quentron.com

[lumen]

Well sarky, maybe you could use your math to figure out where you went wrong!

@profitis   If you need anything custom designed or build to advance your cell, I may be able to help.

[profitis]

@sarkeizen dont be clever now,we both know that no schoolbook is going to paragraph a 'how to bust 2lot' manual but yeah sure,chek out the subsection titled 'electrode concentration cells' and simply apply to the oxygen electrode and away you go.this thread isnt about 2lot.its about wether quenco works and is useful or not.

[profitis]

thanx @lumen.i,l drop a pm sometime.

[sarkeizen]

Well sarky, maybe you could use your math to figure out where you went wrong!

Dude, this is part of your problem.  You could have used that post to actually make an argument.**  You could have spent time thinking about what it is you are trying to say, spent some time in self-criticism to find the flaws in it, revise it and then say it.  Instead you just make vague assertions and trite comments.  You probably don't even read half of what I type before you knock off another bit of invective.  I wouldn't mind but that's all you have to say.  The irony is, that implies that I'm taking you far more seriously than you take me.  Which would be just one of those things if you weren't going on and on and on and on about how I'm not engaged here.

In short: You're being useless.  Snap out of it and be useful.

**So for example, you could cite specifically where I am wrong and provide an iron clad argument demonstrating that I am wrong.  Instead you whined like an infant.

@sarkeizen dont be clever now

It's a habit that's hard to break.

we both know that no schoolbook is going to paragraph a 'how to bust 2lot'

You know what I hate about that profitis guy...he's all about 2LOT and doesn't care about the viability of the idea. :-)

Seriously though, what I'm doing is pointing out the problem with (or what will become the problem with) your argument.  A naive reading of your argument was: "It's so incredibly simple and obvious, a hammerstien** pile is going to give us power forever because it follows some set of rules which I won't cite but clearly imply power forever".

**I'm just too lazy to look up the dudes name, as far as I'm concerned the dude and the mythos surrounding his battery is annoying enough I would probably kick him in the groin many many times if he wasn't dead.  He deserves it.

a) Whatever is in that thing in that museum office you probably can't say with a useful degree of certainty what it is.
b) However much power that thing is putting out you probably can't say with a useful degree of certainty what that is.

Now regardless of whether we are talking about 2LOT or simply a really good battery is irrelevant at this point since those are exactly the two things you need to know in order to make the argument.

c) When someone says "X clearly implies Y" in the context of "but the consensus of in-field scientists do not agree" (where a field is a generally recognized field not say "orgonomy").  Then it's rational to think that it's more likely that they are wrong.
d) If these rules are so common and completely clear, then you should be able to cite them in just about any number of textbooks.   I could then go down to my library and read the cite for myself and be convinced.   The fact that you probably can't indicates that things are likely more complicated than you make them out to be and again which makes you the likely culprit of being wrong rather than the rest of the field.

this thread isnt about 2lot.its about wether quenco works and is useful or not.

Did you get elected to the council of of "what this thread is about?".  I must have missed the memo.  Again it's a board for 2LOT violations, I was answering a direct question about 2LOT.  Now stop being an ass and man up to your argument.

And while I'm telling you get off my lawn...learn to capitalize.

[profitis]

@sarkeizen i repeat. this thread is about the commercial viability of the aforementioned quenco.you still havent answered as to why you bother about trivialities e.g. 2lot?and im beginning to think that this quirky obsession of yours is highly suspect.perhaps to purposely steer attention away from the issue at hand?regarding my aforementioned referal to the subsection of textbooks,if you dont have the electrochemistry knowledge to see the connection and hence build the friggn thing then just say so instead of standing there and blabbering on a tangent that is of no help or use in our quest for commercialy viable solutions to our energy needs..