tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu May 16 09:15:13 1996
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: paghDIch
At 08:52 AM 5/13/96 -0700, Mark E. Shoulson wrote:
>>Date: Sat, 11 May 1996 04:39:21 -0700
>>From: [email protected]
>>At 12:28 PM 5/2/96 -0700, you wrote:
>>>Date: Thu, 2 May 1996 08:17:45 -0700
>>>From: "R.E.Newcombe" <[email protected]>
>>>>Never heard of "Newton's zero th Law of thermodynamics" ?
>>>I've heard of the Zeroth Law... but I don't think it was Newton's.
>>You're taking about Isaac Asimov's Laws of Robotics.(I'd like to quote them,
>>but my hard disk was wipped and I'd have to type them all in.)Basicly:
>No, I'm not thinking of Asimov's laws of Robotics (I've heard of them). I
>was thinking of the laws of thermodynamics. That's why I typed
>"thermodynamics" and not "robotics" (it wasn't a misspelling.)
When you said: "I've heard of the Zeroth Law... but I don't think it was
Newton's.",
I thought: "If he doesn't mean thermodynamics, he must mean, the fictional,
Laws of Robotics, because he didn't even spell thermodynamics or robotics in
his original mail."
>I don't
>know which came first; I believe the thermodynamics ones came first (Asimov
>has written stories about the laws of thermodynamics). Loosely translated
>(and from memory): (0) heat is heat. (1) You can't win (get more energy
>than you put in) (2) You can't break even (do anything without losing any
>energy to heat) except at absolute zero (3) You can't get to absolute zero,
>thanks for playing. It's the old "You can't win, you can't break even, you
>can't quit thge game."
Qapla'
beHwI"av