Did Hero himself find it useless? What applications did he imagine? Nothing helpful for himself personally?
But I wonder, if Romans were not near around at that time, wouldn't Alexandrian inventors be able to build around a more mechanised polis?
It's possible that the thing was just a toy, a demonstration tool for the physics of steam, like the things you can buy in a science museum.
The æolipile that Melanchton illustrates is a (not particularly powerful) device for converting heat into rotational motion. In the technological context of the 1st century, I can imagine using that for a potter's turntable, but a steam machine would have been too expensive for a potter. And then there's the problem that the æolipile as depicted doesn't operate in a cycle as the steam escapes. So, you not only need a supply of fuel, but a constant stream of water. "It's the statue, man, The Statue."
Speaking of particians or other wealthy "investors": It is not necessarily optimal that technology development decisions depend on their needs, inclinations and understanding. In particular, they tend to be more greedy than the society norm - which is not a fortunate aspect regarding concerns of this diary.
Two questions. When you say "optimal", what are you optimising? And what would be an "optimal" mechanism for allocation of surplus wealth? "It's the statue, man, The Statue."
Immediate holders of surplus wealth would of course prefer to keep it to themselves. Whatever social agreements or deals are proposed, there will be some better off without the agreements (in the sense of game theory models). They may even use their power to prevent new agreements, or weaken exsisting ones. (As it happens now, with the global initiative from Washington DC.) They may use measure like propaganda to keep control. On the other hand, the rest of society players may decide that it is unfair to them to have no distribution. In extreme cases, they may have enough power to impose or persuade any distribution whatsoever. Of course, harmonious agreements are preferable. The "optimal" situation is perhaps when the power balance is in favour of the majority seeking a redistribution, and they persuade surplus wealth holders to apply multidimensional individual optimization, along the lines: is it the sum of your ambitions to grasp as much wealth as possible for this moment? Don't you want to be sure that this wonderful society will keep functioning happily in this marvelous environment for indefinitely long time?
Then you just need a slave to polish the mirror.
However, there was no indication to wheter he used this for any practical purpose. Think he was more of an inventor then an entrepreneur. A vote for PES is a vote for EPP! A vote for EPP is a vote for PES! Support the coalition, vote EPP-PES in 2009!
I think the friction between organized labor (seeking greater wages and other benefits) and the capitalists / management (seeking lower wages, higher productivity, and lower overall costs) was a big driver of 20th century technological innovation, as that friction helped drive the demand for the products of such innovation. Slaves, having no power, meant that friction did not exist in ancient Greece and Egypt, and thus there was no need for productivity enhancing technology (this is admittedly oversimplified because other stresses can create that kind of demand - growing population vs limited land for agriculture, for example, requiring greater agricultural productivity).
I assume this has been studied by scholars but I've never looked into it.
you are the media you consume.
