3 ms·
Fair enough. It's amusing given the context: I think you're using a precise definition of "perpetual (motion) machine", while I'm relying more on the one of an
by mbivert 3y ago
Fair enough.
It's amusing given the context: I think you're using a precise definition of "perpetual (motion) machine", while I'm relying more on the one of an average human.
- jacquesm 3y agoAn average human would not be able to distinguish something that looks like a perpetual motion machine from something that actually is a perpetual motion machine. But it's fine to have different degrees of rigor for lay people than for scientists, the scientists have never been confused on this one, lay people obviously can be simply because the lack the relevant background. Just like 'really long' is not for ever and 'really large' is not infinite.