Talk:1166: Argument - Revision history

172.70.85.136 at 05:43, 29 March 2025

2025-03-29T05:43:30Z

Dúthomhas: Humor?

2025-03-28T23:44:52Z

Humor?

172.71.242.162: ...what that editor would have generated by using the ~~~~ signoff. Looks like they tried, however, so not using the "unsigned ip" template.

2023-08-31T02:22:37Z

...what that editor would have generated by using the ~~~~ signoff. Looks like they tried, however, so not using the "unsigned ip" template.

172.69.71.36: Can fix the guest user thing, I don't know how to work it

2023-08-31T01:57:41Z

Can fix the guest user thing, I don't know how to work it

AmbroseChapel at 00:50, 1 September 2017

2017-09-01T00:50:57Z

SilverMagpie at 16:53, 22 May 2017

2017-05-22T16:53:39Z

162.158.255.147 at 23:13, 16 July 2016

2016-07-16T23:13:55Z

162.158.255.147 at 23:13, 16 July 2016

2016-07-16T23:13:07Z

Lackadaisical at 19:08, 8 November 2013

2013-11-08T19:08:44Z

Lackadaisical at 20:29, 7 November 2013

2013-11-07T20:29:38Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:43, 29 March 2025
Line 31:		Line 31:
	Pretty sure that, while literally true in the sense that no perpetual motion machine exists and therefore has never run for any length of time, that's not what Randall meant: I'm sure he meant the total time any '''attempted''' perpetual motion machine has run may be in the weeks and months but not the many years since he started the argument. I will edit in 24 hours if nobody objects. [[User:AmbroseChapel\|AmbroseChapel]] ([[User talk:AmbroseChapel\|talk]]) 00:50, 1 September 2017 (UTC)		Pretty sure that, while literally true in the sense that no perpetual motion machine exists and therefore has never run for any length of time, that's not what Randall meant: I'm sure he meant the total time any '''attempted''' perpetual motion machine has run may be in the weeks and months but not the many years since he started the argument. I will edit in 24 hours if nobody objects. [[User:AmbroseChapel\|AmbroseChapel]] ([[User talk:AmbroseChapel\|talk]]) 00:50, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

−	Alas for missed opportunities. Remember, the total time any perpetual motion machine has been running is 0 seconds (rounded up).	+	Alas for missed opportunities. Remember, the total time any perpetual motion machine has been running is 0 seconds (rounded up).{{unsigned\|Dúthomhas\|23:44, 28 March 2025}}

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:44, 28 March 2025
Line 30:		Line 30:

	Pretty sure that, while literally true in the sense that no perpetual motion machine exists and therefore has never run for any length of time, that's not what Randall meant: I'm sure he meant the total time any '''attempted''' perpetual motion machine has run may be in the weeks and months but not the many years since he started the argument. I will edit in 24 hours if nobody objects. [[User:AmbroseChapel\|AmbroseChapel]] ([[User talk:AmbroseChapel\|talk]]) 00:50, 1 September 2017 (UTC)		Pretty sure that, while literally true in the sense that no perpetual motion machine exists and therefore has never run for any length of time, that's not what Randall meant: I'm sure he meant the total time any '''attempted''' perpetual motion machine has run may be in the weeks and months but not the many years since he started the argument. I will edit in 24 hours if nobody objects. [[User:AmbroseChapel\|AmbroseChapel]] ([[User talk:AmbroseChapel\|talk]]) 00:50, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
		+
		+	Alas for missed opportunities. Remember, the total time any perpetual motion machine has been running is 0 seconds (rounded up).

@@ Line 19: / Line 19: @@
 Perpetual Motion Machines are not free energy. For that to happen, you need it to ''output'' more energy than it uses :( [[User:SilverMagpie|SilverMagpie]] ([[User talk:SilverMagpie|talk]]) 16:53, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
-About the thread, it seems to have been deleted with the site :( [Guest user] 18:45, 30 August 2023
+About the thread, it seems to have been deleted with the site :( [[Special:Contributions/172.69.71.36|172.69.71.36]] 01:57, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
 '''Rational Wiki'''

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:57, 31 August 2023
Line 18:		Line 18:

	Perpetual Motion Machines are not free energy. For that to happen, you need it to ''output'' more energy than it uses :( [[User:SilverMagpie\|SilverMagpie]] ([[User talk:SilverMagpie\|talk]]) 16:53, 22 May 2017 (UTC)		Perpetual Motion Machines are not free energy. For that to happen, you need it to ''output'' more energy than it uses :( [[User:SilverMagpie\|SilverMagpie]] ([[User talk:SilverMagpie\|talk]]) 16:53, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
		+
		+	About the thread, it seems to have been deleted with the site :( [Guest user] 18:45, 30 August 2023

	'''Rational Wiki'''		'''Rational Wiki'''

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:50, 1 September 2017
Line 24:		Line 24:

	What started with a single click on Wikipedia's "self-replicating machine" page has led to an ever-increasing number of tabs in my browser containing articles on self-replication. Please help. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.255.147\|162.158.255.147]] 23:13, 16 July 2016 (UTC)		What started with a single click on Wikipedia's "self-replicating machine" page has led to an ever-increasing number of tabs in my browser containing articles on self-replication. Please help. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.255.147\|162.158.255.147]] 23:13, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
		+
		+	''the total time any perpetual motion machine has been running is 0 seconds''
		+
		+	Pretty sure that, while literally true in the sense that no perpetual motion machine exists and therefore has never run for any length of time, that's not what Randall meant: I'm sure he meant the total time any '''attempted''' perpetual motion machine has run may be in the weeks and months but not the many years since he started the argument. I will edit in 24 hours if nobody objects. [[User:AmbroseChapel\|AmbroseChapel]] ([[User talk:AmbroseChapel\|talk]]) 00:50, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

@@ Line 5: / Line 5: @@
 Also, 0.999... ≠ 1 and the government covered it up. [[Special:Contributions/108.233.253.211|108.233.253.211]] 00:35, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
-The explanation for the third post should make note of the situation where you hang a flywheel (e.g. a bicycle wheel) by each end of its axis using cords, spin the wheel then cut one cord, and the bicycle wheel will keep spinning in the same position! There was a YouTube video for this, but I cannot find it, there must be more people who know what I'm talking about. It has something to do with centripetal force (No, Mr. Bond, I expect you to die). :) [[Special:Contributions/84.224.77.100|84.224.77.100]] 05:32, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
+The explanation for the third post should make note of the situation where you hang a flywheel (e.g. a bicycle wheel) by each end of its axis using cords, spin the wheel then cut one cord, and the bicycle wheel will keep spinning in the same position! There was a YouTube video for this, but I cannot find it, there must be more people who know what I'm talking about. It has something to do with centripetal  (No, Mr. Bond, I expect you to die). :) [[Special:Contributions/84.224.77.100|84.224.77.100]] 05:32, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
 :I think it refers to [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Perpetual_Motion_by_Norman_Rockwell.jpg this], not gyroscopes. [[User:Bugefun|Bugefun]] ([[User talk:Bugefun|talk]]) 06:27, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
@@ Line 16: / Line 16: @@
 This thread lives on youtube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=287qd4uI7-E
 '''Rational Wiki'''

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:13, 16 July 2016
Line 21:		Line 21:
	Alright I have no problem with giving a link to rational wiki but can someone explain to me why we are redirecting people there when it has significantly less credible citations than wikipedia's pseudoscience page?--[[User:Lackadaisical\|Lackadaisical]] ([[User talk:Lackadaisical\|talk]]) 20:29, 7 November 2013 (UTC)		Alright I have no problem with giving a link to rational wiki but can someone explain to me why we are redirecting people there when it has significantly less credible citations than wikipedia's pseudoscience page?--[[User:Lackadaisical\|Lackadaisical]] ([[User talk:Lackadaisical\|talk]]) 20:29, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

−	What started with a single click on Wikipedia's "self-replicating machine" page has led to an ever-increasing number of browser ~~tabs~~ containing articles on self-replication. Please help. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.255.147\|162.158.255.147]] 23:13, 16 July 2016 (UTC)	+	What started with a single click on Wikipedia's "self-replicating machine" page has led to an ever-increasing number of tabs in my browser containing articles on self-replication. Please help. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.255.147\|162.158.255.147]] 23:13, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:13, 16 July 2016
Line 20:		Line 20:

	Alright I have no problem with giving a link to rational wiki but can someone explain to me why we are redirecting people there when it has significantly less credible citations than wikipedia's pseudoscience page?--[[User:Lackadaisical\|Lackadaisical]] ([[User talk:Lackadaisical\|talk]]) 20:29, 7 November 2013 (UTC)		Alright I have no problem with giving a link to rational wiki but can someone explain to me why we are redirecting people there when it has significantly less credible citations than wikipedia's pseudoscience page?--[[User:Lackadaisical\|Lackadaisical]] ([[User talk:Lackadaisical\|talk]]) 20:29, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
		+
		+	What started with a single click on Wikipedia's "self-replicating machine" page has led to an ever-increasing number of browser tabs containing articles on self-replication. Please help. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.255.147\|162.158.255.147]] 23:13, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:08, 8 November 2013
Line 19:		Line 19:
	'''Rational Wiki'''		'''Rational Wiki'''

−	Alright I have no problem with giving a link to rational wiki but can someone explain to me why we are redirecting people there when it has significantly less citations than wikipedia's pseudoscience page?--[[User:Lackadaisical\|Lackadaisical]] ([[User talk:Lackadaisical\|talk]]) 20:29, 7 November 2013 (UTC)	+	Alright I have no problem with giving a link to rational wiki but can someone explain to me why we are redirecting people there when it has significantly less credible citations than wikipedia's pseudoscience page?--[[User:Lackadaisical\|Lackadaisical]] ([[User talk:Lackadaisical\|talk]]) 20:29, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:29, 7 November 2013
Line 16:		Line 16:

	This thread lives on youtube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=287qd4uI7-E		This thread lives on youtube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=287qd4uI7-E
		+
		+	'''Rational Wiki'''
		+
		+	Alright I have no problem with giving a link to rational wiki but can someone explain to me why we are redirecting people there when it has significantly less citations than wikipedia's pseudoscience page?--[[User:Lackadaisical\|Lackadaisical]] ([[User talk:Lackadaisical\|talk]]) 20:29, 7 November 2013 (UTC)