quentron.com

[sarkeizen]

@profitis, you promised me you would not continue your discussions with Sarcastic on this thread, but now I see that MarkE has joined in on posting on this thread about Karpen, and you engage with him and Sarcastic.

Glad to see that I'm getting to you enough that you need to give me a nickname. 

I am now declaring to this forum that I am no longer prepared to post here.

Well at least that gets you off the hook for your big non-announcement in August.  Almost the same way that getting all flustered with me saved you from being beaten in an argument with me.  Looks like you have that whole running away bit down to a science.

They do provide all the necessary tools for a 2lot violation mr sarkeizen,

What does that mean?  Does it mean that an unarguable point can be made simply from textbooks and logic?  If not, then again you could have told me I won this argument a while back.

[sarkeizen]

I'm going to refrain from blowing the anti-2lot horn from now on and be strictly going by the textbook.

In other words...textbooks don't support 2lot violation.  Thanks again for the win profitis.

[sarkeizen]

@sarkeizen.gona make your dreams come true,by the textbook.

Yawn...you are (like Philip) pretty much at 100% fail...or is that what you mean?

[MarkE]

Ja but the textbooks provided catalyst spillover.we just want you to show how it obeys 2lot in general or specificly @sarkeizen.

LOL!  Does the entropy not increase with time?  Does not a chemical reaction proceed net in one direction:  feed stock to result?

[MarkE]

They do provide all the necessary tools for a 2lot violation mr sarkeizen,by clearing the path to fullscale reversibility.there is no law save 2lot that prevents this.yet theres a hundred laws for this.

You have killed your own argument.