries (and Australia), but elsewhere too. --
203.94.135.134 (
talk)
23:11, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
I can't find any sources that agree with the following paragraph, there are several sources that say he created the first arc lamp but nothing about an incandescent lamp. 93.97.115.254 ( talk) 23:51, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
"In 1802, Humphry Davy had what was then the most powerful electrical battery in the world at the Royal Institution of Great Britain. In that year, he created the first incandescent light by passing the current through a thin strip of platinum, chosen because the metal had an extremely high melting point."
ehm... why isn't there any reference to Alexander Cruto? (see http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alessandro_Cruto ).
i think that he was an important person to this invention. -- 87.9.230.97 ( talk) 16:35, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
ok, i translated italian article, i hope in a pubblication.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Submissions/Alessandro_Curto -- 87.14.250.45 ( talk) 07:47, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
At what temperature does the filament in a light bulb first start glowing at all visibly (for example, operated by a dimmer)? Are there formulas for temp vs light output? A table of temp vs. apparent color of the glowing filament? - 71.174.182.182 ( talk) 14:56, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
There is a good set of formulas here that relate volts, amps, watts, lumens, and life; for General Electric lamps:
It is said that a wire has to get up to a temperature of about 2000-degC to start emitting significant quantity of visible light. This is above the melting point of copper, aluminum, iron, and steel.
Here is a good source of formulas and examples. It says that the power in to a lamp is proportional to the fourth power of the temperature of the filament in Kelvin, assuming all the power in is radiated from the filament:
- 71.174.182.182 ( talk) 15:58, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
The new caption is still gibberish. What's an "E27 bulb housing" ? There's an E27 base, there's an A-shape bulb, but what's a "bulb housing" and where does it show in the picture? Why show this arbitrary lamp at all? The caption should explain the relevance of the picture to the article else it's just a page decoration. The German text in the image description is no help at all. -- Wtshymanski ( talk) 17:20, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
Why is it considered preferable to use fluorescents, when they contain mercury? Granted incandescents use more power, which is bad for the environment, but isn't mercury worse? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.167.114.131 ( talk) 01:01, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
(Help edit this page!!! YOU will be recognized as the writer! Have fun!) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.5.190.240 ( talk) 22:15, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
There are many home experiments possible, making "light bulbs" to learn about the physics. Even a pencil can be used! (But be careful not to burn down the house.)
A pencil lead (carbon) has a resistance on the order of one ohm. Running appropriate current through a mechanical pencil lead produces light by incandesence: www.instructables.com/id/Lead_light_Not_a_LED/ - 71.174.182.182 ( talk) 00:37, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
The table it comes from is unreferenced, so of cause it would be better with referenced values. But I think it is important to see how the efficiency levels off, and that is better seen in a graph-- Thorseth ( talk) 09:04, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
The efficacy of practical incadescents depend on the life for which they are designed, whether single of coiled coil filaments are used and the composition of the filling gas, as well as the rated voltage. A good indication of the variation of efficacy with wattage for lamps designed for an average life of 1000 hours can be found in IEC Publication 64 - Tungsten filament lamps for domestic and similar general lighting purposes - Performance requirements. My (old) copy gives two tables - "Lamps with normal luminous flux" and "Lamps with high luminous flux" The former covers single coil lamps and the latter coiled coil. They list "Minimum Rated luminous flux" for voltages 100 to 250, for wattages from 25 - 200W Earlier editions included higher wattages in the first table.
From the High Luminous flux table it can be deduced:
Watts 25 40 60 100 150 200
Efficacy
120 V 10.6 12.5 14 15.8 16.1 17.0 230V 9.2 10.4 11.8 13.4 14.4 15.2 From the "Normal Luminous flux talbe: 120V 8.8 10.9 12.7 14 15.5 16.3 230V 8.8 8.5 10.3 12.4 13.8 14.5 The apparent anomoly with the 230V 25W is because this lamp was a vacuum lamp, while all the others would be gasfilled.
It is unlikely these values have changed in later editions.
These show a flattening off at higher wattages and that the benefits of coiled coil filaments are greatest in the 40 -100 W range. Redcliffe92 ( talk) 14:17, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
I removed some text from the Commercialization section which was not really about commercialization, so much as it was poorly referenced and misleading claims about operating bulbs on DC, and claims that it was simple to make a "permanent light bulb." Even back in the 1890's they knew that there was a tradeoff between light output per watt and lifetime. If a bulb is operated at a low current, its lifetime is extended but the hue becomes more reddish and there is much less light output per watt. Thus more bulbs have to be installed to achieve a given level of lighting, at a higher cost for fixtures and wiring, as well as for the electricity used. with a higher overall cost. The claims about inserting a rectifier in the socket do not make clear whether it is a simple half wave rectifier, which would drastically reduce the RMS voltage and the efficiency. The cite to a scientist was some off the cuff remarks in a blog, and not a book or peer-reviewed journal. Edison ( talk) 17:39, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
I have removed the following passage:
As for any other electrical appliance, the hourly cost of operation can be calculated by multiplying the input in watts by the cost per kilowatt-hour and dividing by 1,000; for example, a 100-watt lamp operated on electricity that costs 10 cents per kilowatt-hour will cost 100 × 10/1,000 = 1 cent per hour to operate.
Not only is it entirely trivial and only tangentially relevant, but it is also highly confusing: I actually spent some fifteen seconds contemplating the meaning of the paragraph, looking for a non-trivial statement, not realising that someone actually wrote an entire paragraph on something so trivial. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.77.131.54 ( talk) 05:45, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
I assume that light bulbs replaced candles at some point as the main artificial light source in industrial societies. When did this happen??? Light bulbs combined with electric power in every home presumably radically changed people's ability to work when they pleased. This huge effect on society is completely unmentioned. My main curiousity is when did this happen? (Of course it will vary by region, and many places still have no power, but I think it is still a reasonable question.)
It is very nice to cover the zillion patent history, but even the "commercialization" section doesn't tell me when, say, a typical New York apartment or London flat was lit primarily by candles vs. light bulbs. Did they catch on slowly? Quickly? In what decades? Please, somebody tell us the social history! 130.60.5.218 ( talk) 22:05, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
I've heard that in the 1950s lightbulbs were given away for free when you recycled your old ones(I think I heard it was the Edison Company). Then someone decided that they wanted to make a profit off selling lightbulbs so they sued on grounds that the company giving lightbulbs away for free was running a monopoly and that was the end of free lightbulbs? 65.42.26.190 ( talk) 20:19, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
Is the incandescent the first mass-produced electric light source? And does not its continued use, in the face of better alternatives, represent economic inertia by virtue of its position? User:Edison says not to mindlessly edit war, but in his edit summary he said "Candles and oil lamps were also mass produced. Do not mindlessly edit-war. Take it to the talk page." Since my edit said "By virtue of their position as the first mass-produced electrical light source" and he failed to notice that, who is the mindless one? Abductive ( reasoning) 03:13, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
So much talk on discussion forums all over internet about exploding bulbs. So many photos and videos. Sometime light bulb explosion causes injuries and even suspected cause of, apartment fire, wildfires, fire on train etc. But I am not finding any website to give references. I can't give references of discussion forums. I just don't understand what is going on. Hope that some user knows better references. If so, please add a section to this article Light bulb and redirect article created by me to this article. Thanks! Rāmā ( talk) 15:49, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
I really like having the history in-line in an overview article, but perhaps the section is large enough to split out? --- Wtshymanski ( talk) 02:33, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
maybe add mention in the table of comparing efficacies of the recent commercially available Cree XP-G white LEDs of 132lm/watt —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.83.19.103 ( talk) 19:35, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
Considering its the archetypical example of Planned Obsolescence in engineering and business courses which discuss this, shouldn't their be a section on how lightbulbs are designed to fail by insuring the gas mix inside the bulb will oxidize the filliment? 208.66.124.31 ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 14:45, 27 January 2010 (UTC).
Why not mention "pearl" versions? —DIV ( 138.194.12.32 ( talk) 06:17, 26 November 2009 (UTC))
We need a little more on Sawyer and Man's bulb, which was important to Westinghouse getting the Worlds' Fair lighting contract when Edison wouldn't sell him any lamps to use on AC. Sawyer looks like a tragic figure and Man is interseting as a rare lawyer/inventor. I've renamed a section to "manufacturing" which could be considerably expanded. -- Wtshymanski ( talk) 15:05, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
The first sentence reads "Approximately 90% of the power consumed by an incandescent light bulb is emitted as heat, rather than as visible light.[27]"
This should be made more accurate. You cannot speak of emission of heat. Emission (or radiation) is one possible way to TRANSFER heat. The emission consists of photons in the IR part of the spectrum. And if the human skin (or the air surrounding the bulb) absorbs them, they will be perceived as "warmth".
I suggest to change it to "Approximately 90% of the power consumed by an incandescent light bulb is emitted as infrared radiation, rather than as visible light.[27]"
Bj norge ( talk) 11:20, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
Very well. There are of course some heat processes involved. But they are not emitted. This sentence refers to the main processes in play. I don't see why wikipedia should be less precise than other comparable sources. There is a lot of technical language in the article as well as in thousands of other wikipedia articles. And this can quite misleading if one uses technical and collquial language in the same section. There is some room between the suggested text and a physics text.
It was just a concrete and simple suggestion for a possible clarification of the text. But we cannot reach a consensus on this so we'll leave it at that. Bj norge ( talk) 08:27, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
This article refers to 25 General Electric TP-110 pg. 3 26.^ Kane and Sell 2001 page 37, table 2-1 27.^ General Electric TP-110, page 23, table. and several of them are used as references repeatedely.
I get no hits on google for anywhere to view or buy these documents. Are these references available anywhere? And if not, are they appropriate references? Bj norge ( talk) 21:33, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
The Raymond Kane , Heinz Sell book is of course a excellent, valid and appropriate references. I belive we should include the title and ISBN number (at least once), so that it is easy to find and readily apparent that it is a quote from a published book.
I cannot see how to go from the information "General Electric TP-110" to anything that one can use to obtain this. Maybe there is a fuller name that makes it easier to find? GE has numerous documents published on the net but I haven't found anything with this name. Bj norge ( talk) 09:03, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
Current article states, "Study of the problem of bulb blackening led to the discovery of the Edison effect, thermionic emission and invention of the vacuum tube." Although true, this article needs to explain that Edison discovered adding additional metal elements to the lamp envelope and then connecting voltage to them produced a triode vacuum tube (called 'valve' in the UK) which allowed Edison to use a little current flow between two of these elements to control a large current flow between two other elements. Edison named this the 'Edison effect'. Edison noted this control of current in his laboratory notes. Edison promptly dismissed his 'Edison effect' and other inventors later on recognized its possibilities. These other inventors made use of the 'Edison effect' and produced the Audion tube and the triode vacuum tube or valve.
I propose to write in this article, "Edison dismissed his 'Edison effect' and others invented the vacuum tube."
Will also include supporting references.
Would appreciate other editors to comment on how best to combine these two sentences to preserve the historical facts...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triode
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triode_electron_tube
-- Sponsion ( talk) 06:30, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
This page seems to be a repeated target of vandalism. Fortunately there are a lot of cops on the beat, but should this article get semi-protected to free them up to do more useful work? Ccrrccrr ( talk) 16:40, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
I have reverted deletion of the comment about slow reaction time of CFLs. This is a serious problem for elderly and disabled individuals especially where their sight is poor. with many "trip and fall" accidents caused by low light levels. Peterlewis ( talk) 07:53, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
Well I suppose ignorance of the problems is a excuse for your curious opinions. I saw my own 106 year old father slip when using a CFL kitchen lamp with slow reaction time. I replaced it immediately. The article gives some good advice but clearly needs some healthy criticism from those of us who have to investigate real accidents. Peterlewis ( talk) 21:20, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
Peterlewis, I appreciate your raising this sincere concern, and I'm sorry the response was sarcasm. Unfortunately, there's really not any way that we can add anything in Wikipedia without a reliable source backing up your assertion. The idea that "instant illumination is vital for their safety" is not self evident. How are people safe for time just before the switch is thrown? Ccrrccrr ( talk) 02:55, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
The story of how the incandescent light bulb came into being is interesting, to say the least. Anyone today interested enough can read about it today but won't have lived through the exciting days when the battle to produce successful electric light was in full swing. The newspapers of the day were keen to chase the next big development in science and print it. Reporting scientific developments sold newspapers. There is one particular report that many would find both amusing and interesting; printed by the New York Daily Tribune in January, 1880 under the title 'Mr. Edison's New Lamp.' Here's the link to the image, provided by the Library of Congress, Washington, DC. : http://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/sn83030214/1880-01-02/ed-1/seq-2/ MZionC ( talk) 17:45, 27 August 2010 (UTC) On 9-23-10 Production was officially ended by GE of the incandescent light bulb.
I visited this page hoping to find sales totals for the lightbulb. How many lightbulbs have been sold since its invention? How many are sold annually? I think the page should mention same. -- 66.222.244.232 ( talk) 18:21, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
I'm not prepared to make the actual changes to the section of the article on "Health Issues," until it can be properly sited. I think the issue of UV light emitted by fluorescent bulbs also requires a notation on just how much time humans today spend in doors, away from natural light. UV light is the only method by with the human body makes vitamin D.
In addition, I think it is extremely relevant to add a notation that fluorescent bulbs contain a quantity of mercury (as noted by the Hg symbol on the bulb/packaging).
However, it should be noted that I found this article by typing a search for "Light Bulb." This article is the return, which is clearly about a specific type of bulb - the incandescent light bulb. Unless this article is prepared to include more information on fluorescent bulbs, I feel the "Health Issues" section should be moved to the Discussion Page, rather than the actual article. Christopher, Salem, OR ( talk) 17:23, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
But an incandescent bulb causes much more mercury to be released into the atmosphere for us all to breath than a CFL bulb, because the latter uses 1/4 less power for equivalent lumens of light. Thus the mercury argument is a red herring. Of course, incandescents are made of very thin glass to allow them to produce more light, thus making them prone to easy breakage. it is quite difficult to break a CFL, which is made of heavier, thicker, glass tube. Try to break one. I find it almost impossible without seriously focused force. In any case, a red herring concern from most likely the business as usual lighting industry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.32.166.162 ( talk) 23:35, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
{{edit semi-protected}}
For the entry, "Incandescent light bulb", under the section "Manufacturing", could you please fix the following grammatical error.
Original text :
Early lamps were laboriously hand-assembled; cost of lamps fell after automatic machinery was developed.
Proposed, corrected text :
Early lamps were laboriously hand-assembled; however after automatic machinery was developed the cost of lamps fell.
OR
Early lamps were laboriously hand-assembled. The cost of lamps fell after automatic machinery was developed.
220.245.94.174 ( talk) 09:21, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
Well, I guess the article is locked, so there is nothing I can do about the fact that this key article does not mention the most common light bulb envelope form factor A19 nor the most common one-inch E26 base.- 96.237.72.218 ( talk) 18:21, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
{{edit semi-protected}}
efficacy should be "efficiency"
Indytycoon (
talk)
12:50, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
The use of 'efficacy' in the article seems vague. At some points it seems to be meaning efficiency and other places something else, possibly 'effectiveness' - which is what I'd take 'efficacy' to mean.
Lamps, bulbs and tubes
I was mildly irritated by these terms until the point I read 'tubular bulb'. I guess this is akin to circular squares ?
Tubes are tubular and presumably bulbs are bulb-shaped ;) - hence their name. I think there is much debate about the mix up between 'lamp' and bulb but, based on one of Edison's patents, I think I've worked it out. A 'light bulb' is undoubtedly a bulb-shaped light source. A 'lamp' is a contraption for creating light - with name variations for specific designs. Lamps may use light bulbs as their light source. Alternatives are gas and oil, etc. 'Lamp' variations include 'desk lamp','standard lamp', 'street lamp', 'miner's lamp' ['Davy Lamp'] 'head lamp' (car) etc. A light bulb is what it says on the tin. A lamp includes control gear to manage the light source.
I do suspect 'tubular bulbs' exist - on the ends of thermometers - where the bulb is more a round-ended cylinder. Any envelope with a contact at either end is most certainly a tube. Bulbs are obviously significantly less tubular and have both terminals at one end of the envelope. There may well be a grey area somewhere (due to dim light?) but perhaps definable on the quantity of caps.
I came looking for when 'pearl' bulbs were first made. I note there's a lacking in the article on pearl/frosting of bulbs.
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.141.47.192 ( talk) 00:47, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
In 1924, Marvin Pipkin, an American chemist, patented a process for frosting the inside of lamp bulbs without weakening them, and in 1947 he patented a process for coating the inside of lamps with silica.
oh and i forgot to tell you this kind of light bulb can really hurt your skin — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bernster1997 ( talk • contribs) 00:06, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
{{edit semi-protected}} Costs of lighting:
"To compare incandescent lamp operating cost with other light sources, the calculation must also consider the lumens produced by each lamp." Remove the word "also."
Actually this whole section is awkwardly written and should be written from scratch. The costs of industrial lighting are the same for residential except instead of required illumination, you have desired illumination. Just remove the word required and replace it with desired and remove the mentioning of commercial and industrial. I also don't see any mention of the cost of energy used per lumen which would be a primary determinant of the cost--the number of lumens needed times the cost per lumen.
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 |
The Edison patent is for an "electric lamp" as I would suppose most of these inventions would have been called at the time. I think the current discussion using the term "light bulb" is appropriate as this is the common term used today. However, I also believe it would be interesting to know when the term "light bulb" was first used, or came into common usage. Jbottoms76 ( talk) 08:21, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
In 1906, the General Electric Company was the first to patent a method of making tungsten filaments for use in incandescent light bulbs.
Wasn't this patent bought from Lodygin? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.131.194.102 ( talk) 10:29, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
Yes, It was...see http://www.geocities.com/s_fedosov/history/texno.htm —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.255.179.188 ( talk) 17:13, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
I have fluerescent lights everywhere in my home, *except* my room. Because i work all the time with the computer and look at the monitor, and fluerescent lights make my eyes ake and makes them wet when i look at the monitor 10 minutes or more. Yes i tried to replace light bulb in my room with fluerescent light already so many times. Yes the vertical frequency is the highest, 80 hz, yes the monitor is lcd. But why no one thinks about the simple fact that the fluerescent lights flicker, and the monitor screen flickers as well, and together they generate much more intensive and lower frequency flickering, while banning light bulbs or advocating against them. When they ban light bulbs in EU, would there be any possibility for me to get a light which doesn't flicker? Are there any alternatives, or anyone even ever thought about it? Are there some special lights which are made to flicker less? I think these concerns have to be mentioned in the article for it to be neutral point of view, instead of writing there only the fluerescent lights advocacy, that the light bulbs would be eventually replaced with the flurescent lights, and this is only good. Please consider that, thank you.-- Tkorrovi 17:39, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
Tkorrivi, There are other bulbs, known as LED bulbs that are somewhat expensive, but last longer than cfls (Also known as fluorescent bulbs) and use less energy. But, these bulbs do not produce as much light. N:vision cfl's do not flicker. (At least, I think so.) —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
75.166.211.132 (
talk)
03:33, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
When I reverted the Nickroxvote3 vandalism, I used "Humphrey" Davy for the spelling, but that was later changed to Humphry. I only came by because Nickroxvotex vandalized one of the sites I monitor so I was curious about what he did here. I also got curious about this Davy guy and did some Googling on him and noted that his named was spelled as Humphrey here and there, which is why I ended up spelling it that way. Whatever. Just some FYI. -BC aka Callmebc 14:10, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
Hi, I just googled to find out exactly what an 'incandescent bulb' [as opposed to "a bulb"!] is as they have just been banned in Ireland, and I read the above discussion. So here are the links confirming their banning in Ireland last week. Greenpeace wanted the ban to start in 2010 [1] but the Irish government is banning them from 2009. http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/breaking-news/ireland/article3229273.ece; http://www.greenpeace.org.uk/media/press-releases/ireland-legislates-to-ban-inefficienct-light-bulbs-by-2009-20071206; http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/WO0712/S00420.htm; 213.202.170.60 ( talk) 23:58, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
Is Ireland now the first state to ban incandescent bulbs? 213.202.170.60 ( talk) 23:59, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
Someone changed the text recently to say Swan was born in "Sunderland, England" rather than "Sunderland, United Kingdom." What is the preferred usage? Is the present like saying someone was born in "Philadelphia, Pennsylvania" rather than "Philadelphia, United States?" No strong feelings on this, but input from Brits or Manual of Style wonks appreciated. Edison ( talk) 23:33, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
A diagram in this article identifies insulation at the base of a lightbulb as "vitrit". What is this stuff? A Google search brings up nothing, other than a site that requires you to pay to access it, which identifies it as a mineral:
http://www.mindat.org/min-23479.html
These links seem to be associating it with coal:
http://www.kgs.ku.edu/Publications/Bulletins/102_1/03_class.html
http://www.oxygentimerelease.com/A/Therapies/Germanium/b7.htm —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.232.126.158 ( talk • contribs) 21:51, 19 December 2007
Response copied from Wikipedia Reference Desk: Miscellaneous: :::"The Electrical Engineer" for Oct. 25, 1889 p 322 [2] talks about the "Vitrite Company" as making the insulating glass used in the base of light bulbs. I find a description of the base of the bulb, inside the brass screw-form base, being filled with "vitrite" in pp 68-69 of "Electricity in Mining" By Sydney Ferris Walker, Van Nostrand, New York, 1907, viewable at Google Books [3] . Before vitrite, porcelein was used, and before that plaster of paris, which absorbed moisture and which crumbled from the heat. Vitrite is described in "A Dictionary of Chemistry and the Allied Branches of Other Sciences" By Henry Watts (1869)as another name for vitrinopal, "a matrix of Bohemian pyrope, related to pitchstone, and being 83.72% silica, 3.58% ferric oxide, 7.57% lime, .67% magnesia, and 11.46% water. Unfortunately this adds up to 107%. The 1911 Britannica article on electric lamps [4] calls it "vitrite." Numerous other sources found from Google Book search spell it "vitrite." I have corrected the spelling in the Incandescent light bulb article. Edison ( talk) 18:20, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
I wish this article had a little more on the physics of the light bulb. I came to it hoping to solve something. It's common knowledge of course that electricity running through the resistance of the filament causes the filament to get so hot it glows. So the resistance is what makes it work. But then it seems to me, from Ohm's law, that for a given voltage, a lower resistance would pass more current, and therefore the device would operate at a higher power. So it would seem that to get more light output, you'd use a filament with a lower resistance. It's a paradox I've been wondering about for some time. 140.147.160.34 ( talk) 19:31, 31 December 2007 (UTC)Stephen Kosciesza
[5] Contains a reprint of "Invention of the Incandescent Lamp", Electrical World and Engineer, Vol 35, No 15, Apr 14, 1900, pg 540" which cites predecessors of Woodword and Evans who had superior lamps, and debunks some of the claims made for their priority. I am still trying to figure out the significance of the claim that "Edison bought their patent then patented his bulb." Thisoft-repeated claim makes little sense. If his patent were the same as an earlier patent, then competing and infringing manufacturers would have cited that fact in the litigation, which Edison eventually won, and they would not have been counting down the days until his patent expired. You don't buy a patent from someone then re-patent it and claim it is your own. Edison ( talk) 23:06, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
I've taken a look at the artice, Lamp (electical component) and there is a little information that I'd like to add to this article. Where the article states: "The same year, Canadians Henry Woodward and Mathew Evans", I will add: ",working for the Morrison’s Brass Foundry on Adelaide St., West Toronto, Canada" and at the end will amend it to say "obtained a US patent for their light bulb," so in full it will read:
"The same year, Canadians Henry Woodward and Mathew Evans, ,working for the Morrison’s Brass Foundry on Adelaide St. West Toronto, Canada, obtained a US patent for their light bulb."
Within the Lamp (electrical component) article, there is a rather subjective section entitled 'A Brief History' which, whilst not suitable for an encyclopedia, does contain a line or two of useful information. If there is a better wording that anyone can thing of, please don't hesitate. I'm still rather new to editing documents on Wiki, especially in a scientific article. Daniel-James 01:51, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
I've corrected 90-95% heat output statement to 98%. See the table already in the article, which already confirms this figure.
I also removed the existing reference http://www.homefamily.net/index.php?/categories/consumersmarts/light_bulb_energy_efficiency/ because it is
Tabby ( talk) 07:09, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
Edison wrote: "The reference you deleted cites a Canadian government site [6] for the 5 to 8% figure. Such a source is not so easily dismissed as that for being "wrong," i.e. not agreeing with your opinions."
If you want to cite the CDN govt site, then great, but citing the article with basic errors I removed is not a step toward the solution, as that sort of material is not fit for citation. It is neither correct, accurate, scientific, nor written with any particular care for the facts. I don't know if we'll agree on that, but I hope at least you appreciate why I removed it, and why others likely will in future if reinstated. Tabby ( talk) 20:46, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
There is an inconsistancy in the article between the "10%" light 90% heat" for incandescent lamps and the later reference to "9% efficiency" for halogen lamps, which was recently modified to 25%. If we are still thinking about the ratio of light to heat 25% is impossible. I believe 9% for (the best) halogen lamps is about right and the GE reference to "approximately 10 % is rather optimistic for ordinary domestic lamps. A 120V 100W at 17 l/w corresponds to a colour temperature of 2900K . A black body at this CT has 5% in the visible. For 9% the CT would need to be about 3200K. Tungsten filaments are not perfect black bodies, generally giving slightly more light, but my figures indicate roughtly the comparison. The figures in the table for efficiency, related to the perfect conversion to light aren't very relevent for other than academics and probably just cause confusion. ( Redcliffe92 ( talk) 21:06, 27 March 2008 (UTC))
The diagram lacks ballotini fuses
GLS filament lighting is normally 2700K Tabby ( talk) 07:21, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
Agreed. Patent reference to ballotini fuses added to the article.( Redcliffe92 ( talk) 16:14, 10 March 2008 (UTC))
As there is a section on the Edison screw type socket, we should probably include a reference to Edison_screw which as an overview. Alternatively, Edison_screw could be merged with this article (which is getting very long). Moaltmann ( talk) 00:02, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
I've rephrased US policy to international, as the US only accounts for 5% of the world population.
/* Luminous efficacy and efficiency */ Most -> Some safety codes. Most is unrealistic for a worldwide wiki, even among the wealthier countries only some do.
Same applies to mandatory use of LEDs in emergency escape signs, here in UK we usually use fluorescent, claiming LEDs are mandatory does not describe the world situation factually.
If someone is going to revert this to describing only US practices, please give us all a good reason here. Tabby ( talk) 21:04, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
In the description of Lamp Construction it is stated "filled with an inert gas to reduce evaporation of the filament and reduce the required strength of the glass". I do not believe "reduce the required strength of the glass" is correct. During manufacture the gas filling is introduced at just below, or even above atmospheric pressure. When the lamp is lit its pressure will rise, so the glass envelope will be under tension. Converesely, in a vacuum lamp it will be under compression. Glass fails under tension, not compression. Even with a wall thickness on 0.7mm in places the bulb is very strong, and bursting is not an issue, (unless it receives a thermal shock). Gas filling does create higher temperatures on the bulb, particulary where the convection stream from the filament reaches it. This has to be taken into consideration when sizing the lamp, for example to keep the base temperature within limits. Does anyone object to the removal of "and reduce the required strength of the glass" ? ( Redcliffe92 ( talk) 19:40, 11 March 2008 (UTC)) No comment, so deletion made. ( Redcliffe92 ( talk) 20:50, 17 March 2008 (UTC))
No comment on the article. But inviting opinions on whether the lightbulb is an ohmic resistor. I will keep my opinion to myself for now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.238.49.65 ( talk) 21:45, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
The resistance of tungsten is temperature dependent,with a posative coefficant, but this does not mean it is not ohmic. The cold resistance of gasfilled lamps is about one fifteenth of the hot resistance, higher for higher efficacy lamps. Carbon has a negative coefficient. ( Redcliffe92 ( talk) 22:33, 18 March 2008 (UTC))
-- Wtshymanski ( talk) 22:45, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
Can someone fill me in on the details of tungsten oxidation in air? See Talk:Tungsten#At_what_temperature_does_tungsten_burn. — Omegatron 23:49, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
While it's good to go back in the edit history to make sure you've caught all the vandalism, it's probably not a good idea to rewind the article from May 15 back to February 28. It's necessary to keep the good edits as well as getting rid of the bad. -- Wtshymanski ( talk) 16:48, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
Great picture but I'd be surprised if these were actually incandescent lamps; though some of them do look a little orange in the picture. -- Wtshymanski ( talk) 13:58, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
The photo would fit well in Floodlights (sport) - JWGreen ( talk) 02:10, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
Nitrogen is sometimes used as a fill gas in light bulbs. See Britannica online [9] and the IEE site on light bulbs [10]. The article said neon and argon were used, without mentioning nitrogen. Edison ( talk) 23:49, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
How is mentioning that in Australia "light bulbs" are commonly called "light globes" unencyclopaedic?
If this is true, then mentioning that the term is used in the theatre, television and film industries is also unencyclopaedic (and unreferenced). So I've removed that line and moved the term to the introduction line, because it is used not only in the entertainment industries (and Australia), but elsewhere too. --
203.94.135.134 (
talk)
23:11, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
I can't find any sources that agree with the following paragraph, there are several sources that say he created the first arc lamp but nothing about an incandescent lamp. 93.97.115.254 ( talk) 23:51, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
"In 1802, Humphry Davy had what was then the most powerful electrical battery in the world at the Royal Institution of Great Britain. In that year, he created the first incandescent light by passing the current through a thin strip of platinum, chosen because the metal had an extremely high melting point."
ehm... why isn't there any reference to Alexander Cruto? (see http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alessandro_Cruto ).
i think that he was an important person to this invention. -- 87.9.230.97 ( talk) 16:35, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
ok, i translated italian article, i hope in a pubblication.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Submissions/Alessandro_Curto -- 87.14.250.45 ( talk) 07:47, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
At what temperature does the filament in a light bulb first start glowing at all visibly (for example, operated by a dimmer)? Are there formulas for temp vs light output? A table of temp vs. apparent color of the glowing filament? - 71.174.182.182 ( talk) 14:56, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
There is a good set of formulas here that relate volts, amps, watts, lumens, and life; for General Electric lamps:
It is said that a wire has to get up to a temperature of about 2000-degC to start emitting significant quantity of visible light. This is above the melting point of copper, aluminum, iron, and steel.
Here is a good source of formulas and examples. It says that the power in to a lamp is proportional to the fourth power of the temperature of the filament in Kelvin, assuming all the power in is radiated from the filament:
- 71.174.182.182 ( talk) 15:58, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
The new caption is still gibberish. What's an "E27 bulb housing" ? There's an E27 base, there's an A-shape bulb, but what's a "bulb housing" and where does it show in the picture? Why show this arbitrary lamp at all? The caption should explain the relevance of the picture to the article else it's just a page decoration. The German text in the image description is no help at all. -- Wtshymanski ( talk) 17:20, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
Why is it considered preferable to use fluorescents, when they contain mercury? Granted incandescents use more power, which is bad for the environment, but isn't mercury worse? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.167.114.131 ( talk) 01:01, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
(Help edit this page!!! YOU will be recognized as the writer! Have fun!) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.5.190.240 ( talk) 22:15, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
There are many home experiments possible, making "light bulbs" to learn about the physics. Even a pencil can be used! (But be careful not to burn down the house.)
A pencil lead (carbon) has a resistance on the order of one ohm. Running appropriate current through a mechanical pencil lead produces light by incandesence: www.instructables.com/id/Lead_light_Not_a_LED/ - 71.174.182.182 ( talk) 00:37, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
The table it comes from is unreferenced, so of cause it would be better with referenced values. But I think it is important to see how the efficiency levels off, and that is better seen in a graph-- Thorseth ( talk) 09:04, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
The efficacy of practical incadescents depend on the life for which they are designed, whether single of coiled coil filaments are used and the composition of the filling gas, as well as the rated voltage. A good indication of the variation of efficacy with wattage for lamps designed for an average life of 1000 hours can be found in IEC Publication 64 - Tungsten filament lamps for domestic and similar general lighting purposes - Performance requirements. My (old) copy gives two tables - "Lamps with normal luminous flux" and "Lamps with high luminous flux" The former covers single coil lamps and the latter coiled coil. They list "Minimum Rated luminous flux" for voltages 100 to 250, for wattages from 25 - 200W Earlier editions included higher wattages in the first table.
From the High Luminous flux table it can be deduced:
Watts 25 40 60 100 150 200
Efficacy
120 V 10.6 12.5 14 15.8 16.1 17.0 230V 9.2 10.4 11.8 13.4 14.4 15.2 From the "Normal Luminous flux talbe: 120V 8.8 10.9 12.7 14 15.5 16.3 230V 8.8 8.5 10.3 12.4 13.8 14.5 The apparent anomoly with the 230V 25W is because this lamp was a vacuum lamp, while all the others would be gasfilled.
It is unlikely these values have changed in later editions.
These show a flattening off at higher wattages and that the benefits of coiled coil filaments are greatest in the 40 -100 W range. Redcliffe92 ( talk) 14:17, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
I removed some text from the Commercialization section which was not really about commercialization, so much as it was poorly referenced and misleading claims about operating bulbs on DC, and claims that it was simple to make a "permanent light bulb." Even back in the 1890's they knew that there was a tradeoff between light output per watt and lifetime. If a bulb is operated at a low current, its lifetime is extended but the hue becomes more reddish and there is much less light output per watt. Thus more bulbs have to be installed to achieve a given level of lighting, at a higher cost for fixtures and wiring, as well as for the electricity used. with a higher overall cost. The claims about inserting a rectifier in the socket do not make clear whether it is a simple half wave rectifier, which would drastically reduce the RMS voltage and the efficiency. The cite to a scientist was some off the cuff remarks in a blog, and not a book or peer-reviewed journal. Edison ( talk) 17:39, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
I have removed the following passage:
As for any other electrical appliance, the hourly cost of operation can be calculated by multiplying the input in watts by the cost per kilowatt-hour and dividing by 1,000; for example, a 100-watt lamp operated on electricity that costs 10 cents per kilowatt-hour will cost 100 × 10/1,000 = 1 cent per hour to operate.
Not only is it entirely trivial and only tangentially relevant, but it is also highly confusing: I actually spent some fifteen seconds contemplating the meaning of the paragraph, looking for a non-trivial statement, not realising that someone actually wrote an entire paragraph on something so trivial. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.77.131.54 ( talk) 05:45, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
I assume that light bulbs replaced candles at some point as the main artificial light source in industrial societies. When did this happen??? Light bulbs combined with electric power in every home presumably radically changed people's ability to work when they pleased. This huge effect on society is completely unmentioned. My main curiousity is when did this happen? (Of course it will vary by region, and many places still have no power, but I think it is still a reasonable question.)
It is very nice to cover the zillion patent history, but even the "commercialization" section doesn't tell me when, say, a typical New York apartment or London flat was lit primarily by candles vs. light bulbs. Did they catch on slowly? Quickly? In what decades? Please, somebody tell us the social history! 130.60.5.218 ( talk) 22:05, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
I've heard that in the 1950s lightbulbs were given away for free when you recycled your old ones(I think I heard it was the Edison Company). Then someone decided that they wanted to make a profit off selling lightbulbs so they sued on grounds that the company giving lightbulbs away for free was running a monopoly and that was the end of free lightbulbs? 65.42.26.190 ( talk) 20:19, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
Is the incandescent the first mass-produced electric light source? And does not its continued use, in the face of better alternatives, represent economic inertia by virtue of its position? User:Edison says not to mindlessly edit war, but in his edit summary he said "Candles and oil lamps were also mass produced. Do not mindlessly edit-war. Take it to the talk page." Since my edit said "By virtue of their position as the first mass-produced electrical light source" and he failed to notice that, who is the mindless one? Abductive ( reasoning) 03:13, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
So much talk on discussion forums all over internet about exploding bulbs. So many photos and videos. Sometime light bulb explosion causes injuries and even suspected cause of, apartment fire, wildfires, fire on train etc. But I am not finding any website to give references. I can't give references of discussion forums. I just don't understand what is going on. Hope that some user knows better references. If so, please add a section to this article Light bulb and redirect article created by me to this article. Thanks! Rāmā ( talk) 15:49, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
I really like having the history in-line in an overview article, but perhaps the section is large enough to split out? --- Wtshymanski ( talk) 02:33, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
maybe add mention in the table of comparing efficacies of the recent commercially available Cree XP-G white LEDs of 132lm/watt —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.83.19.103 ( talk) 19:35, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
Considering its the archetypical example of Planned Obsolescence in engineering and business courses which discuss this, shouldn't their be a section on how lightbulbs are designed to fail by insuring the gas mix inside the bulb will oxidize the filliment? 208.66.124.31 ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 14:45, 27 January 2010 (UTC).
Why not mention "pearl" versions? —DIV ( 138.194.12.32 ( talk) 06:17, 26 November 2009 (UTC))
We need a little more on Sawyer and Man's bulb, which was important to Westinghouse getting the Worlds' Fair lighting contract when Edison wouldn't sell him any lamps to use on AC. Sawyer looks like a tragic figure and Man is interseting as a rare lawyer/inventor. I've renamed a section to "manufacturing" which could be considerably expanded. -- Wtshymanski ( talk) 15:05, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
The first sentence reads "Approximately 90% of the power consumed by an incandescent light bulb is emitted as heat, rather than as visible light.[27]"
This should be made more accurate. You cannot speak of emission of heat. Emission (or radiation) is one possible way to TRANSFER heat. The emission consists of photons in the IR part of the spectrum. And if the human skin (or the air surrounding the bulb) absorbs them, they will be perceived as "warmth".
I suggest to change it to "Approximately 90% of the power consumed by an incandescent light bulb is emitted as infrared radiation, rather than as visible light.[27]"
Bj norge ( talk) 11:20, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
Very well. There are of course some heat processes involved. But they are not emitted. This sentence refers to the main processes in play. I don't see why wikipedia should be less precise than other comparable sources. There is a lot of technical language in the article as well as in thousands of other wikipedia articles. And this can quite misleading if one uses technical and collquial language in the same section. There is some room between the suggested text and a physics text.
It was just a concrete and simple suggestion for a possible clarification of the text. But we cannot reach a consensus on this so we'll leave it at that. Bj norge ( talk) 08:27, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
This article refers to 25 General Electric TP-110 pg. 3 26.^ Kane and Sell 2001 page 37, table 2-1 27.^ General Electric TP-110, page 23, table. and several of them are used as references repeatedely.
I get no hits on google for anywhere to view or buy these documents. Are these references available anywhere? And if not, are they appropriate references? Bj norge ( talk) 21:33, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
The Raymond Kane , Heinz Sell book is of course a excellent, valid and appropriate references. I belive we should include the title and ISBN number (at least once), so that it is easy to find and readily apparent that it is a quote from a published book.
I cannot see how to go from the information "General Electric TP-110" to anything that one can use to obtain this. Maybe there is a fuller name that makes it easier to find? GE has numerous documents published on the net but I haven't found anything with this name. Bj norge ( talk) 09:03, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
Current article states, "Study of the problem of bulb blackening led to the discovery of the Edison effect, thermionic emission and invention of the vacuum tube." Although true, this article needs to explain that Edison discovered adding additional metal elements to the lamp envelope and then connecting voltage to them produced a triode vacuum tube (called 'valve' in the UK) which allowed Edison to use a little current flow between two of these elements to control a large current flow between two other elements. Edison named this the 'Edison effect'. Edison noted this control of current in his laboratory notes. Edison promptly dismissed his 'Edison effect' and other inventors later on recognized its possibilities. These other inventors made use of the 'Edison effect' and produced the Audion tube and the triode vacuum tube or valve.
I propose to write in this article, "Edison dismissed his 'Edison effect' and others invented the vacuum tube."
Will also include supporting references.
Would appreciate other editors to comment on how best to combine these two sentences to preserve the historical facts...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triode
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triode_electron_tube
-- Sponsion ( talk) 06:30, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
This page seems to be a repeated target of vandalism. Fortunately there are a lot of cops on the beat, but should this article get semi-protected to free them up to do more useful work? Ccrrccrr ( talk) 16:40, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
I have reverted deletion of the comment about slow reaction time of CFLs. This is a serious problem for elderly and disabled individuals especially where their sight is poor. with many "trip and fall" accidents caused by low light levels. Peterlewis ( talk) 07:53, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
Well I suppose ignorance of the problems is a excuse for your curious opinions. I saw my own 106 year old father slip when using a CFL kitchen lamp with slow reaction time. I replaced it immediately. The article gives some good advice but clearly needs some healthy criticism from those of us who have to investigate real accidents. Peterlewis ( talk) 21:20, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
Peterlewis, I appreciate your raising this sincere concern, and I'm sorry the response was sarcasm. Unfortunately, there's really not any way that we can add anything in Wikipedia without a reliable source backing up your assertion. The idea that "instant illumination is vital for their safety" is not self evident. How are people safe for time just before the switch is thrown? Ccrrccrr ( talk) 02:55, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
The story of how the incandescent light bulb came into being is interesting, to say the least. Anyone today interested enough can read about it today but won't have lived through the exciting days when the battle to produce successful electric light was in full swing. The newspapers of the day were keen to chase the next big development in science and print it. Reporting scientific developments sold newspapers. There is one particular report that many would find both amusing and interesting; printed by the New York Daily Tribune in January, 1880 under the title 'Mr. Edison's New Lamp.' Here's the link to the image, provided by the Library of Congress, Washington, DC. : http://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/sn83030214/1880-01-02/ed-1/seq-2/ MZionC ( talk) 17:45, 27 August 2010 (UTC) On 9-23-10 Production was officially ended by GE of the incandescent light bulb.
I visited this page hoping to find sales totals for the lightbulb. How many lightbulbs have been sold since its invention? How many are sold annually? I think the page should mention same. -- 66.222.244.232 ( talk) 18:21, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
I'm not prepared to make the actual changes to the section of the article on "Health Issues," until it can be properly sited. I think the issue of UV light emitted by fluorescent bulbs also requires a notation on just how much time humans today spend in doors, away from natural light. UV light is the only method by with the human body makes vitamin D.
In addition, I think it is extremely relevant to add a notation that fluorescent bulbs contain a quantity of mercury (as noted by the Hg symbol on the bulb/packaging).
However, it should be noted that I found this article by typing a search for "Light Bulb." This article is the return, which is clearly about a specific type of bulb - the incandescent light bulb. Unless this article is prepared to include more information on fluorescent bulbs, I feel the "Health Issues" section should be moved to the Discussion Page, rather than the actual article. Christopher, Salem, OR ( talk) 17:23, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
But an incandescent bulb causes much more mercury to be released into the atmosphere for us all to breath than a CFL bulb, because the latter uses 1/4 less power for equivalent lumens of light. Thus the mercury argument is a red herring. Of course, incandescents are made of very thin glass to allow them to produce more light, thus making them prone to easy breakage. it is quite difficult to break a CFL, which is made of heavier, thicker, glass tube. Try to break one. I find it almost impossible without seriously focused force. In any case, a red herring concern from most likely the business as usual lighting industry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.32.166.162 ( talk) 23:35, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
{{edit semi-protected}}
For the entry, "Incandescent light bulb", under the section "Manufacturing", could you please fix the following grammatical error.
Original text :
Early lamps were laboriously hand-assembled; cost of lamps fell after automatic machinery was developed.
Proposed, corrected text :
Early lamps were laboriously hand-assembled; however after automatic machinery was developed the cost of lamps fell.
OR
Early lamps were laboriously hand-assembled. The cost of lamps fell after automatic machinery was developed.
220.245.94.174 ( talk) 09:21, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
Well, I guess the article is locked, so there is nothing I can do about the fact that this key article does not mention the most common light bulb envelope form factor A19 nor the most common one-inch E26 base.- 96.237.72.218 ( talk) 18:21, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
{{edit semi-protected}}
efficacy should be "efficiency"
Indytycoon (
talk)
12:50, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
The use of 'efficacy' in the article seems vague. At some points it seems to be meaning efficiency and other places something else, possibly 'effectiveness' - which is what I'd take 'efficacy' to mean.
Lamps, bulbs and tubes
I was mildly irritated by these terms until the point I read 'tubular bulb'. I guess this is akin to circular squares ?
Tubes are tubular and presumably bulbs are bulb-shaped ;) - hence their name. I think there is much debate about the mix up between 'lamp' and bulb but, based on one of Edison's patents, I think I've worked it out. A 'light bulb' is undoubtedly a bulb-shaped light source. A 'lamp' is a contraption for creating light - with name variations for specific designs. Lamps may use light bulbs as their light source. Alternatives are gas and oil, etc. 'Lamp' variations include 'desk lamp','standard lamp', 'street lamp', 'miner's lamp' ['Davy Lamp'] 'head lamp' (car) etc. A light bulb is what it says on the tin. A lamp includes control gear to manage the light source.
I do suspect 'tubular bulbs' exist - on the ends of thermometers - where the bulb is more a round-ended cylinder. Any envelope with a contact at either end is most certainly a tube. Bulbs are obviously significantly less tubular and have both terminals at one end of the envelope. There may well be a grey area somewhere (due to dim light?) but perhaps definable on the quantity of caps.
I came looking for when 'pearl' bulbs were first made. I note there's a lacking in the article on pearl/frosting of bulbs.
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.141.47.192 ( talk) 00:47, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
In 1924, Marvin Pipkin, an American chemist, patented a process for frosting the inside of lamp bulbs without weakening them, and in 1947 he patented a process for coating the inside of lamps with silica.
oh and i forgot to tell you this kind of light bulb can really hurt your skin — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bernster1997 ( talk • contribs) 00:06, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
{{edit semi-protected}} Costs of lighting:
"To compare incandescent lamp operating cost with other light sources, the calculation must also consider the lumens produced by each lamp." Remove the word "also."
Actually this whole section is awkwardly written and should be written from scratch. The costs of industrial lighting are the same for residential except instead of required illumination, you have desired illumination. Just remove the word required and replace it with desired and remove the mentioning of commercial and industrial. I also don't see any mention of the cost of energy used per lumen which would be a primary determinant of the cost--the number of lumens needed times the cost per lumen.