quentron.com

[sarkeizen]

beginning over 100years or so ago at the time

...when the gullible and uncritical roamed the earth and they congregated and eventually formed the free energy movement and they vowed to make people more stupid every year.

intending support?lol @sarkeizen show me one higher education science textbook that doesnt support the wikipedia cell,the cell that you cant and wont kill

So are you going to answer my question?  Are you going to support your statement about textbooks necessitating the existence of and the ability to build batteries which can power an ipod like device eternally?  Anytime you want to answer clearly.  Just let me know. :-)  Take your time if you find the question difficult.

whats with your obsession with eternity man

You're the one who brought it up.  You said that the battery would power a device continually forever.  I can show you where you (stupidly) said that.  As that is the statement I took issue with, as long as you are claiming you can support it.  That's the statement that I should defeat.  The other reason that it's important is your (very stupid) obsession with building things.  No built device can validate the claim that it would operate eternally strictly through observation.  Yet that is exactly what you continually (stupidly) demand.

Now if you want to withdraw that argument.  Go ahead but as long as it's your claim, I'm going to force you to defend it.

[profitis]

A)stupid? You mean like lord kelvin?wasnt he the guy who said something about heavier-than-air-machines being impossible? B)so are you going to answer my question first,CAN YOU KILL THE WIKIPEDIA BATTERY AND SHOW IT (in theory if you prefer).C)ok i lied @sarkeizen.it,l power your ipod for 80years(im saying this to hopefully chill you out).happy now?

[profitis]

can you use textbooks to show how to kill the wikipedia battery @sarkeizen because i can use textbooks to show how not to kill it.

[sarkeizen]

,l power your ipod for 80years(im saying this to hopefully chill you out).happy now?

Dude, I'm not sure why you think I get excited over your posts.  I mean you are really, really, really, really, really, really, really stupid but that's not exactly uncommon.  It's the only thing more common than hydrogen.  What you have been doing is boring me, day after day of ridiculous twisting and turning.  Trying so very hard to avoid being clear, avoid making a useful argument, avoid supporting it properly.  I mean I admit I'm amused to keep hammering you into the ground but that's really all I get out of this (and upping my postcount - not far from "hero" now!)

As I said.  "forever" , "eternal" was your point.  If you didn't mean it don't say it.

So something that runs for 80 years and then runs out of juice.  That isn't likely to be a 2LOT violation.  The oxford bell has been running for over 150 years and we know it will run out and we know it's not a 2LOT violation.

So I guess you give up then?

[profitis]

maybe its because you like to hear me repeat myself over and over again?maybe thats your thing @sarkeizen.maybe thats why you get high on my posts.i mean,how many times must i tell you that it doesnt matter how long the thing lasts-as long as it lasts the lifespan of the ipod right?you know of any oxford bells that can power an ipod for 80years?please let me be the first to know,we,l be rich.give up?holy shit im beginning to think youre crazy dude,i just challenged you to use textbooks to show us how a textbook battery goes dead and you wont do it @sarkeizen,you wont because you cant.its you who,s being hammered here buddy,wakeup.i can use a textbook to show you how an oxford zinc-carbon goes flat anytime :-)