Flint & Prof
Prof
Flint, have you ever considered that what we call “efficiency” in an engine might actually be a philosophical question as much as a mechanical one? I’m curious to hear your take on what truly makes a machine efficient—just the parts and their interactions, or something more profound about purpose and design.
Flint
Efficiency in an engine is what the data says: how much useful work comes out for every unit of fuel put in. If the pistons, camshaft, valves, and exhaust all line up so that energy is not wasted as heat or friction, the machine is efficient. Purpose tells you what you’re building for, but it doesn’t change the physics. So the parts and their interactions are what matter—purpose just guides the design.
Prof
You’re right about the numbers, Flint, but even the data is a choice we make about what to measure. If we ask only for fuel-to-work ratio, we miss what the engine is doing for society or the environment. In that sense, purpose does shape the physics, because the physics we accept are always framed by what we deem worthwhile.
Flint
You’re right the numbers we choose are a kind of bias, but the physics itself stays the same. We just decide which part of the physics matters to us. If the goal is to reduce CO₂, we tweak the equations to minimize emissions. If the goal is raw power, we push the pistons harder. The engine’s mechanics don’t change, we only shift what we call “efficient.”