Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why wasn't the steam engine invented earlier? Part II

antonhowes.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 315 posts

Re: Why wasn't the steam engine invented earlier? Part II

#161

Post by throwawaycuriou »

qikInNdOutReply wrote: post #76
terhechte wrote: post #40

The Greek philosoper Hero of Alexandria actually invented something close to a steam engine in the 1st century BE [1]. Whenever I think about "obvious" inventions which happened quite late in our civilization, I remember "The road not taken", a fantastic short story that plays with this idea. [2] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aeolipile [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Road_Not_Taken_(short_stor...

So why did it not win? The answer. Slaves. Slaves in the mines, slaves in the home, slave driving the rowboats and all services. Labour was cheap and plenty, also intelligent - with entrenched "automation" like this, no inventions are actually needed. Which goes to show, that technology stratifyng society strangles itself, by producing a servant class outcompeting all technology. Give it a hundred years and the "natu…

This begs a question: what technologies are inhibited by a looser definition of slavery? What inventions would arise if a global minimum wage was enforced?

Re: Why wasn't the steam engine invented earlier? Part II

#162

Post by BurningFrog »

bluGill wrote: post #158
qsort wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's very unlikely that slaves would be able to cover any present-day jobs except very menial service tasks. Cleaning houses, mowing lawns, sure. But you wouldn't even get as far as a taxi/truck driver, which is one of the least qualified jobs today.

Slaves did many skilled labor jobs back in the day. In Uncle Tom's Cabin (a book you really should read, but beware the purpose was to make you pick up your gun and march, so if you have those tendencies...) on of the important slaves held a good factory job. Of course most slaves were just hard labor, but they did hold other positions. I think you can find examples of slaves holding every position in society other t…

I think the point is more that you can't give a slave a truck with a tank of gas and expect to see either again.

Re: Why wasn't the steam engine invented earlier? Part II

#163

Post by zcw100 »

This question reminded me of a show that I used to love watching, Connections with James Burke. I'm sure there are aspects that it is missing but it's a very well told story of what needed to come together for the invention of the steam engine.

https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x68mfbf

Re: Why wasn't the steam engine invented earlier? Part II

#164

Post by lambda_matt »

There is an absolutely fantastic book by Simon Winchester called The Perfectionists. He has a chapter on the steam engine-- the long and the short of it was it couldn't exist until they could precisely machine the bore and piston to adequate tolerances produce enough power without accidentally producing a bomb

Re: Why wasn't the steam engine invented earlier? Part II

#165

Post by BoxOfRain »

OJFord wrote: post #154
visiblink wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The use of the word dependencies in this context is perfect. Untangling the history of technological innovation is an adventure into dependency hell.

It could be a pretty nice 'coffee table book': a walk through history of inventions, with the dependencies of each one listed (to one or maybe two degrees only of course). You could pick it up anywhere, read forwards; back from something specific (or forward, if you made it a doubly linked list?); or back from whatever 'the end' would be.

It would be interesting to see if there's a way this dependency graph could be captured and saved for future generations in the event of civilisation collapsing. I suspect something like that would rapidly reduce the time it takes for society to rebuild because it wouldn't have to spend energy figuring out what doesn't work all over again as much.

Re: Why wasn't the steam engine invented earlier? Part II

#166

Post by stareatgoats »

masswerk wrote: post #121
stareatgoats wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You say the anthill is the result of the amazing collaboration of all the ants in the colony, but look here is an ant that goes off doing nothing. What say you now? I say the big picture is that the steam engine was developed within a legal system that in general protected IP rights, at least respected them on a completely different level than before. Granted there are more pieces to the puzzle, but let's not forge…

Which meant that we would be still stuck with the Newcomen atmospheric engine as the settled technology? High steam pressure isn't just about a wandering ant, but about the major step in the development of the steam engine, opening the technology to all kinds of applications, beyond just pumping.

Interestingly, we don't seem to understand each other. It could be me. No matter, have a nice day.

Re: Why wasn't the steam engine invented earlier? Part II

#167

Post by mywittyname »

wrycoder wrote: post #156
moffkalast wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hell, even today if a CME or something wipes out our electronics we'll have to go way back to vacuum tubes or even simpler setups to restore our society since most modern electronics need modern electronics to be designed and manufactured.

You can make something as complicated as a 6502 processor with just electricity for furnaces, motors, and pumps, without using any electronics. You’d have to go back to hand-cut Rubylith for the mask sets. Hand made transistors are no problem, just more expensive.

People still do this stuff for fun too. So it's not some lost knowledge.

I wouldn't be surprised if some colleges taught this as part of a history of computers course.

Re: Why wasn't the steam engine invented earlier? Part II

#168

Post by mason55 »

legitster wrote: post #145

Environmental collapse and the price of steel! I think people forget just how expensive metal was. Carpenters would lock up their saws because the blades were so precious. People knew how to make cheaper steel from coal for a long time, but it was regarded as an inferior product and avoided. However, charcoal is labor intensive stuff to collect. By the 1700s, some cities in Europe had so depleted their available fore…

Sounds like energy production recently. While oil was cheap enough we had no reason to invest in cleaner tech. Even the threat of climate change isn’t enough. It’s only when oil gets real expensive that we invest in alternatives.

Re: Why wasn't the steam engine invented earlier? Part II

#169

Post by stareatgoats »

lolc wrote: post #155
stareatgoats wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your perspective on patents seems colored by the relative recent advent of patent trolls and the use of litigation to stifle innovation and competition. I suggest you look at the situation in England around 300 years ago and compare to the feudal system that was the rule elsewhere at the time - everything had to be approved by the king or the nobility, who had vested interests in land owning and serf systems. This so…

Check out the Wright brothers patent war at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wright_brothers_patent_war

Thanks that was interesting. But I'm not sure if there is a point related to the discussion in there or if this is just a tangential piece of trivia?

Re: Why wasn't the steam engine invented earlier? Part II

#170

Post by I-M-S »

BoxOfRain wrote: post #165
OJFord wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It could be a pretty nice 'coffee table book': a walk through history of inventions, with the dependencies of each one listed (to one or maybe two degrees only of course). You could pick it up anywhere, read forwards; back from something specific (or forward, if you made it a doubly linked list?); or back from whatever 'the end' would be.

It would be interesting to see if there's a way this dependency graph could be captured and saved for future generations in the event of civilisation collapsing. I suspect something like that would rapidly reduce the time it takes for society to rebuild because it wouldn't have to spend energy figuring out what doesn't work all over again as much.

Both of you might be interested to check out "How to Invent Everything" [1] - it's even got flowcharts the kind you mention at the end! [2]

[1] https://www.howtoinventeverything.com/ [2] https://mohamadacma.com/content/images/2022/04/825235c6-665f...

Post reply on HN