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

Custom Search

Author Topic: quentron.com  (Read 1261459 times)

profitis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3952
Re: quentron.com
« Reply #2520 on: June 11, 2014, 01:29:05 PM »
Haha phil I thought there was a chance I might be wrong.I have an idea why but yes let's see if mark E is capable of destroying it with his superb knowledge.

MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: quentron.com
« Reply #2521 on: June 11, 2014, 02:14:57 PM »
Haha phil I thought there was a chance I might be wrong.I have an idea why but yes let's see if mark E is capable of destroying it with his superb knowledge.
Are you ever going to present an actual argument for the thermodynamic reversibility that you claim?  Or is what we have already seen all that you have to offer?

profitis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3952
Re: quentron.com
« Reply #2522 on: June 11, 2014, 02:39:02 PM »
The argument @mark E is that wikipedia asserts,in a highly domineering way,that all capacitors must leak.what's preventing this one from leaking after opening switch.

MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: quentron.com
« Reply #2523 on: June 11, 2014, 04:07:22 PM »
The argument @mark E is that wikipedia asserts,in a highly domineering way,that all capacitors must leak.what's preventing this one from leaking after opening switch.
How in the world would a leakage current establish your claim of reversibility?  Leakage would oxidize one material and reduce the other.  Potential energy from the feedstock is permanently lost in such a process, making it non-reversible.

sarkeizen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1923
Re: quentron.com
« Reply #2524 on: June 11, 2014, 04:53:27 PM »
Haha phil I thought there was a chance I might be wrong.I have an idea why

and yet...

Lol but it is impossible.that's what I'm saying man.it is totaly impossible for you or anyone else

Profitis lies again.  Yawn.

profitis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3952
Re: quentron.com
« Reply #2525 on: June 11, 2014, 11:55:09 PM »
Because leakage current across the vaccuum would return it to its original state @mark E.neutral > charged > neutral. You seem confused,wonder why. A primary school kid can understand that diagram

profitis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3952
Re: quentron.com
« Reply #2526 on: June 12, 2014, 12:04:25 AM »
No lies @ sarkeizen. It remains impossible for you to disprove perpetuum mobilum in all gaseous spillover cells. We're talking about contact emfs now,don't distort the subject.

sarkeizen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1923
Re: quentron.com
« Reply #2527 on: June 12, 2014, 12:31:56 AM »
No lies @ sarkeizen. It remains impossible for you
..or anyone....that's what you said.  See it's right there in the quote.

So you lied.  No surprise but just worth pointing out. :D

MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: quentron.com
« Reply #2528 on: June 12, 2014, 01:01:06 AM »
Because leakage current across the vaccuum would return it to its original state @mark E.neutral > charged > neutral. You seem confused,wonder why. A primary school kid can understand that diagram
Unfortunately, you present yourself as though you do not. 

profitis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3952
Re: quentron.com
« Reply #2529 on: June 12, 2014, 03:35:11 AM »
No lies @sarkeizen.you or anybody.it has been the highlight of my life to have made such a bold declaration here in on internet knowing that nobody can or will prove me wrong.its like a rush, a cocain high, and I haven't profited off of it one cent yet.that remains to be seen.

profitis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3952
Re: quentron.com
« Reply #2530 on: June 12, 2014, 03:50:31 AM »
I simply asked a simple question to you @mark E.your the one who went and made it unpresentable.it appears as though mr hardcastle was right.you won't be answering it anytime soon.

sarkeizen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1923
Re: quentron.com
« Reply #2531 on: June 12, 2014, 04:24:42 AM »
No lies @sarkeizen.you or anybody
So Philip can't but you thought he might.    You realize that "can't" and "might" are mutually exclusive.
Quote
it has been the highlight of my life to have made such a bold declaration here in on internet
Dull life.
Quote
knowing that nobody can or will prove me wrong
If you provide a formal argument as described by me earlier, from a textbook cite.  I will prove it wrong (or prove that it's not a formal argument) inside of a day.  So it seems the only reason "nobody can" is because you are hiding your argument. :D

There are probably hundreds and thousands of arguments I can't prove wrong...simply because nobody mentioned them to me.  Yours is pretty much the same thing.  Not sure that's something to be proud of though.

profitis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3952
Re: quentron.com
« Reply #2532 on: June 12, 2014, 04:46:10 AM »
Philip is the electrostatics expert here @sarkeizen so of course I might be wrong on the above diagram,s thought-experiment.counterarguments for my declaration are a dime a dozen,you have to physically prove that Im wrong mr sarkeizen.

sarkeizen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1923
Re: quentron.com
« Reply #2533 on: June 12, 2014, 05:09:28 AM »
Philip is the electrostatics expert here @sarkeizen so of course I might be wrong
Then you can't say "not you not anybody" if somebody can.  From where I sit Philip has only shown expertise in making grand claims.
Quote
counterarguments for my declaration are a dime a dozen,you have to physically prove that Im wrong mr sarkeizen.
So your argument can be easily defeated logically.  Figured as much. :D  That's why you need to hide it. :D

MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: quentron.com
« Reply #2534 on: June 12, 2014, 09:27:23 AM »
I simply asked a simple question to you @mark E.your the one who went and made it unpresentable.it appears as though mr hardcastle was right.you won't be answering it anytime soon.
You made a claim that a particular process is reversible.  You have failed to even begin to offer any credible argument for that claim.