From: muratlanne@gmail.com   
      
   "Richard Smith"  wrote in message news:m1y0qan51h.fsf@void.com...   
      
   Collaboration would be like   
   "Here's this chalcopyrite (the primary copper ore) 'which I found lying   
   in my garden as it just so happened' which I've broken-up - will you   
   grind it?  Jim has got a lab. froth-floation machine.  Bill has the   
   firebricks to build a furnace in his garden" - etc, etc.   
   Make my contribution "modular".   
      
   ---------------------------------   
   The British approach to electronic warfare R&D during WW2 was like that,   
   very small teams on tasks that could be modularized such that each member   
   handled an entire electrical or mechanical aspect and the only collaboration   
   required was connecting them. I was part of a similarly managed project to   
   design a tester for advanced semiconductors.   
      
   In the Farm Hall transcripts the captured German atomic scientists discussed   
   R&D group dynamics after hearing of the US success and complained that   
   Germans couldn't and hadn't cooperated as well as they assumed the Americans   
   had on such a large project. Their egos were too big and Nazi dogma promoted   
   competition instead of cooperation. They hinted that they hadn't really   
   wanted to succeed. My "Copenhagen" guess is that Bohr and Heisenberg   
   discussed ways to appear to make progress without actually doing it. I think   
   the same was true of Kammler's Bell which I can see as an X-Ray antiaircraft   
   weapon.   
      
   https://germanhistorydocs.ghi-dc.org/pdf/eng/English101.pdf   
      
   "KORSHING: That shows at any rate that the Americans are capable of real   
   cooperation on a   
   tremendous scale. That would have been impossible in Germany. Each one said   
   that the   
   other was unimportant."   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)