@Hollander,


Hello my friend.  Looks like you are missing the point that the little experiment provided the leap of faith to Quenco.  Just saying that any useful control experiment will be better done on a Quenco; not on the pentode if you catch my drift.

Hi Lumen,
I read the article about using tunneling diodes to convert heat to electricity, and it seems the FE community let this info went ignored long time ago. I personally think if you can convert direct sunlight heat to 1.2V 100mA DC with 7 pieces of tunneling diodes( which is not an expensive component), this is quite impressive.
Even without the refinements of quenco, which are quite remarkable to ay the least, I think we can start experimenting with off-the-shelf components to replicate the efects discovered by those scientists who wrote the article.
What you say, lumen?

Quote from: e2matrix on October 24, 2012, 12:09:37 PM
hollander,  what is a "high sensibility ammeter" ?   Can we assume you meant high sensitivity ammeter?

Obviously, yes. 

QuoteI also do not understand your question about doing a test without a 'thermionic layer'.  I don't see any reference on that page to a thermionic layer in that test with the pentode.   Are you saying to do the test without any heat?  If so don't you think that his reason for adding the capacitor was to establish a base line by keeping out stray emf?

One of the Pentode electrode must be covered with a thermionic coating in order to emit electrons (collected by the second electrode). I have a Keithely 614 (high sensitivity electrometer) and it gives a reading of pA and even uA when the terminals are connected to some capacitor. One must be extremely careful when performing such kind of measurements.
   

QuoteOne other question for you.  You seem intent on believing he has nothing of interest here.  Ask your self this.  Would a physicist move half way around the world to meet with other scientists at Stanford and high tech companies to start production on this if he had nothing real?  And doing all that without asking anyone for money?  Yes he will be selling licensing for this but who is going to put up a Million dollars or more without knowing for certain it is a viable device?   My 'High Sensibility meter' says NO, no one would do that unless it is a viable device.

I agree with you. Let's wait to see whether someone is willing to put up a Million dollars. As far as you know, is there a person willing to do that? My 'High Sensibility meter' says that Hardcastle will have hard time to justify why his invention does not work.

@hollander.

Philip was right with you.

You are expressing a negative quality in you, and you want to pollute us with your negativity. Your negative attitude is not welcome in this forum, but you are welcome.

If you have positive qualities express it, but not express negative here.

Currently Philip gave us an experiment, that is reach up to us to check and see if it's true or not. and accept that you make factual statements, based on experiments.  And as you know from quantum mechanics, the experimenter influences the results of an experiment, and with negativity, we will see only negative results, with a positive attitude may not get the desired results but we can discover a new reality, perhaps more valuable than we are looking for.

If you correct your attitude, and you become objective, and express the results of your own experimentation, you are welcome, but if you keep your negativity, thank you not write anything, because you damage the warm atmosphere of camaraderie in this room.

Hi All,


There certainly is some quantum weirdness creeping in to conversations. LOL


I always used a moving coil meter (a meter that is 0-10uA and is the simple unpowered type device that can only respond to ACTUAL current) as well as a Keithley for confirmation and low current. I did all the things that should be done for an experiment. I also repeated the experiments with devices in series, back to back, and in parallel (5). I also had scientists do the test independently. The outputs were as predicted and fully support my claim that it violates Kelvin. So that then brings me to a guy that comes in here and constantly wants to smear my work, what is his motivation? When I first saw his post I thought he must be some sick individual, the last post only seems to confirm that he has some issues. What I cannot get is these people that presented with a $10 challenge refuse to do it but would rather seek to get everyone to abandon a breakthrough.


@ Hollander, do the $10 experiment and report your results here, you have my word that it works and that it is a violation but if you do it and it does not work then I will pay for your time and expenses plus send you a gift voucher for 1000 Euro (I assume by the name you are from Holland).


As to the other Esaki experiment someone came up with here, by all means entertain yourself and experiment, but I do not see that it is in any way Quenco, so I would rather you did not label it as being equivalent unless you can explain to me why.


Thanks as usual to those that have such kind words towards me.


At Stanford we have resolved a production issue and have agreed to make 10,000 1mm2 devices as a run, I expect about a 5% yield which should equate to 500 devices. The reasoning for this is that we have poor knowledge of Pt metal nucleation, we do not know exactly on what cycle it will take off so we know over the 10,000 on some it will not, on some it will have too much. We are confident that 5% will quickly rise to 99.9%, this is all a bit like making ic's.


We have also solved flat metal substrate issues, there is experience at Stanford of doing Silver on polished Silicon (atomically sooth) and then etching away the silicon thus leaving atomically smooth silver. Everything else all agree is easy to do and in fact we have already done them in Australia.


I am a bit surprised not one person from the quentron website readers seems to have done the $10 experiment, it is such a significant thing that I would have expected dozens of science labs, universities and such to have raced to do it, sort of proves that a challenge to the 2nd law is so taboo that even secret experimenters are shy. I mean it is less than $10 to be part of history, to be one of a handful to have violated the 2nd would be bragging rights, am I right?


Anyone reading this who is at a Uni or has access to a lab the challenge I put to Hollander applies.


I'll be back next week with an update.