quentron.com

[sarkeizen]

Well, in short....your original statement that I disagreed with is about textbooks - all textbooks in fact (or virtually all or perhaps most).  So anything that doesn't start with a textbook citation can't really make that point.

Hence anything else is a distraction from this point.  So far you have produced no ordinary textbook cites about any of the other fantasies you are currently having.  Now in theory you could take an ordinary textbook like the one you deceived me into getting and demonstrate that it necessitates and predicts some wikipedia-unicorn-moron-thing and then attempt to try and demonstrate that such a thing necessitates a battery which powers an ipod-like device continually and eternally.

However a) You haven't done that b) It seems like the long way around to make your point c) It seems very, very, very, very, very much like you're just trying to distract from the point.  Since you yourself said that you discovered the wikipedia-monkey-karate-death-car during your postings with me.  However that was well after your made your statement about textbooks and well into your months of stalling.  So it's impossible for that have been the original reason for your statement.  So either you can still demonstrate your point from an ordinary textbook, or you realized that you can't and now are trying to snow me by bringing in all sorts of other non-textbooks things - most of which you don't appear to have read.

So why not jut own up, say you were wrong and move on?

[profitis]

how can i say im wrong with the monster nernst equation staring me and you in the face @sarkeizen dont be like this .my only point,given that ambient pressure gaseous concentration cells BEHAVE AS EXPECTED,is that i dont see kelvin statement anywhere in their thermodynamic cycles of operation.do you? Does anybody? Let them speak up now..

[sarkeizen]

how can i say im wrong

Because you can't seem to form a formal logical argument from whatever you imagine an ordinary textbook says.  The fact that you don't really understand how physical equations are derived is interesting as well.

my only point,

Wrong.  Your original point, which I disagreed with, which you reiterated several times was about TEXTBOOKS necessitating the existence of and ability to build batteries which would run an ipod-like device continually and forever.  If you want to CHANGE your point or even if you want to talk about something else.   Just admit that you can't support it.   If you could, why haven't you done so already?  Why have you spent so much time avoiding my questions, postulating new unrelated or unnecessary statements, demanding I demonstrate something that you made up and just generally being an all-around asshole?

[profitis]

and you still,to this day,cant seem to get it in your head that im telling you that this class of concentration cells behave as expected @sarkeizen,expected.how do you personaly expect the nernst equation to apply to e.g. an ambient pressure oxygen electrode concentration cell?theres only one way,the way its supposed to apply.

[sarkeizen]

and you still,to this day,cant seem to get it in your head that im telling you that this class of concentration cells behave as expected

Depends.  If by "behavior" you mean "continuously and eternally running an ipod battery".  Then "expected" probably doesn't mean more than "expected by profitis the ultra-moron and general asshole to honest people."  Now if you mean "expected by the general populace of electrochemists and physicists" then that seems pretty unlikely.   For that to be expected by such a large group of people yet there is no direct note of it anywhere in a textbook.  No, "Here's how you create a battery that lasts forever" or "Hey we were just joking about the 2nd law" or "If you need to power something infinitely then here's how you do it". You've said this yourself.

So the fact that YOU expect some configuration of chemicals to behave in a certain way is not in dispute at all.  The problem is you said it's necessitated from an ordinary textbook which you still can't demonstrate.  I'm pretty sure you know you can't too.  So your only choice is to desperately try to change the subject...which is what you've been doing for months...and lying.

Just admit this and we can move on.