quentron.com

[sarkeizen]

@sarkeizen affirmative.O2 adsorbs directly onto the gold and platinum surfaces like a sponge to different degrees.

There's simply not enough information on that site to make your argument.

It certainly doesn't clearly state, you can make a battery that runs forever there and there isn't any information on the limitations or requirements of constructing that type of cell.  This doesn't really qualify as "predicting" anything as far as I see.

Which again, might be a good reason to refer (that is to say "cite") a more expansive text like...I don't know...a textbook?

I wonder how many posts you'll spend avoiding referencing one this time?

[profitis]

@sarkeizen theres enough info there to a)predict an O2-electrode concentration cell and therefore b)predict when it will reach equilibrium.thats all that matters :-)

[sarkeizen]

@sarkeizen theres enough info there to a)predict an O2-electrode concentration cell and therefore b)predict when it will reach equilibrium.thats all that matters :-)

EOA's "I'm avoiding a cite again" post #1 - I bet this gets to 100!

If there's enough to make the prediction that you claimed, of a battery which runs forever with sufficient specs to run an ipod and it's as obvious as you are implying then you should be able to create a formal logical argument for it.

I realize that whatever your education it didn't include anything remotely like formal logic, so I'll help.  You need to make a series of statements which force your conclusion, that is they exclude all other possibilities purely through logic and ONLY the assumptions explicitly stated in that one quote.  No other assumptions from anywhere else.

Now if you can't do that then one of two things seem likely, either you can't extrapolate what you think from just those forty-two words OR it's not as obvious as you're implying.

Here's the place where you think you can do that, get it wrong, then you claim that it's right and look more stupid than usual.  Please begin.

[profitis]

@sarkeizen so if i told you to go build a zinc-air cell and that it lasts forever whats preventing you from a)building/testing it or b) if your lazy at least drawing it and checking it out in theory first. So if i told you to go steal two oxygen probes from your local aquarium and build an self-charging O2 concentration cell whats preventing you from a)stealing and building it to check it out or b) if your too scared to steal and too lazy to build check it out on paper,in theory. logic enough? Commonsense enough? TWO oxygen sensor probes ie. im not talking about building a nuclear bomb here man.you havent made one single challenge on the grounds of common sense here as im telling you that a KNOWN TYPE OF CELL will not go flat ever.its on you to disprove me not me to disprove you.

[profitis]

@sarkeizen  the maximum entropy state of 2 SEPERATE pieces of platinum sitting at different depths in a glass of water,one at its surface,one below its surface is NOT THE SAME as when they are in physical contact with each other,logic enough? Seperate=maximum entropy state (a).in contact=maximum entropy state (b).pure utter logic