A question about perfect machines

[BobbiLynn]

IF it develops a leak then SOMETHING eroded/wore out/down on it.

Okay, that's what I thought too... No such thing as a perfect machine? Because a perfect machine would never eventually wear down?

Anything that eventually springs a leak is not perfect. Right?

 

[BobbiLynn]

Pretty much... What you thought was perfect was actually not perfect (or flawed) to begin with.

Is this really the correct answer? This is very important. So thank you.

 

[Golddiggie]

Is this really the correct answer? This is very important. So thank you.

There is no spoon...

 

[BobbiLynn]

There is no spoon...

I can jump over the moon just fine with only a fork, no need for that useless spoon.

 

[Golddiggie]

I can jump over the moon just fine with only a fork, no need for that useless spoon.

SPOON!!!

Do you know where your towel is???

No more forkin around.

 

[BobbiLynn]

SPOON!!!

Do you know where your towel is???

No more forkin around.

I don't remember where I left it, does that me the crazy one?

 

[Golddiggie]

I don't remember where I left it, does that me the crazy one?

I know, exactly, where my towel is (plus several others). I even have the one with the answer to the ultimate question of life, the universe, and everything. :rockin:

 

[BobbiLynn]

I know, exactly, where my towel is (plus several others). I even have the one with the answer to the ultimate question of life, the universe, and everything. :rockin:

Can I borrow a towel, I just need to dry off real quick...? Damn machine sprung a leak.

 

[Golddiggie]

Can I borrow a towel, I just need to dry off real quick...?

Wow... That didn't take long at all... lol

 

[BobbiLynn]

I know, exactly, where my towel is (plus several others). I even have the one with the answer to the ultimate question of life, the universe, and everything. :rockin:

Wow... That didn't take long at all... lol

Yeah, yeah, like I said, damn machine sprung a leak...

 

[BobbiLynn]

Is this really the correct answer? This is very important. So thank you.

Okay, yeah, now I am talking to myself and even quoting myself. But back to serious matters, is this the correct answer?

But damn, now I forgot the question....

 

[maxamuus]

This machine you are referring to doesn't happen to be your noggin does it?

 

[Golddiggie]

This machine you are referring to doesn't happen to be your noggin does it?

If so, then it was never 'perfect' to begin with. First use started the leak.

 

[BobbiLynn]

The machine exists, I did not build it though, I was only questioning it's so called "perfection", or how it could ever have been called perfect, you know, before it busted.

 

[Golddiggie]

The machine exists, I did not build it though, I was only questioning it's so called "perfection", or how it could ever have been called perfect, you know, before it busted.

Advertisement's never lie about products.

 

[BobbiLynn]

Advertisement's never lie about products.

The whole thing was one big lie? It that the answer then?

 

[BobbiLynn]

If so, then it was never 'perfect' to begin with. First use started the leak.

If someone were to build a better one, they would need to include better instructions, to avoid operator failure? Is that what you are trying to say? Or you take something perfect, put it into an imperfect scenario, you are only asking for trouble?

 

[zeg]

"Perfect" has many meanings.

The meaning that causes most of the logical problems, where nothing can ever go wrong, is simply not a meaningful concept. Achieving this isn't a matter of making a single perfect widget, it requires something like controlling the universe. The apparently trivial problem with wear and tear in the sense we're used to is just an example of an interaction between the machine and its environment. Eventually that environment will be destroyed in a supernova or swallowed by a black hole, and that's the end of it. It's pretty extreme wear and tear, but that's essentially what it is.

A more useful concept of "perfect" is something like "as good as possible given the limits of what can be realized." It's perhaps not as satisfying, but it doesn't create the paradoxes that the more general sense creates. The reason is that the more general sense is simply not consistent with reality. If you insist on using that meaning, then I'd simply say there is no answer to your question because it's pure fantasy.

 

[Golddiggie]

If someone were to build a better one, they would need to include better instructions, to avoid operator failure? Is that what you are trying to say? Or you take something perfect, put it into an imperfect scenario, you are only asking for trouble?

Even if they make the instructions 100% idiot proof, that's only good for the current generation of idiot. The next generation will manage to un-proof the instructions. You would need to make it beyond stupid simple. Like one button for 'GO' and have it run completely automated otherwise. Don't give the user the opportunity to stop it. Hard wire it for power and plumb it with something that will survive a nuclear blast. Even that has a chance of being broken by a future generation 'idiot'.

Unless you completely, and totally, remove the human element from the equation, you'll always have issues. Just the nature of the beast.

 

[Warrior]

The perfect machine does not exist. Perfection is what you strive for but we will never obtain. Take comfort though we can get very good at making that machine but there is always room for improvement

 

[Golddiggie]

I think no one would actually want a truly 'perfect' machine. It's just not in our nature to accept something that's really perfect. We always want to tweak, alter, change, upgrade it. If it's really perfect then that won't be possible, so it will be imperfect for us. Sort of like the first Matrix that was made (in the movie how it was described and how humans couldn't handle it).

So, while you might believe you've conceived of a perfect item/device/machine/etc. reality (as already mentioned) makes creating such item impossible (with our current technology level). That's not to say that it won't be possible at some far distant future time. But, none of us will be around to see it. So, in that case we're "perfectly F'd over"...

 

[BobbiLynn]

So the creator of the machine should just admit, "Hey, I did my best with what I had to work with, what more do you want, perfection?"

 

[Golddiggie]

So the creator of the machine should just admit, "Hey, I did my best with what I had to work with, what more do you want, perfection?"

Something like that... If they claim it's 'perfect' I would be highly suspect. There's probably fine print with a disclaimer about limits of current technology, yadda, yadda, yadda...

You can't even get a machine to fabricate a 'perfect' sphere. There's always a variation of some degree. Even if it's so tiny that WE cannot tell, it's simply not possible to have it truly 'perfect'.

 

[BobbiLynn]

"Perfect" has many meanings.

The meaning that causes most of the logical problems, where nothing can ever go wrong, is simply not a meaningful concept. Achieving this isn't a matter of making a single perfect widget, it requires something like controlling the universe. The apparently trivial problem with wear and tear in the sense we're used to is just an example of an interaction between the machine and its environment. Eventually that environment will be destroyed in a supernova or swallowed by a black hole, and that's the end of it. It's pretty extreme wear and tear, but that's essentially what it is.

A more useful concept of "perfect" is something like "as good as possible given the limits of what can be realized." It's perhaps not as satisfying, but it doesn't create the paradoxes that the more general sense creates. The reason is that the more general sense is simply not consistent with reality. If you insist on using that meaning, then I'd simply say there is no answer to your question because it's pure fantasy.

I think this is actually it, I misinterpreted something along the way... I tried to understand the alternatives, but somehow it went over my head.

 

[zeg]

So the creator of the machine should just admit, "Hey, I did my best with what I had to work with, what more do you want, perfection?"

It's not as defeatist as that. You can make quantitative estimates of what is possible and use those as a reference. The laws of thermodynamics can provide limits on certain parameters. For others, you have to make estimates, but you don't just have to throw your hands up. So it doesn't have to be a question of what you have at hand, so much as what the laws of physics permit.

For being useful, though, that's not so bad. From an engineering perspective, "perfect" could be understood to essentially mean "without design flaws." That doesn't mean that it will never fail, but that its failures are caused by unavoidable conditions.

But you're right, it's unsatisfying---I said as much in my earlier post. As you're getting at, it means that "perfect" is context-dependent and something that is thought thought to be "perfect" may later be found not to be so when new methods are found or our understanding of physical laws changes.

I don't think that's so different from how "perfect" is used in practice.

 

[BobbiLynn]

That doesn't mean that it will never fail, but that its failures are caused by unavoidable conditions.

But if you knew those unavoidable conditions were there, why would you use the term perfect? Because you don't understand the meaning of the word? Or you just thought it meant "that other thing", not what it really meant?

 

[Golddiggie]

IMO, concepts, and even ideas and designs can be perfect (or as close as we can perceive perfection to be). But when you try to bring those into the physical world, you're hampered by things like (as mentioned) the laws of physics.

As I mentioned earlier, I'm sure that [at some point] our technology level will advance to the degree where it's viable to produce something that actually IS perfect. Not saying that will happen in the next thousand years (or even ten thousand) but it could happen. Provided we don't make the perfect idiot move and destroy ourselves.

 

[Dan]

Hey BobbiLynn
Late to this thread coming in
You probably know here on HBT
There are brilliant minds, I'm sure that you see
Your question asked in an intellectual state
Has been answered by great minds that is no mistake
I just have a question to your question
Why are you asking for suggestions
You know the answer as well as do I
The human body is perfect but someday will die
There is no other way around it and that's not a lie

 

[BobbiLynn]

I am just going to have to sleep on it some more, then re-evaluate, you all got me a little confused now....

 

[Golddiggie]

I am just going to have to sleep on it some more, then re-evaluate, you all got me a little confused now....

Having a "Florida moment"??

As Dan said, you asked, we answered, now you get to gnaw on the answers and see if you can wrap your melon around them.