More of the "everything uses maths so everything is maths!" trend. The Industrial Revolution was fueled by more than just mathematical advancements; it was equ

More of the "everything uses maths so everything is maths!" trend. The Industrial Revolution was fueled by more than just mathematical advancements; it was equally driven by empirical experimentation, practical innovation, and socio-economic factors. Innovators like James Watt relied heavily on trial-and-error and hands-on experience, not just mathematical models. Technological breakthroughs such as the spinning jenny and power loom stemmed more from mechanical ingenuity than from direct mathematical applications. Moreover, the rise of capitalist economies, availability of investment capital, and political stability played crucial roles in facilitating industrial growth. These elements, combined with a consumer culture, suggest that the revolution was as much about socio-economic transformation as it was about a mathematical paradigm shift. Additionally, the revolution cannot be seen solely through the lens of mathematics, as it underplays the significance of scientific understanding and multidisciplinary collaboration. Scientific theories in physics, chemistry, and biology provided essential underpinnings for technological advancements. The development of efficient steam engines, for example, was closely tied to the understanding of thermodynamics. Furthermore, the Industrial Revolution was a result of collaboration among mathematicians, scientists, and craftsmen, blending theoretical concepts with practical applications. The evolution of education, encompassing both mathematical and practical skills training, also played a pivotal role in preparing the workforce for industrial challenges. Thus, the revolution was a multifaceted phenomenon, influenced by a blend of practical experience, scientific knowledge, and socio-economic developments. I recently read "Lost in Math" by Sabine Hossenfelder and I'm seeing some similarities here. Hossenfelder's book critiques modern theoretical physics, particularly its reliance on aesthetic criteria such as beauty and simplicity in maths, which she argues can lead physicists astray from empirical science. The idea that the most elegant or beautiful mathematical equations are the best or most accurate representations of the physical world has almost become comedy.