Quote from: MileHigh on October 28, 2012, 02:36:12 PM
I am just telling you the truth as I see it and I have 30  years worth of experience in electronics to draw on to help me form my impressions and opinions.  As a general comment, you would be wise to factor in the advice and suggestions from people that have more experience in something that you don't have experience in.

Finally, no takers to explain why the $10 TV tube experiment overturns the 2nd LoT?  I personally don't see that happening at all.

Someone with your electronics experience could easily do the $10 experiment and produce current from an isothermal environment. (which does overturn PART of the second law)

Or you could do the experiment that was posted by "TheCell" a few posts back. Again, current from an isothermal environment.
Or, being a good skeptic, you could just believe you are right and keep crying about how impossible it is. (this is by far the easiest and is recommended for general life failure skeptics)

Lumen:

Who says I'm crying and what pray tell is a "general life failure skeptic?"  Haven't the skeptics been winning?  You need to chill out.  If this ends up going nowhere I would like an acknowledgement from you that I was right.

Nor did I say current flow was impossible.  What I said was I don't see how this experiment violates the 2nd LoT in an any way.

Can you explain how the experiment violates the second law?  So far I haven't heard from anybody, perhaps you would like to take a crack at it?

MileHigh

 

@Philip

There are some things that I do not understand. I made a simple question about your pentode experiment and you asked me and other people to repeat the experiment, maybe posting the results on youtube. What is the goal of all this? Try to convince me and other "skeptic" that the pentode results were real? I said that one must be extremely careful in performing very very very low current measurements because it is quite easy to measure the instrument own disturbance, above all when you are doing measurement @ 500 C.

I think that the best way to silence people like me is: post a video of your own results with a Quenco working prototype. You are saying that Quenco is a "million times more powerful" than your pentode experiment. Moreover, now the patent has been filed, so no copyright problem. Why you do not do that?

One more question: Do you already have a Quenco working prototype? If not, how one can say that it is a "million times more powerful" than the pentode experiment? Are you try to sell a technology before having tested it?

I see that quentron.com site changed layout once again. Preparing for the launch?