[fuelled6532]

That's funny.

Also nonsense. The canal boats were replaced by steam railways. A hundred years later. The water in the canals came from regular sources, by gravity.

It took decades to even get steam engines that turned a shaft (as opposed to rocking a beam up and down).

[lupusreal]

You're confused and not even contradicting what I said. Read it again.

Steam engines (which rocked a bar, not rotated a shaft) were put to use draining water out of coal mines. They were powered by that same coal, and the water they pumped out was put right into the canals (where else would you put it?). This made coal cheaper, which in turn allowed more people to move from the country to the cities because cities were no longer reliant on firewood. Growing urban populations was demanded and supported by growing industry in those cities.

My whole point is that all of these factors complimented each other, they created a feedback loop that was the industrial revolution. Trains came later, after the industrial revolution was already well underway. That's what I said already.

[fuelled6532]

Perhaps I misread. I took your comment to imply that the dewatering pumps were used to fill the canals, thus providing transportation infrastructure.

My original comment was in response to the statement that improved locomotion was an obvious consequence of the steam engine.

I contend that is was not obvious. The first walking beam engines were more like buildings, built in place (largely of masonry) and not portable at all.

The steam engine certainly revolutionized transportation, however I doubt that Newcomen or even Watt looked at their work and thought "this is going to change shipping forever".

Like I said, it took a generation to get to revolving shaft, and then another to get to revolution.

Today is probably like that with regard to AI. The pace of change is much faster now, but we still have no idea what the world will be like after this tech matures.