3 ms·

Ah yes, and a better claim than some (there are quite a few more). I always wondered what the effect of these in absolute time is. Consider: if someone had com

by jacquesm 11mo ago

Ah yes, and a better claim than some (there are quite a few more). I always wondered what the effect of these in absolute time is. Consider: if someone had come up with a viable steam engine in the year 1000 or so, how would that have change the course of history?

lisper 11mo ago
I remember reading an analysis of that a while back but I can't remember where I saw it. The upshot was that the industrial revolution turned on more than just innovation, it also required just the right combination of natural resources (coal) and economic conditionsL deforestation in England driving the use of coal for heat, which drove mining, which drove the need for pumps, which made Savery's engine economically viable. Before that steam power would not have found an application. Also, the piston and cylinder (which came later) were derived from canon-making technology, so that had to come first too.
- deepnotderp 11mo ago
  > t also required just the right combination of natural resources (coal) and economic conditionsL deforestation This argument is repeated often, but I don't think it's really true. Both Savery and Newcomen's engines were initially aimed at evacuating flooded metal mines and not coal mines.
  - lisper 11mo ago
    Source? Because Wikipedia says: "A few Savery pumps were tried in mines, an unsuccessful attempt being made to use one to clear water from a pool called Broad Waters in Wednesbury (then in Staffordshire) and nearby coal mines."
- gus_massa 11mo ago
  Probably https://acoup.blog/2022/08/26/collections-why-no-roman-industrial-revolution/ https://acoup.blog/2022/08/26/collections-why-no-roman-indus... HN discussion https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32607187 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32607187 (509 points | Aug 2022 | 519 comments)
  - lisper 11mo ago
    Yes, that was it! Thank you! How did you know?
    - jemmyw 11mo ago
      I remembered the same article too, I'm sure I could have found it again knowing it was listed on HN and/or recalling the wording. Good article too, going in depth on steam engines - the first ones were so inefficient they had to be really close to a really cheap source of fuel and be useful.
    - gus_massa 10mo ago
      Usually "Roman"+"Good post" or "Medieval European"+"Good" can be replaced by "acoup"+"I'm feeling lucky". PS 1: If you can remember how to spell "acoup", it's the harder part. PS 2: IIRC he only (mostly?) post about those topics, not about random old stuff, because it's his expertise area.

lisper 11mo ago

I remember reading an analysis of that a while back but I can't remember where I saw it. The upshot was that the industrial revolution turned on more than just innovation, it also required just the right combination of natural resources (coal) and economic conditionsL deforestation in England driving the use of coal for heat, which drove mining, which drove the need for pumps, which made Savery's engine economically viable. Before that steam power would not have found an application. Also, the piston and cylinder (which came later) were derived from canon-making technology, so that had to come first too.

deepnotderp 11mo ago
> t also required just the right combination of natural resources (coal) and economic conditionsL deforestation This argument is repeated often, but I don't think it's really true. Both Savery and Newcomen's engines were initially aimed at evacuating flooded metal mines and not coal mines.
- lisper 11mo ago
  Source? Because Wikipedia says: "A few Savery pumps were tried in mines, an unsuccessful attempt being made to use one to clear water from a pool called Broad Waters in Wednesbury (then in Staffordshire) and nearby coal mines."
gus_massa 11mo ago
Probably https://acoup.blog/2022/08/26/collections-why-no-roman-industrial-revolution/ https://acoup.blog/2022/08/26/collections-why-no-roman-indus... HN discussion https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32607187 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32607187 (509 points | Aug 2022 | 519 comments)
- lisper 11mo ago
  Yes, that was it! Thank you! How did you know?
  - jemmyw 11mo ago
    I remembered the same article too, I'm sure I could have found it again knowing it was listed on HN and/or recalling the wording. Good article too, going in depth on steam engines - the first ones were so inefficient they had to be really close to a really cheap source of fuel and be useful.
  - gus_massa 10mo ago
    Usually "Roman"+"Good post" or "Medieval European"+"Good" can be replaced by "acoup"+"I'm feeling lucky". PS 1: If you can remember how to spell "acoup", it's the harder part. PS 2: IIRC he only (mostly?) post about those topics, not about random old stuff, because it's his expertise area.