Language: 
To browser these website, it's necessary to store cookies on your computer.
The cookies contain no personal information, they are required for program control.
  the storage of cookies while browsing this website, on Login and Register.

GDPR and DSGVO law

Storing Cookies (See : http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm ) help us to bring you our services at overunity.com . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
https://overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please LEAVE this website now. From the 25th of May 2018, every existing user has to accept the GDPR agreement at first login. If a user is unwilling to accept the GDPR, he should email us and request to erase his account. Many thanks for your understanding.
Amazon Warehouse Deals ! Now even more Deep Discounts ! Check out these great prices on slightly used or just opened once only items.I always buy my gadgets via these great Warehouse deals ! Highly recommended ! Many thanks for supporting OverUnity.com this way.

User Menu

Tesla Paper

Free Energy Book

Get paid

Donations

Please Donate for the Forum.
Many thanks.
Regards, Stefan.(Admin)

A-Ads

Powerbox

Smartbox

3D Solar

3D Solar Panels

DC2DC converter

Micro JouleThief

FireMatch

FireMatch

CCKnife

CCKnife

CCTool

CCTool

Magpi Magazine

Magpi Magazine Free Rasberry Pi Magazine

Battery Recondition

Battery Recondition

Arduino

Ultracaps

YT Subscribe

Gravity Machines

Tesla-Ebook

Magnet Secrets

Lindemann Video

Navigation

Products

Products

WaterMotor kit

Statistics

  • *Total Members: 83987
  • *Latest: zacmag

  • *Total Posts: 892779
  • *Total Topics: 15669
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 3
  • *Guests: 7
  • *Total: 10

Author Topic: quentron.com  (Read 968091 times)

Offline sarkeizen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1923
Re: quentron.com
« Reply #1725 on: December 31, 2013, 11:09:31 PM »
A)yes
Are you saying you spent an eternal amount of time observing the device prior to me posing the question?
Quote
B)whoooar! Are you saying that the class of cells discussed here fall more in line with information theory than the proposed quenco?
No idea, as you have provided only one cite which I haven't read yet and no useful explanation of the mechanism.  However if it's a MD device then information theory says you're probably wrong.
Quote
yeah but the phonecall costed you
No.  Again the person who made this hard is simply and entirely you asshole.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: quentron.com
« Reply #1725 on: December 31, 2013, 11:09:31 PM »

Offline profitis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3952
Re: quentron.com
« Reply #1726 on: January 01, 2014, 12:49:39 AM »
A)yeah B)wtf man.just when i thought this shit was about to get intresting you trip me up again.i dont give a fuck what info theory says,thank god for reproducability thats all im saying.C)bullshit.im glad i stalled your ass coz now i,l just refer you and everyone else to the WIKIPEDIA OXYGEN CONCENTRATION CELL namsayn.WIKIPEDIA O2 CELL @sarkeizen.i dare you to build and test one,even theoretically.

Offline sarkeizen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1923
Re: quentron.com
« Reply #1727 on: January 01, 2014, 01:48:38 AM »
A)yeah
So you're lying.  Again.
Quote
wtf man.just when i thought this shit was about to get intresting
You have made pretty sure that won't happen.
Quote
you trip me up again.i dont give a fuck what info theory says,thank god for reproducability thats all im saying.
Well if it's against information theory then you (and possibly others ) are probably wrong...repeatedly.  Also given that you've lied many times in this thread it's not like your claim of a violation or being reproducible is really worth much.
Quote
bullshit.im glad i stalled your ass
So in other words you just admitted that you're an EOA.  Congratulations, I guess?
Quote
i dare you to build and test one,even theoretically.
Sorry, daring someone to be stupid isn't really very enticing but it probably works with the local yokels.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: quentron.com
« Reply #1727 on: January 01, 2014, 01:48:38 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline profitis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3952
Re: quentron.com
« Reply #1728 on: January 01, 2014, 07:50:31 AM »
@sarkeizen..A)nope B)thats what im trying to say to you man.info theory is your shit so you should be able to tell us if a wikipedia-cell and a kelvin-bust will be compatible with it in some way.work it out man.i got a feeling they are.C) oh k mr smartass in other words youre saying that its stupid to build a wikipedia-cell? Lay that one by me again man?????rotfl!
« Last Edit: January 01, 2014, 12:56:18 PM by profitis »

Offline sarkeizen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1923
Re: quentron.com
« Reply #1729 on: January 02, 2014, 09:23:37 AM »
@sarkeizen..A)nope
Except that you just stated you spent an eternal amount of time in a finite period.  That is a lie.  sorry.
Quote
B)thats what im trying to say to you man.info theory is your shit so you should be able to tell us if a wikipedia-cell
What I said was: You have provided only one cite which I haven't read yet and no useful explanation of the mechanism involved.  It would be stupid to claim something is a violation of any theory if the thing in question has been poorly explained and supported.
Quote
youre saying that its stupid to build a wikipedia-cell?
If the objective is to validate that such a cell would run eternally then yeah that would be exceptionally stupid to build one for that purpose.  Anyone who's read Karl Popper could have told you that.  It's such a well-known problem in science there's actually a formal name for it.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: quentron.com
« Reply #1729 on: January 02, 2014, 09:23:37 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline profitis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3952
Re: quentron.com
« Reply #1730 on: January 02, 2014, 01:34:27 PM »
A)nope.a finite period can be subdivided into eternal subdivisions of time thus i was actualy watching it eternaly @sarkeizen.i.e. i did not lie.B)well i think that the normal rules of concentration cells should apply to concentration cells @sarkeizen.Lest you wana change them to suit you.C) if i tell you that a certain battery described in the non-fiction part of wikipedia is eternaly powerful then it is technicaly no longer my duty to prove anything.it is in fact you who now has to defend the wikipedia kelvin law application to the wikipedia battery in question,either by demonstration or by theory.dontcha think?after all you are their representative.

Offline sarkeizen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1923
Re: quentron.com
« Reply #1731 on: January 02, 2014, 03:26:36 PM »
A)nope.a finite period
I can just cut you off there and say that you just admitted you watched for a finite period of time and therefore you have admitted you did not watch the battery running eternally.  So you did, in fact lie...one more time!
Quote
can be subdivided into eternal subdivisions of time
A "subdivision" would mean a "period less than the parent period in duration".  Since you have just admitted that the parent period is finite.  A sub-division can not be infinite.

It's interesting that in your effort to troll you couldn't even take the time to look up the *correct* way to state Zeno's paradox.  Moron.
Quote
well i think that the normal rules of concentration cells should apply to concentration cells
So far you are the only person, that I can see asserting that batteries which last eternally can be built based entirely on existing decades-old knowledge.  Clearly the problem is, *do the rules work the way you describe* which is the point of this "discussion" which you have tried very hard to stall.  The answer is probably "no, profitis is an idiot".
Quote
if i tell you that a certain battery described in the non-fiction part of wikipedia is eternaly powerful then it is technicaly no longer my duty to prove anything
Without even touching on the idea that Wikipedia has contained fake information (I've removed references to non-existent articles myself) and does today (I have one fake article I maintain in Wikipedia).  Your claim is stupid because despite having the word "wikipedia" in it sentence.  It is still just making an unsupported assertion.  In this case you are asserting something *about* wikipedia or more precisely about the interpretation of something in wikipedia.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: quentron.com
« Reply #1731 on: January 02, 2014, 03:26:36 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline profitis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3952
Re: quentron.com
« Reply #1732 on: January 02, 2014, 05:27:06 PM »
A) so what @sarkeizen? Im going to look at it tomorrow again.whats the problem? B)no.the rules work the way they describe.C) except that countless other references beside wikipedia mention the same battery thus its not an error anymore @sarkeizen.interpretation? How much interpretation can you get from a name like 'oxygen concentration cell'?the name is so specific that a scientist can determine how it works just by looking at it man.since you wont believe me regardless it really boils down to my challenge @sarkeizen: can you prove to us that a wikipedia O2 conc. cell is non-eternal.can you flatten it for us please.we are challenging you @sarkeizen.we,the overunity.com crowd and audience.

Offline sarkeizen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1923
Re: quentron.com
« Reply #1733 on: January 02, 2014, 07:21:57 PM »
A) so what @sarkeizen? Im going to look at it tomorrow again.
Are you saying "I lied again, so what?".  I think the problem with lying is self-evident.  That aside, tomorrow will also be a finite period of time.   You can't assert that your observations imply that this will last eternally. QED.  As I said before this is such a well known problem we give it a special name in science.
Quote
B)no.the rules work the way they describe.
Same problem, you can imagine that what you think is a reasonable consequence of the formula but a) You've already admitted that you haven't observed this effect and b) You have yet to give a good reason to believe it.
Quote
except that countless other references beside wikipedia mention the same battery thus its not an error anymore
Which is, of course irrelevant.  Unless they all say, clearly that the battery would run eternally.  Probably not because you have said that textbooks don't say that.  You might as well argue that "Elephant Dung Gives Eternal Life" based on no observation of someone living forever and the fact that numerous sources proclaim the existence of elephant dung.  Your desire and talent for missing the point is becoming legendary.

Quote
How much interpretation can you get from a name like 'oxygen concentration cell'
You have provided exactly one cite, a formula which I am going to read about as soon as my copy of the book gets here.  The amount of interpretation that can come from a formula is actually pretty big.  Most experimentally derived formulae have been derived under a number of assumptions.

Quote
since you wont believe me regardless
If you provide a cite and a formal logical argument from that cite to your conclusion.  I'll accept you as having made your point.  So far, in three months of asshole-ish stalling.  You have provided exactly one cite.
Quote
it really boils down to my challenge
You have challenged me to be as stupid as yourself.  Do not be surprised if I don't take you up on being stupid.  I've already explained why your challenge is stupid, it can't demonstrate your point.

Not to mention, that if you admit this is the ONLY way you can make your point.  Then you have LOST the argument.  You argued that I don't need to observe, I only need to look at the textbooks.  So that's what I'm doing.  As I said, I'm pretty sure you're wrong but I've got a textbook coming and I'm going to read it and then watch you flounder for another three months trying to argue your point.  Perhaps you haven't been keeping score but pretty much every time you've attempted to engage me in a logical argument you have lost.


Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: quentron.com
« Reply #1733 on: January 02, 2014, 07:21:57 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline profitis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3952
Re: quentron.com
« Reply #1734 on: January 02, 2014, 10:39:57 PM »
mr sarkeizen..are you aware that we have challenged you to a physical demonstration of kelvins law in a cell mentioned in wikipedia? Are you aware that we want to cut through the crap and see some evidence?

Offline sarkeizen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1923
Re: quentron.com
« Reply #1735 on: January 02, 2014, 10:51:33 PM »
@sarkeizen..are you aware that we
rofl...aren't we plural today...moron. :D :D :D :D
Quote
Are you aware that we want to cut through the crap and see some evidence?
Evidence for what thesis of mine?  That textbooks DON'T necessarily predict a battery which runs eternally?  How could building anything provide evidence for or against the main thing I've been talking about for three months?  Especially when YOU YOURSELF said I didn't need to observe anything (and by extension didn't need to build anything).  YOU said I just needed to read textbooks.  Right?  You said that right?  I can quote you again if you like.

You know if you want to have another different discussion...it might just be easier if you concede this point.  Considering your desperate change of subject I think we all know, that you know that you lost.

Just 'sayin.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: quentron.com
« Reply #1735 on: January 02, 2014, 10:51:33 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline profitis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3952
Re: quentron.com
« Reply #1736 on: January 02, 2014, 11:13:51 PM »
mr sarkeizen..thesis sir? Are you saying you will not be able to demonstrate kelvins law within the wikipedia battery in question?that you rather prefer to chat about it?

Offline sarkeizen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1923
Re: quentron.com
« Reply #1737 on: January 02, 2014, 11:24:04 PM »
mr sarkeizen..thesis sir?
The only thesis we are discussing, as far as I know.  Is that you told me that textbooks clearly necessitate a battery which runs forever.  You said, that nothing needs to be built to demonstrate this.  Again, I can quote where you said or otherwise expressed these ideas.
 
Were you lying then? Or have you changed your mind and you no longer believe that textbooks alone are sufficient to prove your point?

Offline profitis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3952
Re: quentron.com
« Reply #1738 on: January 02, 2014, 11:33:08 PM »
mr sarkeizen..ok sir.you prefer to chat about it then.no problemo.

Offline sarkeizen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1923
Re: quentron.com
« Reply #1739 on: January 03, 2014, 03:48:09 AM »
mr sarkeizen..ok sir.you prefer to chat about it then.no problemo.
Chat about what?  The one thesis that has dominated this "discussion"?  What do you think we've been doing?  What would you rather do?  Demonstrate it?  Sure, that was exactly what you spent three months trying to avoid apparently because you're some kind of enormous obstructionist asshole.

Perhaps you need to figure out what you're saying before you say it.  Moron.

 

OneLink