The point is that these systems are not merely different in degrees, but different in kind, functioning on a very different basis with different potential avenues for growth in production.
Basically says the same.
Dutch? We are talking about Late antiquity. Again, my point is that Roman empire was a totally different world. In all senses.
About the Netherlands. Do not understand your question. I do not know a lot about Dutch trade empire, but my knowledge is sufficient to conclude that they were a technological leader. Their emipre stretched from Moluccas to South Africa, they basically invented capitalism as it is and created first full-time stock exchange.
Please elaborate what do you want to ask here.
The whole point here is the idea that society was simply not ready for such innovations. Who needs steam power? You have cheap slaves. Plenty of them. Glorious Roman steel can even bring you more, and so on.
This is not about pure mechanics or mathematics. This is about social development. Civilsational development.
But the idea of steam-powered engine was not unknown to Greek philosophers. Of course it was just a mere toy. Still, first commercially developed steam engine (James Watt) had, as far as I remember, something like 1,5 percent of energy conversion efficiency.