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

User Menu

Google Search

Custom Search

Author Topic: quentron.com  (Read 1060344 times)

Offline profitis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3952
Re: quentron.com
« Reply #2235 on: February 21, 2014, 09:36:49 PM »
lol @sarkeizen.who are you trying to kid?yourself? Now go back to my last statement and read it, carefully this time ne?wink-wink ;-)

Offline sarkeizen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1923
Re: quentron.com
« Reply #2236 on: February 21, 2014, 10:19:42 PM »
lol @sarkeizen.who are you trying to kid?
I've laid the logic out pretty plain.  All you are doing is putting your fingers in your ears.

i) The True profitis statement must be supported purely by formal argument and cites from ordinary textbooks.
ii) The True profitis statement has not been supported by formal argument and cites from ordinary textbooks.
iii) Any statement claiming to be equivalent to the True profitis statement must by i) contain a formal argument and cites from ordinary textbooks and nothing else.
iv) Any statement claiming to be equivalent to the True profitis statement must by ii) be unsupported.

Sorry, logic wins, profitis the absolute moron...loses. :D :D :D

But please feel free to continue pretending as if you have some kind of argument (which of course you won't disclose)

Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: quentron.com
« Reply #2237 on: February 21, 2014, 10:38:03 PM »
yawn @mark E.my statement still stands.getting taller by the second..
Why do you choose to exemplify Dunning-Kruger in action?

Offline profitis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3952
Re: quentron.com
« Reply #2238 on: February 21, 2014, 10:42:39 PM »
yawn @sarkeizen you and mark E are boring.look,either you guys attack my last vehemently destructive statement headon or put a raincheck on repetitive garbage that realy doesnt even scratch my statement one iota.now inject some useful attacks into this conversation because im beginning to agree with our old friend mr tim123,its getting boring :D 

Offline profitis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3952
Re: quentron.com
« Reply #2239 on: February 21, 2014, 10:53:52 PM »
who,s kruger @mark E?

Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: quentron.com
« Reply #2240 on: February 21, 2014, 10:55:33 PM »
Have you ever been to a supermarket?

Offline profitis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3952
Re: quentron.com
« Reply #2241 on: February 21, 2014, 11:04:59 PM »
that doesnt help us @mark E.im telling you about concentration cells and you want to give a psychology lecture? 

Offline sarkeizen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1923
Re: quentron.com
« Reply #2242 on: February 21, 2014, 11:37:31 PM »
attack my last vehemently destructive statement
Either it's equivalent to the True profitis statement or it is not. 

If it is, then it's powerless because it's unsupported.
If it isn't, it's irrelevant.

Useless or irrelevant.  Let me know which one you pick.

:D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D

Offline profitis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3952
Re: quentron.com
« Reply #2243 on: February 21, 2014, 11:56:50 PM »
you clearly dont understand anything ive said @sarkeizen. my 1st statement is a consequence of my last statement which is self-supported.self-supported.you can only destroy my last statement by showing how 2 different overpotential gas electrodes cant thermodynamicly re-cycle spontaneously.

Offline sarkeizen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1923
Re: quentron.com
« Reply #2244 on: February 22, 2014, 02:03:13 AM »
you clearly dont understand anything ive said
I understand what you're saying.  You're simply incorrect.

So we will represent the True Profitis Statement as T and any other statement as M (for moronic)
So what do we know about T?  It's true IFF (if and only if) a formal argument is presented and at least one cite from an ordinary textbook.  We will call this lemma (1).
Quote
my 1st statement is a consequence of my last statement
In logic we would write that as: M -> T (or M implies T) we can call that (2).  However because of (1) we know that T is only true if there's a formal logical argument and an ordinary textbook cite.  So unless M contains both of those then M can not imply T.
Quote
which is self-supported .self-supported.
If by that you mean M is true.  Then you have a problem because if M is true it means T is true by virtue of (2).  However T can only be true by formal argument and citing ordinary textbooks.  At no point have you provided a formal logical argument for M and not  only have you provided no ordinary textbook cites BUT you specifically stated that M can't be demonstrated with ordinary textbooks.

So you are in contradiction.  The statements M is true and M->T are mutually exclusive the way you have defined them.

You are simply wrong here.  I wonder why you find that so hard to believe?

Offline profitis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3952
Re: quentron.com
« Reply #2245 on: February 22, 2014, 07:14:53 AM »
let me simplify your formula there @sarkeizen,,if M is my anti-kelvin statement at ambient temperature youre screwed,unless, 1)you show in theory how it doesnt gel for the schoolkids sake.2)you show in physicality how it doesnt gel for the schoolkids sake.the schoolkids are not impressed with you right now because i can easily demo the profitis statement in action with nothing more than a pair platinum pants,a glass of water and a meter while you cant do jackshit! Who are people going to believe @sarkeizen? Me or you.

Offline Philip Hardcastle

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 326
Re: quentron.com
« Reply #2246 on: February 22, 2014, 10:33:36 AM »
Hi All,


Updated site


www.quentron.com


I am happy to report that I have figured out how to make the Sebby work at room temp, and at high output.


Sebby is now public property so those interested in building their own home power system might want to try out the new sebby when I publish it. I figure an investment of only a few thousand (not to me) could provide 2kW of 24/7 power.


Nothing yet to publicly share re quenco.


Phil

Offline sarkeizen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1923
Re: quentron.com
« Reply #2247 on: February 22, 2014, 04:00:30 PM »
let me simplify your formula there @sarkeizen,,if M is my anti-kelvin statement
M (for moronic) can be any statement.
T the True Profitis Statement can only be demonstrated with ordinary textbook quotes and logic.  These were YOUR words loser boy.
M can not imply T unless it complies to the same rules for proving T true. 

Like I said, Philip logic is one of the lowest forms of logic.  Please read a book. :D :D

Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: quentron.com
« Reply #2248 on: February 22, 2014, 05:14:23 PM »
Hi All,


Updated site


www.quentron.com


I am happy to report that I have figured out how to make the Sebby work at room temp, and at high output.


Sebby is now public property so those interested in building their own home power system might want to try out the new sebby when I publish it. I figure an investment of only a few thousand (not to me) could provide 2kW of 24/7 power.


Nothing yet to publicly share re quenco.


Phil
Mr. Hardcastle have you conducted any experiments to confirm your current ideas?

Offline profitis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3952
Re: quentron.com
« Reply #2249 on: February 22, 2014, 06:45:56 PM »
Both T and M can be demonstrated with a pair platinum pants and some water @sarkeizen.you are arguing against a live demo infront college kids.the profitis statement will now enter the next phase and burn into totalitarian rule over kelvin statement unless you can stop it.tick-tock tick-tock..