quentron.com

[trim12]

When Phil says experts have tested his Sebithenco device he means experts and not in a toaster either.

@Phil have a great time.

To the Forum have a happy healthy and exciting year.

[e2matrix]

Thanks again for the update Phil.   Have a Happy and Success filled New Year! 

[sarkeizen]

As I have said, I don't believe it will be the power source of the future but I don't understand the QM's of it - my thoughts about its success are based on stuff I have heard on this forum and others. I do know a little about its practicalities as a system and getting any power out of it - that seems like a challenge.

Right, I was just trying to step you through another approach (It's interesting that now that I'm only writing questions lumen et al are pretty silent).  So again, do you think this qualifies as a Maxwell's Demon machine - does it (as described by Philip) reduce entropy in an isothermal environment (Philip appears to say "yes" to this as far as I can tell)

Seems that the only debate going on here is to label my delivery date slippage as some form of scientific proof in the negative.

"scientific proof of the negative" - is that even English?   *sigh*  Whatever that is, if that's all you see then you are simply an idiot.  How do people become EE's (which you claim you are IIRC) and not take some pretty elementary mathematics?  Information governs probability.

all that does is the reality that we have working sebithenco devices in many independent hands (so I know I did not fool myself), and that we will have commercial Quenco tiles for distribution in February

This seems both to be the same announcement philip made over a year ago.  Not to mention it seems something of a lie or at least a violation of SNF lab policy.  The Stanford labs only allow proof-of-concept development: "Commercial activities (ie production of devices for sale) are strictly prohibited;"

I can report that I have been sent confirmation of the actual experiments run by professionals, this now, including a South American friend who was ignored,

Those who were around at the time, can also recall that there were a number of replications of Fleischmann and Pons.  Replication would help discover simple measurement errors it wouldn't discover something biasing the measurements - e.g. something not being properly controlled for.  The OPERA faster-than-light neutrino anomaly illustrates this pretty well.  The experiment was replicated at least once.  Sure Philip claims that people have been replicating this "bake the tube" experiment, presumably with their own equipment.  However we probably aren't looking at a faulty piece of equipment just something that's not being properly controlled for.

sceptics who are more interested in attacking me than doing  the experiment or debating the science

Ok a few sentences ago Philip seemed to imply that doing the experiment isn't meaningful unless done by an expert.  In which case why would he urge anyone to do it?  As for debating the science, I maintain that Philip has posted, either here or else where very little in the way of actual science nor has he done much more than an amateur job arguing it.  Even Lumen who repeatedly jerks Philip off on this forum (not much more vigorously than the other cheerleaders like Bruce do) recognized that Philip begs the question wrt how his device violates 2LOT.

Just as an aside.  People who say things like "fully supported my own results" tend to sound more like used car salesmen than people who actually do lab work.  At least the work I've seen.  The fact of the matter is test results are probabilistic, rarely is anything so perfectly controlled that you get exactly the same result.  What you shoot for is to have results fall within your error margin.  Even then that doesn't necessarily prove your hypothesis (or invalidate your null hypothesis).  It's simply statistical data that increases confidence.

[Bruce_TPU]

Only a few hours of 2012 left here in Australia.


So let me be the first on this forum to wish you all a Happy New Year.


Having a few beers here so forgive me if this is all a bit messed up.

@MBM, Unless you think I am a liar let me tell you that your expert friend is no expert and that we have now a lot of replications of the proof of concept experiment which unequivocally violates the Kelvin interpretation of the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics. Seems that the only debate going on here is to label my delivery date slippage as some form of scientific proof in the negative. Why you bother telling people that Quenco cannot work when you admit you are no expert mystifies me.


Attacks on me personally are so boring that they really do not matter any more (they did a year ago), all that does is the reality that we have working sebithenco devices in many independent hands (so I know I did not fool myself), and that we will have commercial Quenco tiles for distribution in February, touch wood.


One simple quick technical observation, it is kW/cm2 not cm3. The thinness of stacked Quenco means the thermal flux is high, if it were cm thick it would not support more than a few hundred Watts per cm2. The um scale thinness of a 400 layers Quenco means that there will not be any significant Delta T across the device thickness.


I understand that there may be a few reports issued by independents in January of the violation experiment, naturally that is not under my control though I can report that I have been sent confirmation of the actual experiments run by professionals, this now, including a South American friend who was ignored, is the 5th replication of the original sebithenco experiment and all have fully supported my own results.


This news should set the World abuzz but I am almost sure it will just raise the ire of the sceptics who are more interested in attacking me than doing  the experiment or debating the science. Of course for me it matters not one iota for the date in history that changes the World view on energy is when we despatch from Stanford to our licensees the actual Quenco cm2 tiles.


As soon as there is a release of the independent Physicists report I will post it on

www.quentron.com

Back to why I logged on

HAPPY NEW YEAR TO ALL


Phil H

Hi Phil,

Thank you for dropping in with the kind wishes.  I for one am excited to see the coming success of your production.  Have a safe and blessed New Year!

And remember, you can please only some of the people, some of the time, and you will never be able to please all of the people, all of the time, no matter what is said, and in the future, shown.  Keep pressing on, following your dream.  That is the most admirable thing to me.   

Cheers,

Bruce

[sarkeizen]

I for one am excited to see the coming success of your production.

...didn't you say you didn't have any beliefs about Quenco?   Man, I need to get in with your deity.  Mine has this whole intolerance of lying and stretching the truth.  Yours, seems way more chill about the whole deal.