[rollei_list] Re: OT - Formula One and Perpetual Motion

  • From: Ardeshir Mehta <ardeshir@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 22:22:14 -0500

On Friday, January 28, 2005, at 10:14  PM, Bernard wrote:

>> Now YOU tell me: which would be better - the humongous bank of 
>> batteries and no fuel engine, or an ICE generating electrcity, or a 
>> turbine engine of the same power and expense as the ICE generating 
>> electricity? It's a no-brainer, at least as far as I can see.
>
> A no-brainer indeed. Personally, I would go with the proven technology 
> and avoid technological dead-ends and vaporware. BTW, you forgot to 
> include perpetual motion machines in your list of options (since I am 
> being asked to choose between some options that are available now and 
> others that may never be viable).

Okay, then explain why hybrids and turbine-powered race cars have been 
banned by the authorities who regulate Formula One!


Ardeshir <http://homepage.mac.com/ardeshir/AllMyFiles.html>


PS: as for perpetual motion, I guess you've never heard of the atom, in 
which the electrons ARE in perpetual motion. Dear oh dear.















Other related posts: