quentron.com

[profitis]

@lumen,thats the first thing that i made sure of,its definitly not chemical energy as the semiconductor material is totaly insoluble in the electrolyte. sub-visible light bandgap material stretching into the infrared was used and prepared in a special way and is extremely sensitive to temperature changes.if i just breathe on it the current increases dramaticly so this is definitly dark current,no temperature difference required ie.a 2nd law discrepency.

[sarkeizen]

It looks like the work on quenco, is going to resume.

Should we take that any more seriously than claims that the work on Quenco is going to finish?  Is there any difference?  Other than the frequency of pronouncements by Philip aren't the outputs of "working on Quenco" and "not working on Queco" effectively the same?

Also what was that about needing $1M to do batch C?  Does he have $1M?  He certainly didn't earn it with Buddink which is less than $500.

[lumen]

Should we take that any more seriously than claims that the work on Quenco is going to finish?  Is there any difference?  Other than the frequency of pronouncements by Philip aren't the outputs of "working on Quenco" and "not working on Queco" effectively the same?

Also what was that about needing $1M to do batch C?  Does he have $1M?  He certainly didn't earn it with Buddink which is less than $500.

The most interesting thing in this thread is not all the claims or ideas or concepts or theories that Philip has made.
Or, Even the number of companies or people making progress in this exact area of environmental heat conversion,
Or, Even the number of people from the past that have made similar claims of converting environmental heat into usable energy.

The most interesting thing in this thread is that you have never made a post in any other thread to claim their idea cannot work.
Whether it be magnet motors, gravity wheels, generator/motor combo's or any of the truly bad ideas in many of the other threads, you never say anything.
So, something is just a bit strange about that fact and I suppose you could tell us all why that is or maybe we could just make some guesses.

I'm starting to think that you either know Philip and want to steel his work as your own, or maybe you just think you could do better because you know in the end, the quenco chip will work.

I'm not sure at this point what it is, but your obsession with this single thread is not by chance!
Maybe you could fill us all in eh!

[sarkeizen]

Or, Even the number of companies or people making progress in this exact area of environmental heat conversion,

Of course since that number is zero.

Or, Even the number of people from the past that have made similar claims of converting environmental heat into usable energy.

Obviously since the number of physical laws restricting claims are significantly fewer than the number of laws restricting what you can actually make.

The most interesting thing in this thread is that you have never made a post in any other thread to claim their idea cannot work.
Whether it be magnet motors, gravity wheels, generator/motor combo's or any of the truly bad ideas in many of the other threads, you never say anything.
So, something is just a bit strange about that fact and I suppose you could tell us all why that is or maybe we could just make some guesses.

Probably stupid guesses but you still think you can make a computer program which can deterministically predict if an arbitrary computer program will terminate so...

I'm starting to think

Unlikely.

..that you either know Philip and want to steel his work as your own, or maybe you just think you could do better because you know in the end, the quenco chip will work.

ROFL.  I can not believe how badly you suck at math. So let's just get all the ducks lined up now.  If I don't think something will work, I can express that by saying something won't work.  However that is *only* the case if I also criticize *other* things which are similarly stupid right here in this forum.  If it don't then it's evidence that I think it *will* work?  Seriously?  That's your thought process?

If you have a hypothesis and a probabilistic expectation.  You can't consider the expectation both evidence *FOR* a hypothesis *AND* against a hypothesis.

I'm not sure at this point what it is, but your obsession with this single thread is not by chance!
Maybe you could fill us all in eh!

Nothing I haven't already said before.   I followed Philips posts years back and then realized that he was very likely wrong and a fraud.  I simply only have time for one thread on this board and considering how freely people get put on moderation here I doubt I would bother with more even if I had more time.

[lumen]

And of course your obsession with ONLY this thread is.......?