HABTEC SOLAR CONVERTER

[MarkE]

It's now pretty clear that it's all been bull$hit.
If it worked then why on earth would you reject partnerships and joint ventures to take to market?
It was touted as 'open source' so if you don't partner with larger businesses then they will go and make it themselves and cut you out.

If PH really thinks he has something (which I don't, given his recent outburst) then he must be insane to crap-out on the project because of a few sceptics. Alternatively, it could be the best thing he ever does!

He seems very volatile.

[lumen]

I believe Philip's concept is viable. He spent much energy and time trying to develop a high tech version that would solve the worlds energy problems and faced many skeptics and problems and was so criticized here for his failures.

Now Philip was attempting to GIVE AWAY a low tech and easily built solution that may have been useful to many in this forum.
Again he is faced with criticism and negativity for giving away an easily built device that falls totally within the open source rules of this forum and is possibly the best free energy solution of any of the threads in this forum.

His website now states that he will no longer waste his time on others, and will use his time for his self.
So, was the criticism for his work in the past, or for his new low tech approach that may have shown different results?

I guess going by some logic, one could say if you fail many times then you can never succeed, though the rule to success is if you fail then get up and try again.

[MarkE]

I believe Philip's concept is viable. He spent much energy and time trying to develop a high tech version that would solve the worlds energy problems and faced many skeptics and problems and was so criticized here for his failures.

Now Philip was attempting to GIVE AWAY a low tech and easily built solution that may have been useful to many in this forum.
Again he is faced with criticism and negativity for giving away an easily built device that falls totally within the open source rules of this forum and is possibly the best free energy solution of any of the threads in this forum.

His website now states that he will no longer waste his time on others, and will use his time for his self.
So, was the criticism for his work in the past, or for his new low tech approach that may have shown different results?

I guess going by some logic, one could say if you fail many times then you can never succeed, though the rule to success is if you fail then get up and try again.

The criticism of the past few days focused on him apparently welching on a bet he made in June.  Mr. Hardcastle did not dispute the quote in post #4 by celsus.  Mr. Hardcastle has not provided the proof that was the subject of the bet.  I call that a loss.  Mr. Hardcastle is upset that others see it that way as well.

Mr. Hardcastle has over the years made various claims that by leveraging thermionic principles he could break the Second Law of Thermodynamics.  His various concepts have been heavily criticized as unworkable.  Mr. Hardcastle expresses his opinion that he claims is shared by experts who he says refuse to be identified that an experiment with a vacuum tube in an oven validates his claims of a Second Law violation.  Those experiments are at least three years old.  They have been criticized heavily as well.

Mr. Hardcastle's latest efforts seem related to the three year old vacuum tube experiments.

Over the time that I have been familiar with Mr. Hardcastle's claims to Second Law violations I have never seen where Mr. Hardcastle has set-out an idea and then defined a test that could falsify the null version of his idea.  IOW I have never seen him establish a means that could prove his Second Law violation claims even in the extremely unlikely case that they might be true.

The decision to pull the plug on his web site was Mr. Hardcastle's.  He has done similar things at least several times before.  IMO, Mr. Hardcastle puts himself in a difficult position:  He has multiple times now: made extraordinary claims, promised proof of his claims, failed to provide proof of his extraordinary claims, gone off in a huff.  It is very hard for meto take a person who conducts themselves in such a way seriously.

[celsus]

He has done similar things at least several times before.  IMO, Mr. Hardcastle puts himself in a difficult position:  He has multiple times now: made extraordinary claims, promised proof of his claims, failed to provide proof of his extraordinary claims, gone off in a huff.  It is very hard for meto take a person who conducts themselves in such a way seriously.

I may add: He has set a very specific deadline every time and he has failed to keep this deadline every time. Without exception.

[Madebymonkeys]

I believe Philip's concept is viable. He spent much energy and time trying to develop a high tech version that would solve the worlds energy problems and faced many skeptics and problems and was so criticized here for his failures.

Now Philip was attempting to GIVE AWAY a low tech and easily built solution that may have been useful to many in this forum.
Again he is faced with criticism and negativity for giving away an easily built device that falls totally within the open source rules of this forum and is possibly the best free energy solution of any of the threads in this forum.

His website now states that he will no longer waste his time on others, and will use his time for his self.
So, was the criticism for his work in the past, or for his new low tech approach that may have shown different results?

I guess going by some logic, one could say if you fail many times then you can never succeed, though the rule to success is if you fail then get up and try again.

There was, at least (to me), a glimmer of hope in his idea (there are many high efficiency thermionic generators documented even as close as this year...they do depend on a temp differential though!) but his reaction to criticism speaks loud. To me, again, it seems like he is full of crap and cannot and has not been able to demonstrate a 2LOT violation. Instead, I think he has managed to spend a lot of time and money recreating experiments, done many times, which rely on a temperature differential...probably due to measurement errors or blunders.

If the above is inaccurate, I would love to hear PH's side of the story.

Oh, and if PH is listening, do the world (and your family) a favour, let us see how to build a unit before Samsung does it!