In any field of endeavor, it is impossible to make a significant contribution without first being strongly influenced by past achievements within that field.

It is a general human desire to make a significant and lasting contribution in the field. It is obvious that many want to expand the prior art knowledge by embarking unprecedented innovative approaches and leaving a dent in the world (for good); the motivation in many cases is driven as we want our succeeding generation to have exposure to high quality of life which is now missing. We are intrinsically motivated to do so; the desire is driven by admiring individuals like Albert Einstein, Thomas Edison, Steve Jobs, Ron Rivest, etc. the nobodies who just had a desire to change the world and guide future generations. Making a lasting contribution is not easy; it requires strenuous efforts, endless hours of rejections and a lasting dedication – Edison mastered the invention of light bulb after failing over a thousand times – which amongst the other factors is most critical. Whether the innovation is dependent on the prior art heavily depends on varied interpretations – in many cases where the invention is related to existing technology, then yes, whereas in domains where no prior research is existing; just mere exploration will yield a hopeful tangible result.

Deriving information from the dated texts can yield confusing results. There have been incidents where the motivation for a given experiment has been drawn from the previous studies; measuring energy of an individual photon was initially postulated by Einstein and was only recently concluded – The scientist used scaffolding similar to that of Einstein’s. However, at times when no innovation on the subject field exists, we are left with ideas and open ended questions fostering questions which have no direct consequence – Claude Shannon, apex scientist referred to as the father of modern information systems, designed the first Boolean logic supported system, which was unprecedented; however, his results encouraged many innovators towards designing a probabilistic time machines, capable of performing heavy computation which is now known as the computer. It is no doubt that many of the current innovations in the field are directed by the findings of Claude Shannon – defined the characteristic of a secure encryption structure, and need for the hash function. It can thus be evident when we have a tangible prior art, any innovator, explorer can investigate them use them and enhance the overall body of work – Alan Turing, inspired by the work of Claude Shannon produced the first electrical thinking machine, known as the turing machine; it successors are now a modern day computers. However, initially when there is no work done on the subject matter, it becomes quite difficult to explore the same as the methodology on the previous work can be deceiving or inconclusive on the developing domain – initial discovery of Chinese Remainder Theorem was unprecedented and took ages to just formulate the very idea, it can thus be seen that many of the claims made by the innovators are erroneous, as they believed it can be used to finding all the prime numbers on the number line, the same will be ridiculed by todays scientist which was championed and accepted as valid by philosophers of the time; the work was however, unprecedented and thus the above paradox can be depicted as it did not have an established prior art.

The empirical work done in the field can help a lot in enhancing the work. It is a no brainer that any scheme or work designed is not flawless – this is where the innovation takes place, highlighting the flaws, working to make it better and finally enhance the overall body – thus researchers are intrinsically motivated to draw work credible researchers, as they help them in developing a new frameworks, approaches and schemes of much greater applicability – Whitefield Diffie and Matin Hellman proposed an open ended question in 1970s stating a need for an algorithm which can perform encryption using one key and decryption using the other; this idea bemused high intellects of the time and amongst the few Ron Rivest was the one who came up with the solution, the algorithm is a widely used one in the field. Thus, the empirical studies in the prior art can help delineate more output and innovation, yielding the field to evolve at the apex stage of the all. However, certain findings can be erroneous, for instance a decade old manuscript which was used in developing a psychological treatment for overcoming anxiety issue was recently retracted as research showed that the data was falsified to promote results which matched the research hypothesis. However, it doesn’t imply that the same holds for all the cases, there are anomalies which surely exists; the spirit remains un-expunged as we are heavily dependent on such findings to actually grow the domain.

Innovation and evolution are congruous to each other as one cannot producing innovative results without evolving the field and evolution cannot happen in the field without innovation. To attain innovation a dependency on the prior art is needed. However, one can argue that many ideas are drawn from regions which are incongruous with the current findings – mathematicians believed that there were distinctive numbers on the number line; a mathematician which claimed that there were infinite numbers between any two numbers was ridiculed and was boycotted from the field and Fourier designed the series representing unprecedented heat equations using Sine and Cosine terms was ridiculed by masses experiences a real-time application and is championed throughout the field— but it can be proved that such findings do have a lot of holding in overall evolution of the field. The scientists, innovators are constantly exploring and although such findings were once ridiculed, they are now accepted – conversely it can be evident that many approaches proposed by Galelio are now considered unscientific approaches. Thus, however it can be proved that many interpretations can be delineated from this topic; but overall it does have a practical bearing and helps the field evolve.