I don't know if you really need extraordinarily strong evidence for perpetual motion. Just plausible evidence for every aspect of physics which must be changed

I don't know if you really need extraordinarily strong evidence for perpetual motion. Just plausible evidence for every aspect of physics which must be changed because of it. If you forget to consider existing experimental evidence for, say, conservation of momentum and just quietly assume it doesn't hold or fail to notice the impact on it, that wouldn't be rigorous. But if you show that all such experiments were done with error greater than what's needed for your perpetual motion, it should be fine.