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 1261373 times)

profitis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3952
Re: quentron.com
« Reply #2535 on: June 12, 2014, 11:18:30 AM »
It cannot even be defeated on logical grounds mr sarkeizen: all gas spillover cells necessitate a 2lot disintergration in theory and in practice.you cannot destabilize this statement using logic or physical demonstration. 

profitis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3952
Re: quentron.com
« Reply #2536 on: June 12, 2014, 11:29:55 AM »
Incorrect @markE. It was wikipedia that declared that all capactors must leak.you have failed to explain why the diagrammed one won't leak on open switch mode.

MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: quentron.com
« Reply #2537 on: June 12, 2014, 12:26:40 PM »
Incorrect @markE. It was wikipedia that declared that all capactors must leak.you have failed to explain why the diagrammed one won't leak on open switch mode.
It's very sad that you keep throwing about straw men.   Shall we return to the issue at hand?  You have constructed the model, and you insist that according to wikipedia that what you have drawn is a leaky capacitor.  Whether it is or it isn't:  1) a capacitor, 2) a capacitor that is initially charged, or 3) a capacitor that is initially charged and ultimately discharges via leakage, you have not shown either of the things needed to establish the thermodynamically reversible process that you claim:  1) two thermodynamic states, and 2) that the system can on its own move from either state to the other.  If you claim 3) as you seem to be suggesting, then you are going to have one heck of a time showing reversibility.

profitis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3952
Re: quentron.com
« Reply #2538 on: June 12, 2014, 01:00:58 PM »
You know its number 3 @mark E.I don't understand why your beating around the bush and I assure you your going to struggle to show irreversability. I've shown reversability by using wikipedias assertion against you ie, the thing spontaneously charges up as is evident in the diagrams,wikipedia says it will now spontaneously charge down when switch is opened.so either it will remain permanently charged on open switch or it won't.if it doesn't then its blatantly obviously reversable. I'm suspecting mr hardcastle will mention something about electric fields over the vaccuum gap making it irreversable but if he is going to say this then I want to know why the two pieces needed contact in the first place. 

profitis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3952
Re: quentron.com
« Reply #2539 on: June 12, 2014, 01:59:56 PM »
I can put the whole issue  to you another way @mark E.do the two metallic pieces need to be in contact to fully charge up.yes or no.

MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: quentron.com
« Reply #2540 on: June 12, 2014, 02:16:02 PM »
I can put the whole issue  to you another way @mark E.do the two metallic pieces need to be in contact to fully charge up.yes or no.
Are you ever going to put forth an argument to support your claim?

MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: quentron.com
« Reply #2541 on: June 12, 2014, 02:20:37 PM »
You know its number 3 @mark E.I don't understand why your beating around the bush and I assure you your going to struggle to show irreversability. I've shown reversability by using wikipedias assertion against you ie, the thing spontaneously charges up as is evident in the diagrams,wikipedia says it will now spontaneously charge down when switch is opened.so either it will remain permanently charged on open switch or it won't.if it doesn't then its blatantly obviously reversable. I'm suspecting mr hardcastle will mention something about electric fields over the vaccuum gap making it irreversable but if he is going to say this then I want to know why the two pieces needed contact in the first place.
OK, so it's your argument that the configuration forms a capacitor.  And it is your argument that the capacitor leaks.  Now:  show your thermodynamic states and how the system is able to move between either state to the other. 

sarkeizen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1923
Re: quentron.com
« Reply #2542 on: June 12, 2014, 02:55:44 PM »
It cannot even be defeated on logical grounds mr sarkeizen
Two interesting consequences of that statement:

i) Philip can not provide an argument against it.  Since one would assume that you would listen to Philip's argument because it is logical.
ii) You know of a formal logical argument (from an ordinary text) which proves your belief.

If ii) is true, then your only accomplishment was to kept your argument secret.

As I've said, it's unsurprising if I can not defeat arguments I've never been told. :D :D :D

profitis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3952
Re: quentron.com
« Reply #2543 on: June 12, 2014, 04:27:45 PM »
Where's the irreversability here @sarkeizen.in other words what is going to change here to a degree that will prevent repetition in the profit margin. 

profitis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3952
Re: quentron.com
« Reply #2544 on: June 12, 2014, 04:46:51 PM »
Electrochemical thermodynamic downhill gradient 1)charged capacitor. Electrostatic downhill gradient 2) leak across the vaccuum @mark E. Why would the two pieces be sitting seperately neutraly charged in the first place if they were going to be stable in a seperately charged state.

MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: quentron.com
« Reply #2545 on: June 12, 2014, 04:57:22 PM »
Electrochemical thermodynamic downhill gradient 1)charged capacitor. Electrostatic downhill gradient 2) leak across the vaccuum @mark E. Why would the two pieces be sitting seperately neutraly charged in the first place if they were going to be stable in a seperately charged state.
It is up to you to state your argument.  You need to specify the states and then show that the system can move from either one to the other. 

sarkeizen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1923
Re: quentron.com
« Reply #2546 on: June 12, 2014, 05:10:30 PM »
Where's the irreversability here
Don't know.  I'm not an expert at converting a  picture into your homework assignment (which you keep asking people to do for you).

If you have a formal argument then stop hiding it.  If you've forgotten what a formal argument is.  Then ask and I'll define it.

profitis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3952
Re: quentron.com
« Reply #2547 on: June 12, 2014, 05:49:38 PM »
My argument is this @mark E: why would two chunks of metal sit neutral facing each other across a vaccuum when they are supposed to be more happy charged and facing each other across a vaccuum.the stench of reversability is hanging thick over this scenario.I'm saying they are more happy in a neutral state than a charged state.unless you want to point out where I'm wrong..

profitis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3952
Re: quentron.com
« Reply #2548 on: June 12, 2014, 05:59:42 PM »
My formal argument is that you won't be able to give a damning reason for nonprofitable irreversability in that spillover diagram other than declaring 2lot inviolable @sarkeizen.

MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: quentron.com
« Reply #2549 on: June 12, 2014, 06:05:02 PM »
My argument is this @mark E: why would two chunks of metal sit neutral facing each other across a vaccuum when they are supposed to be more happy charged and facing each other across a vaccuum.the stench of reversability is hanging thick over this scenario.I'm saying they are more happy in a neutral state than a charged state.unless you want to point out where I'm wrong..
Are you really that daft?  Once again:  In order for you to show the thermodynamic reversibility that you claim then you have to:  identify the two thermodynamic states that you allege are reversible, AND show how the system can freely move from the first state to the second AND the second state to the first all by itself. 

If by this: 
Quote
I'm saying they are more happy in a neutral state than a charged state.
You seem to be saying that the system seeks a favored state.  If so, then it is not reversible.