Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: New crap statement ? Perpetuum mobile

Author: Bruce Moreland

Date: 11:47:21 09/30/01

Go up one level in this thread


On September 29, 2001 at 14:54:03, Robert Hyatt wrote:

>On September 29, 2001 at 10:41:37, Miguel A. Ballicora wrote:

>>Super-linear speedups are "probably" impossible but so far I did not see that
>>they are "provably" impossible. I would settle with "They are believed to be
>>impossible".
>>
>>Regards,
>>Miguel
>
>
>They simply _are_ impossible.  Unless you believe in perpetual
>motion, infinite compression, a fire that will burn forever, etc.

Take a human who can move a 200-pound box, but only by scraping it along the
ground.  Compute the time it takes him to move 10 such boxes 100 yards.

Assume that two humans can move a 200-pound box more easily.  Can they move a
200-pound box more than twice as fast as one human?  Would this violate laws
against perpetual motion?  Of course not.  It is perfectly valid to consider
working in parallel rather than working serially.  The mechanics of the task
might change, resulting in much increased efficiency -- they can lift the box
off the ground.

Two workers cooperating to perform a task, do not *have* to go less than or
equal to the speed of two workers, each of whom does exactly half of a task that
can be fairly divided in two.

There exists the opportunity for synergy.

The argument that the above violates the prohibition against perpetual motion is
fallacious.

bruce



This page took 0.04 seconds to execute

Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700

Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.