Comments on: Post Oct 28 commentary

By: Roger Bird

Roger Bird — Wed, 30 Nov 2011 22:01:09 +0000

Actually, according to the Spencer Tracy movie of the 1930′s, there were a bunch of people saying that the electric light was scientifically impossible. Somehow, Edison accidentally let out that he had it, not he was working on it. When he didn’t show it, there was a huge boil over with skeptics having a big party and inviting the whole world.

By: Roger Bird

Roger Bird — Wed, 30 Nov 2011 20:24:02 +0000

Craig, I could determine if the E-Cat was for real. It doesn’t really take a scientists to determine that.

But you have an assignment to do. Get to it:

http://ecatnews.com/?p=1430

http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/BarnhartBtechnology.pdf

By: brucefast

brucefast — Wed, 30 Nov 2011 18:52:41 +0000

“You don’t need scientists to confirm that lightbulbs work, because even my old grandmother could see that they did.”

And how many years after Edison invented the lightbulb did your grandmother get to see one? How many skeptics were there that the lightbulb worked before they became ubiquitous?

All that for an invention that didn’t defy known science. The inventions that did defy known science (of which there are many such as the airplane) were even better at gathering skeptics.

By: Craig Binns

Craig Binns — Wed, 30 Nov 2011 18:03:50 +0000

You don’t need scientists to confirm that lightbulbs work, because even my old grandmother could see that they did. Rossi has produced a device which can puff out steam while connected to the power supply – as my grandmother’s electric kettle could do. But Rossi is claiming that it’s more than an electric kettle. This we can’t see, so that’s where the scientists come in.

By: Roger Bird

Roger Bird — Wed, 30 Nov 2011 17:25:43 +0000

But Craig, I didn’t say that airplanes, lightbulbs, and telephones didn’t work. I merely pointed out that we did not need some scientist to confirm that they worked. And I would hardly call Edison a scientist. And the Wright Brothers were bicycle mechanics (and very impressive inventors.)

Rossi has good reasons which have already been discussed why he isn’t showing us what is in his hand. And why should he? What good will it do HIM if some dudes named Roger and Craig are convinced that the E-Cat works? He wants to sell the product. He is (apparently) selling the product. Money will put him in the position to promote his product. The more product he sells, the more it will spread. He is merely not concerned about what academia and the scientific community thinks.

I think, Craig, that you suffer from an allergy to uncertainty. Brucefast and I and others do not. We are not sure about Rossi. We are comfortable being unsure. If Rossi were to come to our door and ask us if we would like to buy an E-Cat, then certainty would become a much more important issue.

I believe that I can speak for brucefast and perhaps others and say that we are certain about cold fusion. Whether it can be controlled yet and be continuous and whether Rossi is doing it is still uncertain. I will gladly be corrected about others, but that is where I am at now.

By: Craig Binns

Craig Binns — Wed, 30 Nov 2011 17:12:20 +0000

Aeroplanes, lightbulbs and telephones WORK. They can be seen to work. The latter two were at once patented and marketed. They weren’t sold in secret to unnamed clients. They were put in the stores and sold in large quantity right away. Aeroplanes were invented in 1903, went public internationally in 1908, and by 1911 were being used by the Italians in their war to grab Libya from Turkey. Interesting, no? Exactly 100 years later …

Compare that with the non-achieving history of cold fusion, and Rossi’s secrecy, obfuscation, and “shadow in the past”, or criminal record as most people would call it.

By: Roger Bird

Roger Bird — Wed, 30 Nov 2011 17:08:26 +0000

But Craig, how is he going to garner any money, which is the purpose of both cons and businesses, if he does not “sell” to real people? If he sells to businesses, then he is even more vulnerable to legal action and/or assassination than if he were to sell to you and me. It seems like a pretty stupid con to me. There must thousands of people like you and me with slightly less critical thinking skills or slightly more money and more desire for adventure and/or discovery that would love to plunk down $5,400 for an E-Cat. His best bet for getting rich if it was a con would be to sell units to individuals. I am sure that he could easily sell to hundreds of people before he got found out. 300 people and he would have $1,620,000. I would be on my way to backwoods of the Philippines with my Filipino wife with that kind of money.

By: Iggy Dalrymple

Iggy Dalrymple — Wed, 30 Nov 2011 17:05:51 +0000

Gamma isolation 3mm

Kernel body (smallest of 2 devices) – 12x12x12cm

Atomic Hydrogen generator

Resistive preheating – 6 seconds

Chemically assisted preheating – media undisclosed

Embedded within reactor structure

Particle size – 3-7 microns

Powder prep method – proprietary

Catalysts involved in reaction – proprietary

Normal H pressure <50 bar

Safety valve 150 bar?

Ecomass 3mm Polyether Block Amide (unlike Pb, non toxic) – 3mm!!! Typo to go with Pleasure Sensor?

Synthetic thermal oil – (alkyl aromatic)

Performance data and alarms to DGT by GSM (phone)

GPS!!?

Self destruct – chemical and non-hazardous

Inner compartment with reactor and coolant interface – argon environment

Two main sizes:

5-11kW and 10-45kW

Operating temp depends on system (four variants) 185, 285, 414 deg C

Ext 55x45x42cm

19kg and 47kg

Larger unit may go up to 34 months without powder change (but still need Hydrogen?)

Max elec input <200w and <310W

COP 1:25 min and 1:32 min

Certification Pending

Serviced in-situ

Any attempt to violate such handling procedures may cause product’s self-destruct with no hazardous or dangerous effects to the environment. http://ecatnews.com/

By: brucefast

brucefast — Wed, 30 Nov 2011 17:04:27 +0000

Actually, from everything I have read that Craig Binns has posted, which is a lot, I have concluded that he has used no high science in his determination. Craig’s model seems to be secret = lie.
Rossi has kept secrets.
Rossi has behaved “irrationally” (not the way Craig perceives that he would have behaved).
Rossi clearly has exaggerated/lied. (Do you really believe that there has been a 1mw plant heating some Italian warehouse for over a year?)

It is Craig’s behavioral analysis that draws him to his conclusion — almost exclusively so. When this is over, he will have to do to his behavioral analysis algorithm what science must do to its understanding of the atom — revamp it to fit the new data.

By: Craig Binns

Craig Binns — Wed, 30 Nov 2011 16:58:03 +0000

Roger

To make my point about refusal to provide evidence and delay, this is from Rossi’s blog last week “(R)emember that such R&D will be closed doors made and not public. I repeat: no more public tests will be made. … Conclusion: from now on we will be more sealed than ever, and we will be open exclusively with our Customers.
To put for sale the small unts we need: 1- safety certification 2- granted patents. We are working on both the issues and I think they will be addressed within 1 to 2 years from now.”

Rossi won’t reveal his magic catalyst i.e. he hasn’t provided sufficient information to replicate the device, so he CAN’T be granted an international patent and he knows it.

Safety certification! Some hope! For an under-the-back-stairs nuke water heater and steam-puffer that can’t be explained by theoretical physics?!? I’ve already raised this issue with brucefast in this blog.

“I THINK … 1 to 2 years.” Typical scam timetable. So no household ecats in the foreseeable future. Only megawatt ones “sold” to mystery clients, with vague hints that they are the military.