quentron.com

[Philip Hardcastle]

I believe the only evidence that can satisfy a person who believes a violation of 2LOT to be impossible, is to have that person test an actual device.


I will post here a link where members can obtain such a device from a distributor, but it will not be before August 20th 2014 for legal reasons.


I am happy to discuss the general issue of 2LOT and Maxellian Demons on the KARPEN PILE thread.

[memoryman]

Philip, we exchanged many emails 2 years ago (memoryman). I am curious: have you finally got good quality working samples?

[MarkE]

How credible a test for a claim is rests on the strength of the evidence that the test generates in relation to the claim.  Long before an experiment is conducted, the experiment should be designed and evaluated for its ability to discern between a null result that rejects the hypothesis under test and a result that supports the hypothesis under test.  If under the conditions of a known null control the experiment yields other than the null result, then the experiment is flawed and its design must be reconsidered.  I encourage you to do all that you can to vet whatever experiments you propose buyers perform before you offer units for sale.

An example of something that would indicate a Second Law violation to me would be an experiment where a quantity of heat passively moves from a lower temperature reservoir to a higher temperature reservoir.  Let me place two reservoirs in a well insulated chamber, let those two reservoirs each start at the same temperature, communicate thermally, and show that heat does not move from one to the other for the null experiment.  Then all things equal add the second law violating mechanism to the first reservoir and observe that its heat decreases while the heat in the second reservoir increases by a like amount.  Swap out the reservoirs and repeat showing that the apparent heat movement direction is not specific to the reservoirs.  Do all that successfully well above the uncertainty of your instruments, and I think you would have strong evidence of a Second Law violation. 

My message is that the method by which you or your customers will test is in many ways more important than the how or why by which you hope to be able to violate the Second Law.  Whatever you do, make certain that you shake out your test ideas well in advance.  That way, when the day comes people interested in your claims will accept your test methods as valid.

[sarkeizen]

I believe the only evidence that can satisfy a person who believes a violation of 2LOT to be impossible, is to have that person test an actual device.

So isn't that an implied claim that the vast majority of people in the world, even people who have only kindergarten math.  Are capable of creating and executing a test which would have a high probability of being correct?

Has it not occurred to you that there are whole billion dollar industries which are completely and utterly FAKE which rely on precisely the same standard of evidence: "If you don't believe me, try it for yourself".

I will post here a link where members can obtain such a device from a distributor, but it will not be before August 20th 2014 for legal reasons.

I have a hard time getting through the summer without looking forward to you failing at the end of it.

I am happy to discuss the general issue of 2LOT and Maxellian Demons on the KARPEN PILE thread.

Are you saying that your quenco is NOT a Maxwell's Demon?  If it is, why wouldn't we discuss it here?

How credible a test for a claim is rests on the strength of the evidence that the test generates in relation to the claim.

Mark, if I wasn't straight I'd seriously want to make out with you right now.  Yes!! A test - any test - can only shift our confidence we have in our hypothesis.  The overall probability of our hypothesis is the conditional probability of the hypothesis and the test.  This is essentially what Bayes Theorem connotes.

Because of this people often forget that it's possible to have a weak hypothesis pass a strong test and have the result still not be credible.

[MarkE]

I don't swing the other way either.   I appreciate the compliment.

I am very skeptical of Mr.Hardcastle's claims.  Just the same, I would be happy to help him work out solid test protocols if he wants my help.