Any physics hotshots in the house?

[Spud1]

Generously, take out the generator from that system and just assume that it is able to keep itself going. It still has to be over 100% efficient just to overcome the energy lost from friction and the energy loss as heat due to cavitiation. Energy will leave this system and, as such, it violates the laws of thermodynamics if it is to be "self-looping" as energy entering the system is not accounted for.

This is the key point - when you read through, they are careful to avoid the words, but it's pretty clearly presented as a "Free Energy Device".

Just keep repeating:

Free energy does not exist
Free energy does not exist
Free energy does not exist
Free energy does not exist
Free energy does not exist
Free energy does not exist
Free energy does not exist

Once you realise this is an attempt at a free energy device it becomes very, very easy to debunk

[matts-uk]

Any advice as to how to handle this? I will probably be directing him to this thread, but there's no guarantee he will take a simple volume of your opinions over mine;

Point him at that research paper I posted. The KPP depends on a principle that has been proven not to work. We can argue why the result is opposite to what is expected but it's difficult to argue against an empirical result from a fully documented University experiment.

I have a facebook contact that has a PhD from Stanford in theoretical physics that has promised to look at it for me but I don't know how much time I can expect him to give me on this.

Turns out the KPP has already been thoroughly debunked.
https://alternative-energy.com.ua/en...d-free-energy/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IDArYf4ug9I
https://gaia.ws1.eu/index_en.php

]The help I'm specifically looking for is how to get through whatever psychological biases he has...

Conformational biases are often driven by fight or flight threat response. Your logical reasoning may be perceived as an attack, as your friend needs to admit to himself that he's been taken in.

Something you could try is to attack from the opposite direction so to speak. Put your cynicism aside and assume the compressor/generator contains some special secret sauce. Would the rest of the machine look the way it does? The answer is no. An optimal buoyancy harnessing machine would use flexible/collapsible lifting bodies. Or inject a gas that is less dense than air and so easier to compress (hydrogen/helium). Or do away with the gas and use a non-compressible liquid that is less dense than water, like petrol. By asking why do it that way and not another way, you can sow some doubt while appearing to be on the same side.

There is clearly a part of him that's worried, otherwise he wouldn't have asked me to look at it, but when he told me he'd invested, and I immediately said 'sell it, sell it all, now', and then gave my reasons, he told me that he's heard these arguments before and he could answer all my questions or issues, so it may take more weapons in my arsenal than I currently have.

Your friend is willing to invest in a principle and technology he doesn't understand. Clearly your friend is prepared to take a risk. Stop arguing on your terms, using reason and logic, and use the terms your friend understands. Bet a reasonable sum of your own money, say £100, that he won't get a return on his investment.

Oh hold on, https://gaia.ws1.eu/wette_en.php