A Case for Rossi

There seems to be a lot of skepticism about the e-cat.  Skeptics point to the fact that formal science hasn’t been done (http://nickelpower.org/2011/10/30/the-aha-moment/).  Skeptics point to imperfections in Rossi’s history, as if everyone who discovers new technology must live the life of a saint.  Skeptics point to the issues of secrecy.  I agree that the secrecy is frustrating, but secrecy in the world of intellectual property is a common necessity.

On the other hand there seems to be a few strong cases for the e-cat:  real scientists have observed it.  Dr. Levi rewired the heating system.  Rossi delivered the 1Mw (1/2Mw) plant on schedule.  Rossi and others appear very “authentic” in video clips, Etc.  Each of these certainly support the validity of the e-cat.

But I see another very strong support for the e-cat.

The e-cat keeps changing.  That’s it.  Why do I see this as very strong support?  Well, firstly, it’s hard to pull off too many variations on a scam.  But more importantly, this is what technology looks like when it is under development.  The e-cat has changed, and become WAY BETTER since it was first shown in January.

When Rossi showed the e-cat to Dr. Levi, it was a much more powerful 20kw single unit.  (This, I believe indicates what the future will be like.)  However, there was a period of time when it was outputting 135 watts!

This seems to have scared Rossi.  Why else would future e-cats be about 5kw?  And if this whole thing is an intentional ruse on Rossi’s part, why would he have created something that scared him?  And when was the last time you saw a ruse get smaller?

The subsequent demos were all done with a smaller format e-cat.  Runaways like we saw with the 20kw unit no longer seemed to happen.  But then something else changed, he started putting more heat in.  The older units were powered by 300 watts, the subsequent units used at least 800 watts of starting power.  Again, Rossi seems to have made his device less impressive, not more.  However, we then began to see “self-sustaining mode”.  How cool is that!  (The 20kw unit ran for 15 minutes without input power during the 18 hour test, but it slowly petered out, and eventually required input.)

The e-cat heat extraction system also seems to have changed radically.  It appears that the original e-cats consist of a core with water running through the middle of it to cool it.  The new ones seem to be a box with cooling fins.  All cooling is external to the core.  Again, this is evidence of the kind of change one expects of a product being improved on rather than a hoax.  I mean, how many ways can you pull off a hoax and get it past the Ph.D’s who are watching?

Even the issues of the 1 Mw plant outputting 1/2 Mw, and the number of e-cats changing from 50 to 100, is this what we would expect to see from a scammer or from a developer.  If I were a scammer I would have met specs — and more.  Why disappoint?  And if it were a scam, why add the confusion of having 100 rather than 50 units in the box?  This just produces unnecessary noise.  The noise is unnecessary from a “scam” perspective, but I am sure that the noise was very necessary, for some reason, from a development perspective.  I know, I don’t know what the reason is, but I do know what real-world development looks like.  It looks like this.

<— To main blog

About these ads

Tags: , , , , , , ,

194 Responses to “A Case for Rossi”

  1. Roger Bird Says:

    I don’t see a problem with waiting patiently to see what happens. I won’t be getting my hands on one anytime soon anyway.

  2. Iggy Dalrymple Says:

    FoxNews: Allan hinted on his blog that an unnamed “customer” of Rossi’s device is a military organization that starts with an N. Rossi said this customer measured and verified the test — and told FoxNews.com that Paul Swanson with the U.S. Navy’s Space and Naval Warfare Systems unit (SPAWAR) can vouch for the demonstration.

    FoxNews.com spoke with a man at SPAWAR who identified himself as Swanson, and who said only that he was “not in a position to talk to the press.” Several other sources within the Navy and the Pentagoneither declined to comment or did not return messages.

    The Navy has long been interested in cold fusion research. At a 2009 meeting of the American Chemical Society, chemist Pamela Mosier-Boss of SPAWAR revealed what she and colleagues claimed was the first clear visual evidence that low-energy nuclear reaction (LENR) devices work.

    Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/11/02/andrea-rossi-italian-cold-fusion-plant/#ixzz1cbA7YqIB

    My San Diego scientist friend, Col Ike, told me 5 or 6 years ago that the Navy was trying to make cold fusion work.

  3. Iggy Dalrymple Says:

    That name “Swanson” rang a bell. I seem to recall Rossi mentioning Swanson, from Space & Naval Warfare, attending one of his tests.

    “Something else to wonder about is who is financing Miley’s work. Given it’s nature it is probably NASA or the US Navy both of which have reportedly shown a great deal of interest in cold fusion. Over at the Renewable Energy World Blog Thomas Blakeslee is reporting that Paul D. Swanson who is described as a Space and Naval Warfare Systems Expert with the US Navy attended Rossi’s October 6 e-cat test in Bologna, Italy.”

    Looks like the USA is Rossi’s silent partner.

  4. Iggy Dalrymple Says:

    eCat Science Witness List
    admin on October 10, 2011 — 71 Comments

    Andrea Rossi’s list of the scientists present at the Oct 6 eCat test:

    Andrea Rossi
    October 10th, 2011 at 5:15 AM
    Dear Vinnie Jones,
    Here is the list of the Scientists who attended the test of October 6th:
    Prof. Petterson Roland – Uppsala University
    Prof. Campari Enrico (Univ. Bologna)
    Prof. Bonetti Ennio (Univ. Bologna)
    Prof. Levi Giuseppe (Univ. Bologna)
    Prof. Clauzon Pierre (CNAM-CEA Paris)
    Dott. Bianchini David (Univ. Bologna)
    Ing. Swanson Paul D. (Space and Naval Warfare Systems- US Navy)
    Prof. Focardi Sergio (Univ. Bologna)
    Prof. Stremmenos Christos (Univ. Atene)
    Prof. Jobson Edward (Univ. Goteborg)
    Ing. Vandevalle Koen (Belgio)
    Dr Enrico Billi (Fisico, Ricercatore, CINA)
    This list does not include many other techicians who attended.
    Warm Regards,


  5. Iggy Dalrymple Says:

    The FoxNews story has been reposted at Discovery News.

  6. Brad Arnold Says:

    I believe that Rossi became more cautious over time because he was trying to avoid a worse case scenario of an explosion (which has happened to other researchers). During initial experimentation Rossi was sometimes getting a COP of 200. Imagine what “skeptics” would make out of an explosion during a demo of the Rossi E-Cat!

    It would be inaccurate to characterize the Rossi E-Cat (E-Cat Container, or Fat Cat) as not ready for prime time, but Rossi admits that once the LENR exothermic reaction is understood and countless design teams optimize the engineering, it will probably make his current version look quite primitive.

    What is really important is the Rossi (or Defkalion, or any number of other companies working on LENR) successfully commercialize “cold fusion.” Only then will consensus reality acknowledge the impossible: that somehow the Coulomb barrier is being breached at relatively low temperatures, and that tremendous amounts of clean energy is at mankind’s fingertips.

    We woke up one day and were millions of times energy richer than the night before. Since it takes about half a million calories to launch a pound of mass outside the Earth’s gravity well, mankind is significantly closer to cosmopolitan space travel.

    • brucefast Says:

      Thanks for the comment Brad, you are right on!

      “I believe that Rossi became more cautious over time because he was trying to avoid a worse case scenario of an explosion (which has happened to other researchers).

      And if Rossi is actively fearing an explosion, it can only be because THE DARN THING WORKS! If THE DARN THING WORKS, he’s not hoaxing.

      “once the LENR exothermic reaction is understood and countless design teams optimize the engineering, it will probably make his current version look quite primitive.”

      Oh yes!

    • maryyugo Says:

      “Imagine what “skeptics” would make out of an explosion during a demo of the Rossi E-Cat!”

      If it was large enough to prove a nuclear power source and nobody was injured or killed, this skeptic would be delighted. It would help prove that Rossi’s claim is real. That is something he is a long ways from having done at the present time.

      So let’s have some good explosions -in the open desert of course.

  7. Bob Norman Says:

    I came across an interesting new web site today.
    This site is attempting to run experiments and reproduce Rossi’s results and find the catalyst. tough row to hoe, but may be worth following.

    I agree with Brad’s comment about Rossi becoming more conservative. I think he has realized that any blow up or major problem will hurt his efforts for certifications and permits. I still think it would be very important to cause a run away reaction and show that it stops itself when the Nickel melts. I hope that is what happens as stated.

  8. Iggy Dalrymple Says:

    Here’s a positive article with interesting comments, both pro & con.

  9. Theodore Rigley Says:

    I think the scepticism results from the absence of convincing evidence for the claimed phenomenon. Duh.

    • brucefast Says:

      The challenge is not to be skeptical, but to be skeptical when skepticism is correct, but be supportive when a phenomenon is real. So how do you get past “duh” and to a confident position?

      • Roger Bird Says:

        Rossi is doing roughly what I would be doing if I was the inventor of the E-Cat. This helps me to believe him. If the Wright Bros. (two of the greatest inventors of all time) had waited for academic and scientific approval, we would still not have heavier than air flight. This help me to believe him. And after Pons and Flieshmann, I would not be at all keen about trying to get scientific verification. Money talks.

      • Iggy Dalrymple Says:

        Big science has lost much credibility with all their carping about man-made global warming, all the while covering up contradictory data and conducting smear campaigns against dissenting scientists.

        Big science has grown to be all about competing for govt grants…to hell with the truth. Scientists were once considered on a pedestal, now they’re near the level of politicians. Same with the medical profession. Specialists see us as just another kidney or bladder, or even worse, a boat payment.

      • Roger Bird Says:

        Iggy, I couldn’t agree more. In the scientific realm, egos have always been in the way of the truth. Everyone was astonished when Stephen Hawking presented some serious work that disproved his own theory. I suppose the fact that Stephen Hawking will never get laid and is still the most esteemed physicist in the world may explain his willingness to contradict himself. But now, government grants and getting published is so important that scientific revolutions are becoming more constipated.

    • Roger Bird Says:

      But scientists are strictly looking at the physical phenomena. Since many of us are not scientists and since almost all of us can’t be there, we have to look to evidence other than just the physical phenomena, like people and the flow of capital etc. I found it very interesting that Rossi took for granted the fact that the E-Cat worked. I watched him very closely for signs of deception. And I was very impressed with the Swedish scientists saying that it worked.

  10. Bob Norman Says:

    Here is a very good article posted my msnbc. I thought it was well written.


  11. Theodore Rigley Says:

    But the Wright brothers had a clear achievement; undeniably, their airplane was flying. But Rossi’s machine is not clearly generating power, or energy, or doing work. And if it could, it would be easy to show, to prove, to the satisfaction of not only scientists and engineers, but the man in the street. One way to prove the e-cat is real would be to get a first one going, then disconnect it from the start-up power, then use its output to get another e-cat going. Or run the first one long enough that it clearly had run out of stored energy, in the on-board pressurized, heated water, that when slowly bled off gives the continued illusion of heat generation for hours after the power is disconnected. Isn’t that what is happening? Seriously, isn’t this a palpable fraud?

    • Roger Bird Says:

      Theodore Rigley, the scientists and academics did not believe that flight was possible for FOUR years after the Wright Bros. were flying around Dayton. I think that Rossi should go to the gold and let the scientists and academics catch up.

    • Iggy Dalrymple Says:

      That would be the best test but so far it’s not sufficiently advanced to generate electricity. It requires electricity to power the cooling pumps.

      Possibly you could operate without pumps by having an elevated tank for the supply of cool water. A lower tank could collect the heated water and the temperature differential would show the amount of produced heat. You could operate the automated valves with batteries.

      There is a theory that the eCat could be fooling everyone (even Rossi) by sucking unmetered juice from the grid. Switching to batteries would preclude the vampire theory.

      Ultimately, the eCat needs to drive a steam-powered generator and operate in a closed loop.

    • Brad Arnold Says:

      “Isn’t this a palpable fraud?”

      Only if you’re blind or have poor judgment.


      “The problem with the “scam theory” is that for the last 10 months, the developers have been putting on demonstrations of their device before groups of learned physicists and selected members of the press in an attempt to show that their “energy catalyzer” actually works. When the reactor is heated up, so much energy in the form of steam is emitted that, short of fraud, the only answer seems to be that nuclear fusion is indeed taking place. The amount of heat being reported and apparently verified by outside observers is simply too much for any known chemical reaction.”


      • Roger Bird Says:

        “palpable fraud” is an oxymoron. If it is palpable, it is no longer a fraud. If it is a fraud, it is not palpable.

      • maryyugo Says:

        In fact Rossi has been asked to and has steadfastly resisted doing the exact tests that would PROVE that his device is real.

        Those are independent evaluation, running long enough to prove it’s nuclear, measuring internal radiation (same reason), and running a blank test (no hydrogen) with the electrical heater providing energy to prove that the measurement devices and methods are accurate. None of that is expensive, time wasting or difficulty. And Rossi won’t do it.

        Nobody knows anything about any client.

        That’s how a scam would work. Rossi can prove it’s no scam but he won’t. Why?

      • Brad Arnold Says:


        Exact tests that would PROVE that his device is real, huh?

        While I concede that Rossi could have done a better job convincing hard core skeptics like yourself, there is more than enough evidence to reach a reasonable conclusion that Rossi is legitimate and the E-Cat is real.

        No, successful commercialization is the only way to put a stake through the heart of profession de-bunkers. Too bad Rossi’s customers don’t want harassing phone calls from angry skeptics and fossil fuel lobbyists, or else we would probably have access to a satisfied customer’s E-Cat already.

        I see Krivit is changing his tone, from confident whistle blower to apologist of his overly skeptical stance. You know, it has gotten to the point where such critical positions taken by “skeptics” are like zombies – you can shoot them, bash them, and burn them, and they just keep getting up and stumbling forward – because the are spouting ideology, not reason.

      • Roger Bird Says:

        The zombie analogy is very good. Remember that the only way to kill zombies is by shooting them in the brain. This shooting is for E-Cats undeniable verification.

      • maryyugo Says:

        “I see Krivit is changing his tone, from confident whistle blower to apologist of his overly skeptical stance.”

        No he’s not. In fact he makes jokes about Rossi now. And he published this devastating video:

        Rossi looks like a deer in headlights when he is caught fiddling with the controls in the middle of a run and thus increasing the steam production by increasing the electrical heat. “Stable … stable”… yah shoore.

  12. Peter Thieberger Says:

    Skepticism based on scientific arguments is usually dismissed as biased and sometimes as the result of a vast conspiracy. Intelligent, technically oriented people should really make an effort to understand some of these arguments, even if they are not nuclear physicists. I will not repeat the arguments others and I have made before. But let me try a new one.

    The same nuclear reactions that allegedly occur in Rossi’s machine would also occur in the sun. There is some nickel there and plenty of hydrogen at much higher temperatures and pressures. And there has been plenty of time (billions of years) for these reactions to convert any convertible nickel into copper. Yet, the nickel isotope composition is the same in the sun as on earth. In other words, the same nickel isotopes that Rossi claims to consume in his e-cat during a few months are still present in the sun after billions of years. If this doesn’t convince you I don’t know what will.

    • Iggy Dalrymple Says:

      “Skepticism based on scientific arguments is usually dismissed as biased and sometimes as the result of a vast conspiracy.”

      I believe that most skepticism is based on the fact that LENR is not compatible with conventional science. I don’t believe Rossi, Focardi, Miley, Piantelli, etc understand the science behind LENR, but to them, “seeing is believing”. Scientific skepticism is further bolstered by bureaucratic inertia and dependence on govt grants, with govt heavily influenced by “old energy”.

      The energy from the sun is primarily “hot fusion”. If there is LENR in the sun, it’s dwarfed by hot fusion.

    • Roger Bird Says:

      Peter Thieberger, you have several unprovable assumptions there, then when the logic doesn’t work out, you say that that proves that Rossi is a fraud. There is absolutely, positively no need for me and for most other people to come to any kind of conclusion concerning Rossi. It is an emotional problem that you skeptics have. If you were presented with the option of buying an E-Cat, then that would be an entirely different matter. I am perfectly happy to wait and see. If Rossi should come to my door and ask for a donation, then I would be more stringent in my thinking.

      • Peter Thieberger Says:

        Great attitude, Roger Bird, congratulations, why should we care if we are not personally affected, right? I, for one, don’t like it when my intelligence is insulted or when the names of prestigious institutions are misused.

      • Roger Bird Says:

        Well, Peter Thieberger, if you feel like your intelligence is being insulted, don’t follow it. My intelligence is insulted when I buy a dishwasher that has controls on it that don’t actually do anything. So I just stop paying attention to those controls. My intelligence can’t be insulted by A. Rossi because I am not investing anything into it, including any intelligence. I will wait and see.

      • brucefast Says:

        Peter Theiberger,
        On another thread Iggy pointed out this link:
        In this link, on a U.S. Government website no less, we read:

        Tests conducted at NASA Glenn Research Center in 1989 and elsewhere consistently showed evidence of anomalous heat during gaseous loading and unloading deuterium into bulk palladium. At one time called “cold fusion,” now called “low-energy nuclear reactions” (LENR), such effects are now published in peer-reviewed journals and are gaining attention and mainstream respectability. The instrumentation expertise of NASA GRC is applied to improve the diagnostics for investigating the anomalous heat in LENR.

        Please explain. How can such an unexpected result, validated by scientists in a highly respected institution go unacknowledged for over 20 years?

      • Peter Thieberger Says:


        It seems to me that this research didn’t go unacknowledged. From the text you quote I conclude that it has been published in peer reviewed journals and, as you say, it is being mentioned on a NASA web site. Let’s not confuse hydrogen or deuterium cold fusion with Rossi’s claims. . There is a big difference. I have never said anything about these Pons and Fleischmann type of experiments. They may very well one day lead to useful energy production.

        The difference has to do with the number of protons in each of the reacting nuclei. In the case of proton-proton fusion or proton deuterium fusion these two numbers are 1 and 1. For proton Nickel fusion they are 1 and 28. The probability for penetrating the Coulomb barrier scales exponentially with the negative product of these two numbers. So the ratio of probabilities for the two cases (everything else being equal) can be written as e^(-1*1)/e^(-1*28), where e=2.7183 is the base of the natural logarithms. The result is 532,000,000,000. That is how many times more likely it is to get cold fusion between two protons or a proton and a deuteron as compared to proton-nickel.

        The equation was derived in 1938 by George Gamow, a great Russian-American theoretical physicist. It has been successfully used ever since in astrophysics and in the interpretation of fusion, alpha decay, etc. Refinements of the theory don’t change the conclusion in any significant way. While one process may be plausible, the other one is not.

      • Roger Bird Says:

        Peter Thieberger, very impressive. Yet, let me guess, all of those numbers were derived from extremely fast protons. I think that there is too much uncertainty (excuse the pun) with quantum mechanics to be sure exactly what is going on. I will continue to wait and see. There is absolutely NOTHING to be gained by coming to a conclusion about this matter except the warm fuzzy feeling that one is right. Why don’t you step back, take a deep breath, and join the rest of us in waiting and seeing what happens.

      • Peter Thieberger Says:

        Roger Bird, the so called Gamow factor I was using is in fact a low energy approximation for sub-barrier fusion. It doesn’t apply to high energy protons that don’t need to penetrate the Coulomb barrier because they have energies higher than the barrier. Quantum mechanics is an extremely successful and accurate theory and nobody seriously doubts its validity.

        But if you don’t want to consider “all those numbers” you could look into my nickel in the sun argument or at the glaring absence of high energy gamma rays that should be there. All point in the same direction. Or, as you suggest, you can ignore it all and wait.

      • Roger Bird Says:

        Yes, Peter, I am going to ignore it all and wait and see. It does me no harm whatsoever. And although I am not expert on nuclear physics, I am an expert on the psychology and sociology of scientific revolutions. Every naysayer in every scientific revolution has rock solid reasons why it can’t happen. So, I will just wait and see. And I find your ideas fascinating and I hope to hear more of them in the future, but your insistence that we all disbelieve I find childish.

      • Peter Thieberger Says:

        Roger, I thought that this blog was about discussing facts, ideas and opinions about the e-cat. Perhaps I was wrong. Or perhaps the opinions need to be all positive. I feel some responsibility to speak up when I see what I honestly believe to be false claims. But perhaps this isn’t the right place.

        One reason I feel this responsibility is that some other scientists have, in my opinion, acted unprofessionally by endorsing something without sufficient detailed knowledge. Rossi, who is not a scientist, has sought and obtained scientific validation without providing any meaningful access. The first and most glaring example was to employ Professor Focardi, a specialist in the field, without revealing to him what he was actually doing.

        He still promises to place e-cats at universities for independent testing, but that action remains in the future for now and will probably stay there.

      • Roger Bird Says:

        Peter, you are pouting. I clearly and distinctly said that I welcome your ideas. And my chastisement was exactly and nothing more than telling you that I will not be joining you in condemning Rossi and saying that the E-Cat is bogus. And if you want to say that it is a fraud, go ahead, but don’t give me a hard time if I don’t join you. If, within the next year, I don’t start seeing this explode, then I will be joining you. I am looking at it not from the laws of physics but from sociological “laws”. People should start making money with this, and it should explode (not physically, but in the number of companies or people who use it). The guy who powers his widget factory with an E-Cat will blow the competition out of the water, if it works. If it does not work, we will hear less and less about it, except perhaps as an example of fraudulent stuff we need to ignore.

        One of the reasons I am not accepting physical laws as a determining factor is that it is obvious that if it works then our physical “laws” have to be changed.

        And the reason I am not quick to condemn it is that (1) so many other great inventions, ideas, and discoveries were condemned in the most unethical of ways and turned out to be true. The history of science is shamefully strewn with cases of evil condemnation of great thinkers. (2) I have no need (and neither do you) to come to any conclusion. Only people who are on the verge of buying one of these E-Cats needs to make up his or her mind. It shows an emotional lack to find it necessary to come to a conclusion otherwise. I am perfectly comfortable with not being sure one way or the other.

      • Iggy Dalrymple Says:

        When did Rossi seek scientific validation? I thought he said he would let the market place be the eCat’s judge.

        How could Rossi have provided eCats to universities when he was down to last dollar when he made his sale? The University of Bologna wants $500,000 to evaluate the eCat.

        Rossi claims to have made his 1st sale plus have orders for two more.

        Once he collects almost $8,000,000 for the 3 units he’ll have the financial independence for scientific studies…but why rock the boat when orders are rolling?

      • Peter Thieberger Says:

        Iggy,what do you think the demos were for? Or saying that he is working “with” Focardi who doesn’t’ have a clue. Or inviting the Swedish physicists and Josephson (who didn’t come). Without such references getting customers would be hard. By the way, how do we know that the first customer is for real?

      • Iggy Dalrymple Says:

        I think the demos were primarily sales demos, probably at the insistence of the 1st customer. He allowed friendly scientists
        in hopes they might give an encouraging review.

      • Roger Bird Says:

        The first customer? We don’t. The plot thickens.

      • Roger Bird Says:

        Iggy, you are right. Although money is great for most of the reasons that people think of, it is also a form of proof if it keeps on coming. Should he get dragged into court by an angry customer (or former customer), that will be bad for his credibility.

      • Roger Bird Says:

        Peter, up until 2 days ago, every seismologist on Planet Earth would have sworn up and down that there could be no earthquake measuring more than 5.5 on the Richter scale in Oklahoma. I have noticed that science has a profound way of being wrong (and then correcting itself.).

      • brucefast Says:

        Peter Thieberger, “It seems to me that this research didn’t go unacknowledged. From the text you quote I conclude that it has been published in peer reviewed journals and, as you say, it is being mentioned on a NASA web site. Let’s not confuse hydrogen or deuterium cold fusion with Rossi’s claims.”

        Thanks for clarifying for me that nickel + hydrogen LENR is substantially more challenged by current physics than deuterium LENR is. I was not fully aware of that.

        However, please consider the state of deuterium LENR.

        On “Cold fusion” Wikipedia says:
        Low-Energy Nuclear Reaction (LENR), refers to the hypothesis that nuclear fusion might explain the results of a group of experiments conducted at ordinary temperatures (room temperature). Both the experimental results and the hypothesis are disputed.

        Note their position that it is an “hypothesis”, and that it is disputed. (I personally think that it is not an hypothesis but a reported phenomenon. If I understand correctly an hypothesis is a proposed explanation for a phenomenon, not the phenomenon itself.)

        They go on, “By late 1989, most scientists considered cold fusion claims dead,[6][7] and cold fusion subsequently gained a reputation as pathological science.”

        Lets see, in ’89 Nasa says that they and others have replicated the phenomenon, and that peer reviewed journals have published the phenomenon. The current opinion is that the phenomenon is “pathological science”. And you are saying, “It seems to me that this research didn’t go unacknowledged.”?

        Its going unacknowledged! It is being actively rejected! If Rossi had followed the peer review path of proof, his technology would be rejected as well, imo.

        Is rejected really to strong of a term? Wikipedia goes on to say, “The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) now rejects patents claiming cold fusion.”

        Some sideshow work is done on the phenomenon known as LENR (what it actually is is beside the point, the only point being a report of excess heat in defiance of the modern understanding of physics.) Nasa reports that they have reproduced the phenomenon. However, because the evidence doesn’t fit the theory, and because the evidence isn’t easy to reproduce, it is rejected as “pathological”.

  13. Iggy Dalrymple Says:

    Is Dennis M. Bushnell, NASA Chief Scientist, Langley Research Center,
    confusing hydrogen or deuterium cold fusion with Rossi’s claims when he says, “This is capable of, by itself, completely changing geo-economics, geo-politics, and solving climate and energy”?
    No, he’s discussing Rossi’s eCat.

    Is Nobel Physics winning scientist, Brian Josephenson, confused when makes an official Cambridge Univ video lauding Rossi’s invention?

    Is the Space & Naval Warfare Systems Unit (SPAWAR) confused when they send Paul D Swanson to observe Rossi’s Oct test?

    Were 3 former members of the US Dept of Energy confused when they formed AmpEnergo, Rossi’s product development company?

    Was China, Chile, Sweden, Italy, Greece, and the USA confused when they sent observers to various eCat tests?

    • maryyugo Says:

      I think everybody is confused about this. I could attack each premise individually but it’s a waste of time. Suffice it to say that Bushnell was almost certainly not talking about Rossi. NASA, according to Krivit and Sterling Allen sent a representative to Rossi in early September and Rossi was “unable” to make the device work for that visit.

      At the big reveal of October 28, none of the guests saw anything worthwhile because Rossi only gave them brief peeks at the experiment for “safety reasons” (yah shoore).

      And all those people who attended… have any written convincing glowing reports except Sterling Allen? And doesn’t Allen approve virtually any silly piece of junk anyone sends him a report about? Just look at his web site! It’s a running joke.

      I say again: there is no convincing evidence that Rossi’s device is real. He could have provided such evidence many times and did not do so. Now he says he will do nothing but make and sell megawatt plants … I bet it will be to anonymous buyers and I bet no university ever gets an E-cat to test. I hope I’m wrong but I doubt it very much.

  14. Craig Binns Says:


    Josephson is a MOST unusual physicist. Readers should consult the wiki entry on him, containing stuff like this: “Josephson is one of the more well-known scientists who say that parapsychological phenomena may be real, and is also interested in the possibility that Eastern mysticism may have relevance to scientific understanding.”

    This source of support for Rossi will do little to enhance his credibility, except perhaps among mystics, swamis, shamans and gurus.

    • Iggy Dalrymple Says:

      Yes, and Newton spent years trying to decipher the secret code to the Bible, but gravity kept on keeping on.

      • maryyugo Says:

        Newton was not reliable about the Bible and Josephson’s opinion is meaningless about the E-cat. All opinions are meaningless absent decent testing and Rossi has never done that. He keeps promising that the two universities he associates with will but he never gives them a device.

        That’s very suspicious.

  15. Craig Binns Says:


    So it did. Is the e-cat in the observable gravity category, or in the mystical secret code category? All the evidence puts it in the second. In other words, will the e-cat “keep on”. The anonymity of Rossi’s alleged customer suggests it won’t.

    • Roger Bird Says:

      The longer that we don’t see an explosion of people powering their homes and factories with E-Cats, the more likely it will be that the E-Cat is bogus. If Rossi starts driving a Mercedes and doesn’t get assassinated by a disgruntled customer, that would help his credibility. If an E-Cat does not get delivered to the University of Bolognia soon, that won’t help his credibility.

      I am about 55% sure that it will work. Peter’s physics brought me down from 60%. (:->)

      • Iggy Dalrymple Says:

        Meanwhile, Wired UK reports today that Rossi claims he now has 26 orders.

      • maryyugo Says:

        26 orders? OK. Name one CREDIBLE client who has ordered and let’s see about some interviews regarding how that client performed due diligence testing. What? Nobody admits ordering a power plant from Rossi? How strange is that? So it’s all “Rossi says” as usual? And you believe it?

      • Roger Bird Says:

        maryyuga, I assume that you are addressing someone else because I did not say anything about 26 orders.

        I also noticed that a lot of what is said is what Rossi said. With regard to the chain of evidence, there is a little too much of what Rossi said and too little direct views of experts not quoting Rossi.

  16. Iggy Dalrymple Says:

    Krivit is beginning to sound like a believer:

    “Rossi’s first customer was Ampenergo. See Lewan article May 16. Ampenergo did not take the opportunity to lock in the North American rights to Rossi’s technology. According to Ampenergo, they couldn’t find enough money. —Rossi’s second potential customer was Defkalion. They too, despite their overflowing enthusiasm, failed to make their first scheduled payment to Rossi on Aug. 1. —Rossi’s third potential customer was John Preston of Quantum Energy Technologies. After his team went to Bologna and attempted to perform due diligence on Sept. 5 and 6, they walked away. A month later, Rossi said that he cancelled the deal because he didn’t like the terms of their contract, despite the fact that Rossi had established the contract with Quantum before letting them walk in the door. —Rossi met with a fourth potential customer on Sept. 8. The engineer for this fourth potential customer contacted the engineers who worked with the third potential customer to exchange notes. They, in turn, contacted me and requested anonymity because they had signed an NDA with Rossi. —And finally, on Oct. 28, according to Rossi, he finally performed sufficient due diligence to convince his “first” customer to pay him for his device. Only there is nothing but Rossi’s word that such a transaction occurred or that there is even a customer. —But according to Wired, which based its story on Fox News, which based its story on Sterling Allan, which based his story on Rossi’s statement, the customer is real and is the US Navy’s Space and Naval Warfare Systems Command (SPAWAR). —All because one scientist from the Navy SPAWAR laboratory went to see for himself if there was any merit to Rossi’s claims and that Rossi says the customer’s name begins with an “N.” Wow. —And what does the SPAWAR scientist have to say? Nothing. —And what does Peter Svensson, the AP reporter who went to check out Rossi’s claims for himself say? Nothing. —And remember what NASA spokesmen had to say about its relationship with Rossi on Sept. 29 and Oct. 4. Nothing. —Obviously NASA, the Navy and AP are conspiring to suppress the reality of Rossi’s extraordinary device. Steven B. Krivit Editor, New Energy TimesEditor in Chief, Wiley Nuclear Energy Encyclopedia
    Steven B. Krivit”
    Nov 6th 2011

    scroll down 2/3

    • brucefast Says:

      I am a bit baffled by the “Krivit is beginning to sound like a believer:” bit. It sounds to me like Krivit is very much not a believer. It also sounds to me like Krivit’s statement, “Obviously NASA, the Navy and AP are conspiring to suppress the reality of Rossi’s extraordinary device” is intended to be taken tongue in cheek.

      • Craig Binns Says:

        Very much tongue in cheek; and his comments as well as his observations are, as usual, devastating for Rossi.

        Rossi’s only sane response would be to allow the more complete testing whereof Iggy speaks. So why won’t he? Only one explanation is worth considering, particularly when we’re dealing with the Petrol Dragon, the former toxic-waste-to-fuel Shiekh of Brianza.

  17. Iggy Dalrymple Says:

    None of that is expensive, time wasting or difficulty. And Rossi won’t do it.

    That’s how a scam would work. Rossi can prove it’s no scam but he won’t. Why?
    Welcome aboard, MaryYugo, skeptic heavy hitter.

    I also wish that Rossi would have allowed more complete testing. I have no idea what is his motivation for not allowing it. Maybe he’s so confident that he wants to thumb his nose at the world, all the way to the bank.

  18. Bob Norman Says:

    If I was in Rossi’s shoes, I would not turn over E-Cats to the University crowd. He risks too much by such an action. University types like to talk about what they are doing, secrets are not well kept. Security in most of these places are not hard to beat. By having them evaluate his device, he loses control. I personally hope he doesn’t do it until he is further along and has less to lose.

  19. Iggy Dalrymple Says:

    Bloomberg short video on eCat

  20. maryyugo Says:

    “I also wish that Rossi would have allowed more complete testing. I have no idea what is his motivation for not allowing it.”

    The only reasonable explanation for Rossi’s behavior over the past nine months is that he has nothing except trickery and deceit. His script is similar to Steorn’s. It’s a typical run for a scammer. I could list the reasons but I think it would bore most of the readers here so I won’t.

    • Roger Bird Says:

      maryyugo, that is nonsense. Scamming is a reasonable explanation. But there is at least one other reasonable explanation. Rossi may want to protect his patents. Your failure to include patent protection as another reasonable explanation tells me that you have an agenda. I suspect that your agenda is that you are uncomfortable with uncertainty, which has nothing to do with the truth or with truth seeking.

      • maryyugo Says:

        Rossi recently wrote on his blog that he will only make megawatt plants and his production capacity is “saturated” for the next two years. I will bet you however much you care to risk that all the clients will be secret and he will never allow any university to have a device to test. If that happens for the next year in the light of Rossi’s prior claims and promises (and Defkalion’s) will you believe it’s all a scam?

        If Rossi wanted patent protection, he’d file a proper patent instead of the joke he and his lawyers wrote up. Patent protection in Italy and the US alone would make him a billionaire many times over if the device is real. He could get assistance in doing this from any number of wealthy people who would want to see his device become a reality to save the world from the current energy crisis.

        Rossi’s behavior has never been in any way reasonable. If he really had a cold fusion device, he’d have gotten together with a large corporation under a non disclosure agreement and properly developed it and protected it before it was ever announced. And at any time, he could have gotten a proper credible test by a university without revealing a thing except the size of the input and output connections and the amount of startup power the thing needs. It could have been done entirely as a “black box” with absolutely no risk to Rossi.

        This whole adventure is shaping up like one huge and well executed scam. The remaining question is who the foolish early investors were who gave Rossi money, who will give him more now (there sure seem to be a lot of volunteers) and what his “end game” is going to be. With Rossi’s latest announcement, it looks more and more like Steorn.

        Here’s Rossi’s latest pronouncement:

        “Andrea Rossi
        November 10th, 2011 at 11:11 AM
        Dear Wladimir Guglinski:
        So far we are manufacturing 1 MW plants, and our next 2 years capacity of production has been already saturated. For the small units we need at least 1-2 years for the approvals. Your suggestion, anyway, are good, among the infinite possibilities of employ, those are surely possible too.
        Warm Regards,

        From his blog.

      • Roger Bird Says:

        Even a secret client will go ballistic if the E-Cat is a scam, and said client will drag Rossi into court and we will hear about it. So, secret clients doesn’t stop Rossi from being revealed as either a scam-artist or an inventor. If the E-Cat works, then we will see his secret clients taking over their industries. If the E-Cat does not work, we will see his secret clients not so secret anymore dragging him into court. And only a complete fool would put down real money without proof. If he is a scam, eventually the secret clients will either assassinate him or drag him into court.

      • maryyugo Says:

        Fools give money to scammers all the time without due diligence. Try Googling:

        – Steorn

        – Carl Tilley

        – Dennis Lee

        – Bedini

        – Mark Goldes

        – Aviso

        And just about anything promoted on the web sites of Sterling Allen or Craig Brown.

      • Roger Bird Says:

        True, I do recognize the name Dennis Lee. But it won’t do anything for me or to me if Rossi is a con except to disappoint me for about 3 minutes. I am sure that there will be someone like you, maryyugo, making sure that a fraudulent Rossi is kept in check.

      • maryyugo Says:

        I meant to add that if Rossi is interesting in keeping the device secret, that is incompatible with selling it to anyone. There is no foolproof protection method. Anyone buying it, with care and skill, can break it into it and do reverse engineering. So it makes no sense to sell “megawatt plants” for two years if you’re concerned that the invention is unprotected. If it’s unprotected by patent, you can’t sell it at all without expecting it to be reverse engineered and stolen.

        Anyway there really is no “megawatt” plant– it’s just 50 of the smaller devices in parallel. So instead of selling them singly he’s selling them in lots of 50 and somehow that protects his intellectual property? Can you, Roger, or someone else explain to me how that works exactly?

      • Roger Bird Says:

        maryyugo, what difference does it make to you? We will see as time goes on whether Rossi is a scam artist or not. It is one of those certainties that you skeptics are so fond of.

      • Iggy Dalrymple Says:

        I agree. While I’m cautiously optimistic, I’m not confident enough
        to buy stock. After some feedback from customers….maybe.

      • maryyugo Says:

        [q]maryyugo, what difference does it make to you?[/q]

        Simple. I despise and hate scammers. They waste everyone’s time and energy. They’re scumbags and deserve no quarter. Most should be in jail.

        As for Rossi, if it ever turns out he’s proven fraudulent, I suggest putting him in for a whole winter in an unheated Alpine cabin with just an E-cat to keep him warm.

      • Roger Bird Says:

        maryyugo wrote: “I despise and hate scammers.” This is your emotional problem, maryyugo, one that I don’t share. Hatred and anger hurts you and annoys the rest of us for having to listen to it. Since people without an emotional agenda are uncertain about Rossi, it is obvious that your emotional agenda is making you jump to conclusions. A conclusion of absolute certainty will present itself within the next year or so, if not sooner.

        Being solidly against something evil does not make a person good.

      • Peter Thieberger Says:

        Roger, I don’t subscribe to your “don’t get involved” philosophy. If I see something that has all the characteristics of a scam I speak up. If it isn’t a scam, it will survive no matter what the skeptics may say. For me the reason for speaking up is not anger or the desire to punish anybody, but the desire to prevent damage, even if I am no directly affected. In this case the potential damage is not only financial. The credibility of serious research to find clean and cheap sources of energy will suffer.

        What will also suffer are the reputations of serious scientists who allowed Rossi to trick them into providing “scientific” endorsements while not giving them adequate access. Even if the e-cat works as advertized, they have no business rendering professional opinions if they are not allowed to exercise their professions. A physician could be accused of malpractice for diagnosing a patient without performing a medical examination. Physicists should be held to similar standards.

      • brucefast Says:

        “I despise and hate scammers.”

        I certainly despise and hate the scammer that contacted my mother-in-law recently trying to get personal banking information from her. Rossi, however, seems to be quite actively not asking for my money or anyone else’s. If Rossi proves to be a scammer, I am quite capable of providing him with that cabin you want him to live in.

        However, which is worse, the scammer who pulls the wool over the eyes of a half-dozen Ph.D. physicists (but doesn’t take their money) or the guy with the invention that can transform the world who is called a scammer and thrown into the heap of history. The latter is a person committing every bit as great an evil as the scammer who tried to rip off my mother-in-law.

      • maryyugo Says:

        “I certainly despise and hate the scammer that contacted my mother-in-law recently trying to get personal banking information from her. Rossi, however, seems to be quite actively not asking for my money or anyone else’s. ”

        You have absolutely no way to know that. In the Steorn scam, the money was obtained from investors secretly and every investor probably signed an NDA. I wouldn’t be surprised if they also assumed all the risk. In the Dennis Lee scam, it was pay as you go.

        Rossi regularly receives dozens of offers for investments just in his blog. One can only imagine how many he gets privately. I would guess he only picks the ripest plums and the dumbest and least critically thinking people with the most money. That’s just a guess, of course.

        “The guy with the invention that can transform the world who is called a scammer and thrown into the heap of history.”

        I don’t think there is such a thing. Maybe there was once a way to delay discoveries or to kill a lone inventor and suppress his stuff. But with the internet, those days are long gone. Anybody can publish an uncensored book. Anybody can get a patent, given that they follow the usual very liberal rules. How can anyone be thrown into the heap of history, whatever exactly that means?

      • brucefast Says:

        Peter Thieberger, “If I see something that has all the characteristics of a scam I speak up. If it isn’t a scam, it will survive no matter what the skeptics may say.”

        Peter, why are you posting on this thread rather than the much more challenging If Replication is the Holy Grail… thread. On the latter thread are histories of phenomena that have been swept under the rug because they challenge “science”. “If it isn’t scam, it will not survive” is simply incorrect.

      • brucefast Says:

        maryyugo: “Anybody can publish an uncensored book. Anybody can get a patent, given that they follow the usual very liberal rules.”

        First, ‘seems Rossi can’t get a patent. Second, just because somebody self-publishes a book that doesn’t mean his work is recognized. Consider this:

        Mendel’s work goes unrecognized
        Mendel tried to drum up interest in his results but to no avail. Part of the problem was that botanists of Mendel’s time were not accustomed to statistics being applied to natural history, and so they couldn’t recognize the importance of Mendel’s discovery. And when Mendel tried to replicate his results with hawkweed, he failed — not because his original insights were wrong, but because the genetics of hawkweed are very peculiar. Nevertheless, the patterns that Mendel saw did apply to many organisms and were there in nature for anyone to see. Darwin himself noted a three-to-one ratio in the colors of snapdragons. But for all his genius, Darwin didn’t realize the importance of that ratio.
        Mendel abandoned his experiments in the 1860s and turned his attentions to running his monastery. When he died in 1884, he was remembered as a puttering monk with a skill for breeding plants. It was only some 15 years after his death that scientists realized that Mendel had revealed the answer to one of life’s greatest mysteries.

        You so sure this couldn’t happen just because of the internet? Bullshit! Scientists are just as pig headed and close-minded now as they were then.

        BTW, do I really need to dredge up a thousand self-published books claiming wonderful scientific discoveries that have received no mention from the scientific community? Of course they exist.

  21. Peter Says:

    Who told you that there is a secret client? Oh, I get it, it must have been Rossi! In that case everithing is just fine.

    • Roger Bird Says:

      Peter, I rest my point. It does seem that there is way too much of “Rossi said” at the origin of every chain of communication. I would like to see a real business owner or independent scientist be at the origin of more chains of communication.

  22. maryyugo Says:

    Newest from Krivit: NASA engineer says at meeting that Rossi has never proven his device to be real:


    • Bob Norman Says:

      Mary, I don’t think Rossi’s patent is a joke. Yes, it could have been better, but it isn’t that bad if you look at the claims structure and thats what is important.

      Personally I don’t trust anything that comes out of our government. The patent office is questionable in my mind and the powers in government have a lot to lose if this technology is real. The tax base hit is huge, so they have an agenda. The DOE refuses to even look at it, they would rather spend Billions on a stupid technology called solar. Just a few million in research could go a long way, but they insist on backing the wrong technology, one more time. The government always gets it wrong. NASA is being replaced by private business, for a lot less I might add.

      • Roger Bird Says:

        I don’t think that solar is stupid. At least you can actually get energy out of it. I think hot fusion is stupid. 50 years ago hot fusion was said to be 35 years into the future. Now, 50 years later, it is 50 years into the future. When will these dolts get it that it doesn’t work.

      • Bob Norman Says:

        Solar is no where close to being cost affective. It wears out before you get it paid for. I bet solar will go away before long and be labeled a bad technology. Only works part time and requires battery and high support. Not where I would ever put a dime. Just look at all the Solar companies failing, it doesn’t make economic sense.

      • Roger Bird Says:

        Bob, I very reluctantly agree about solar, but it beats the hell out of hot fusion. We get less than zero out of hot fusion and we waste a lot of bandwidth being told by those whose jobs depend upon it how great it will be, in 50 years.

      • Bob Norman Says:

        Roger, I agree Hot Fusion is a waste of money and time. I remember back in 1976 a professor told me they were less than 5 years away from systems that would power the US. Untold Billions later they are saying the same thing. Cold fusion looks way more real than hot fusion. There are thousands of lab reports of heat being generated by Cold fusion and there are a raft of papers on the subject. Cold Fusion looks real and should be getting the research money.

    • brucefast Says:

      Steve Krivit is full of **it!

  23. Peter Thieberger Says:

    The Italian patent is a joke because they don’t disclose what they claim to be their only secret, namely the catalyzer. Industrial secrets are just fine but if you want a patent something you have to say what it is that you patent. You can’t have it both ways.

    • Bob Norman Says:

      The patent deals with the structure of the Ecat, so it is not required for what he teaches by the patent. The Ecat can show some degree of operation without the catalyst, so its not essential for the patent. A separate patent on the exact procedure fore preparing the Nickel makes more sense. In light of the patent offices closed mind on cold fusion, I would leave it a trade secret until they change their thinking. There was a request for congressional hearings on the DOE and Patent office treatment of Cold Fusion. The public will force government to change, they are just trying to protect their tax base.

      • brucefast Says:

        “The public will force government to change, they are just trying to protect their tax base.” I think that the patent office’s motivation for rejecting cold fusion is all about “science” and little to do with tax base. As with the physicists, the patent people are afraid of being shamed like Pons and Fleishmann were. Discovery isn’t their motivation, avoiding a major blunder is. Err on the side of caution is their motto.

  24. Rockyspoon Says:

    maryyugo says that all Rossi has to do is file a US patent and his problems with proprietary information are over. maryyugo forgets (either on purpose of because he/she is clueless, or worse) that the US patent office refuses any patent that is in any way, shape or form associated, consistent, or even remotely related to “Cold Fusion”. Such items are simply stamped with “Cold Fusion” on the file wrapper and it gets special handling–through the group 220 Director’s Office and the Office of the Assistant Commisioner.

    Areas where such Cold Fusion devices may have application (which indicates it can be completely peripheral and it still gets rejected) are:

    Fuel Cells
    Power plant
    Radiant energy
    Helium production

    So, maryyugo, the US Patent Office is obviously at war with any inventor that submits anything directly or even circumstantially associated with cold fusion and that’s one of the things Rossi should do with his E-Cat? You strongly recommed it as a solution, but again I must ask, are you clueless?


    I think you’re applying some of the best propaganda tools there are, maryyugo–misinformation and falsehoods. I don’t think “clueless” can be used in your defense, maryyugo–you know way too much for that, but anytime you can influence casual readers of these blogs to believe in lies, you’re certainly there to lead the way. All one has to do is read what you write to know you’re not honest.

    Reader beware: Don’t believe what maryyugo writes here. He/she has an agenda that is anything but the truth.

    • Iggy Dalrymple Says:

      I can’t remember their names but I watched a video about a couple of old LENR scientists that tried to patent their inventions. One used the term “Cold Fusion” in his application and was denied. The other obfuscated his terminology and was granted his patent.

  25. Iggy Dalrymple Says:

    Here’s another eCat website….said to be in association with Rossi, but I haven’t see where he endorses the site. http://ecat.com/ecat-products/ecat-home

    • brucefast Says:

      This is FANTASTIC! This site is taking pre-orders. I put my name in already! This site has been to the “recommended sites” list.

      Hey, wait a minute, this is ecat.com!! Isn’t this the guys that had the cool videos?

    • Iggy Dalrymple Says:

      The site is interesting. Watch this youtube which is at the end of Rossi’s bio. At 11:12 there’s a graphic that shows a “sheetmetal catalyzer”. I had never heard the catalyzer described that way.

      • brucefast Says:

        “sheetmetal catalyzer”, I’ll have to ponder that one for a while. It is interesting that the picture shows a coil of corrugated sheetmetal.

      • Roger Bird Says:

        For the philosophically insightful scientist, everything is either an open question, or it is a proven fact. Unfortunately, it has been my experience that most scientists are philosophically retarded, and they say foolish things like “there are no UFOs”.

      • Iggy Dalrymple Says:

        OK, assuming the “sheetmetal catalyst” is not a red herring, then the catalyst must be metal. How many metals can be formed into sheet. Many I suppose. Steel, tin, copper, silver, gold, aluminum, magnesium, etc. Rossi claimed the catalyst was inexpensive. I’m betting aluminum, steel, or magnesium. I’m no scientist but I remember as a kid adding chips of aluminum to lye & water and great heat was produced and hydrogen was released. But that’s a chemical reaction. Magnesium can burn with a white hot reaction….again chemical.

      • brucefast Says:

        Not aluminum, gold, tin, copper, magnesium too low of melting point.

      • Roger Bird Says:

        The video was very impressive. The people presenting are heavy hitters in the critical thinking department. I have to say that I am now 65% certain.

        Please remember that those folks may be holding back to protect their reputations and the reputations of their university. I am holding back for a much more important reason: the respect of my 12 year old son. Although he will love me even if I am wrong, since he is entering puberty, I need for him to respect my judgement and insight.

      • brucefast Says:

        Roger, imo, the best wisdom you can pass on to your child is the gift of ambivalence. You, I must say, are doing an excellent job of it.

        I watched a documentary recently on “pundits”, news experts. It was interesting that pundits are really lousy at ambivilance, they are very good at stating categorically. They are also very good at being wrong. Certainty is not all its cracked up to be.

      • Roger Bird Says:

        brucefast, I could not agree more. Well, perhaps I could be a little more ambivalent about that. [[[Just kidding]]]. The history of science is strewn with people who were so certain. All of those brilliant minds who opposed Elizabeth Kinney, Alfred Wegener, Albert Einstein, etc. etc. etc. We could put all of the scientists in history into 4 groups: those that discovered something new (an exceedingly small group); those that opposed them (a very large group); those that supported them, often as merely followers (a huge group); and those who were not certain but willing to listen (a very small group). Unfortunately, the emotional development of most scientists seems to be arrested at middle school age, and they are about as abusive as middle children.

    • Roger Bird Says:

      I think that some people may be short-stroking their hope and enthusiasm for what might be. I understand how they feel, but I think that they may be jumping the gun.

      • Iggy Dalrymple Says:

        What’s wrong with a little unrestrained hope, so long as the hoper isn’t shelling out any money? We’ve all rooted with glee that out team would win and left the stadium disappointed.

      • brucefast Says:

        Iggy, “We’ve all rooted with glee that out team would win and left the stadium disappointed.” Love it!

  26. Iggy Dalrymple Says:

    Bruce, I didn’t notice any corrugation but there were perforations in the ends of the green cylinder.

    I remember some scientists speculating on the catalyst. One guessed iron & carbon powder. One to soak up oxygen (don’t know where oxygen would come from) and the other to break the bond of the H2 pairs.

    • Iggy Dalrymple Says:

      I bet Toyota is burning the midnight oil on this. Toyota is very experienced in working with nickel for their nickel-metal-hydride batteries.

  27. Iggy Dalrymple Says:


    From A Text Book of Inorganic Chemistry, Partington 1946 –

    “Atomic hydrogen. – Langmuir (1912) has shown that hydrogen in contact with a tungsten wire heated by an electric current at low pressure, is dissociated into atoms:
    H2 2H. This splitting of the hydrogen molecule is attended by the absorption of a large amount of energy, about 100kcal per gram molecule. The atomic hydrogen so formed is chemically very active. Langmuir also showed that atomic hydrogen is formed when an electric arc between tungsten electrodes is allowed to burn in hydrogen at atmospheric pressure. The atomic hydrogen was blown out of the arc by a jet of molecular hydrogen directed across the arc, and formed an intensely hot flame, which is capable of melting tungsten (m.p. 3400oC). This flame obtains its heat not from combustion but from the recombination of hydrogen atoms into H2. It is suitable for melting and welding many metals. Iron can be melted without contamination with carbon, oxygen or nitrogen. Because of the powerful reducing action of the atomic hydrogen, alloys can be melted without fluxes and without surface oxidation. A feature of the flame is the great rapidity with which heat can be delivered to a surface, which is very important in welding operations.”
    Maybe part of the catalyst is tungston.

    • Iggy Dalrymple Says:

      According to the Los Alamos National Laboratory, pure tungsten is a gray-white metal with the highest melting point of any known metal: 6,192 F.

      Read more: What Is Tungsten Used in? | eHow.com http://www.ehow.com/facts_6817187_tungsten-used-in_.html#ixzz1dyKXJZ99
      I don’t know if tungsten can be rolled into sheet-metal.

      • brucefast Says:

        Fantastic find, Iggy!

        Tungsten is relatively common (1.25 parts per million), but rather expensive $11 / 100kg (abt $50 per pound) because it must always be refined. (http://www.chemicool.com/elements/tungsten.html)

        If the plates are made of pure tungsten it could significantly impact the cost of an e-cat core. However, a tungsten veneer on steel or nickel may work (other metals with a high melting point.)

      • Iggy Dalrymple Says:

        Somewhere I read, maybe on PESwiki, that Rossi’s catalyst consisted of two substances, so if tungsten is one part, maybe it’s sprayed or sputtered onto the sheet-metal cylinder, or perhaps it’s bound with the nickel particles.

        Do you think the over-unity heat could be produced from the rejoining of the hydrogen pairs? Maybe the catalyst is nickel/tungsten. Maybe there is no fusion, but hydro-reunion. This could explain the need for periodic electric input…gotta split some more hydrogen pairs.

      • brucefast Says:

        “Do you think the over-unity heat could be produced from the rejoining of the hydrogen pairs?” No, that would be a perpetual motion machine. Introduce hydrogen to tungsten, it breaks apart, let it rejoin, poof, extra heat. No, there must be combustion, storage and retrieval (rechargeable battery) or nuclear.

    • Iggy Dalrymple Says:

      Here’s someone that speculates that tungsten is the Rossi catalyst.

      Fluffy on February 28, 2012 at 3:38 pm

  28. Iggy Dalrymple Says:

    Peter M. Bell
    Carnegie Institution of Washington

    “Atomic hydrogen gas could be used as an energy conservative fuel, as it recombines to the diatomic molecule. For every recombination between two hydrogen atoms, 4.5 eV of energy are released, which calculates to be over 1 million watts of power per second for 10 grams of atomic hydrogen recombined. The large impulse relative to its light mass could be significant in applications of atomic hydrogen as a rocket fuel. Practical applications aside, the main interest in atomic hydrogen at this moment is in the insight into quantum mechanics that study of its properties may provide. Atomic hydrogen atoms ‘abound throughout the universe,’ even though not on Earth, and thus quantum effects in space, and the hydrogen-rich planets as well, may be elucidated by results of these studies.”

  29. Iggy Dalrymple Says:

    Iggy Dalrymple
    November 18th, 2011 at 7:05 PM

    Dear Dr Rossi,

    Same question as Zimmerson:

    Does the E-Cat utilize atomic hydrogen, as opposed to di-atomic hydrogen?


    Iggy Dalrymple
    Andrea Rossi
    November 19th, 2011 at 2:51 AM

    Dear Iggy Dalrymple:
    In the tank we utilize there is biatomic H. What happens in the reactor is confidential.
    Warm Regards,
    I don’t believe it’s fusion. It’s another phenomena, equally important.
    Hopefully Brian Ahern will explain on Dec 7 (Pearl Harbor Day).

    • Roger Bird Says:

      Dear Iggy and everyone else,

      I am perfectly comfortable with the idea that it may not be nuclear (or electrochemical). It may very well be something we have not yet dreamed of.

      I am also perfectly comfortable with the idea that what we call reality is changing, like the arrangement of hairs on a grizzly’s back. Every now and then, perhaps very slowly, reality changes. It may first have started to change in 1989.

      It is important that our boxes (everyone is in a box, even those who think that they aren’t in a box) be made of porous, thin, or transparent material so that we can expand beyond our boxes.

      What is important is does it produce plenty of safe energy. That is what is important.


      • maryyugo Says:

        “What is important is does it produce plenty of safe energy. That is what is important.”

        Yes but until it is properly tested independent of Rossi, you have no way to know that it does.

        Don’t you wonder why Rossi has not given an E-cat for testing to U of Uppsala and U of Bologna? He promised to do it … what now… five months ago? And he says he tested “hundreds” of them? Universities do classified secret military research all the time without leaking secrets. Why has Rossi not given them anything to test?

      • Roger Bird Says:

        maryyugo, first and foremost, we do have a way of knowing if it works or not. It is called patience.

        Secondly, which part of military did you not understand? Military are rich and rough customers if you piss them off. Anyone could leak Rossi’s secret and what is Rossi going to do about it. Stamp his feet and cry. Or, we could take them to court, and by that time the secret would be everywhere and Rossi would have no chance of containing the damage.

        I understand and appreciate Rossi’s way of doing this because this is the way that I would do it. Trust no one until you are comfortably rich.

      • Roger Bird Says:

        maryyugo, I don’t wonder why he doesn’t trust academia and scientists types. If it works, then he shouldn’t trust them and doesn’t need to trust them. He can gain credibility by selling to people whose only agenda is to save money: business people, very practical people. If it does not work, then obviously he shouldn’t trust academia and scientists.

      • brucefast Says:

        Maryyugo, “Don’t you wonder why Rossi has not given an E-cat for testing to U of Uppsala and U of Bologna?”

        I used to, then I posted this:

        While the report may be an exaggeration, any real component of significant time and/or money involved in giving it over to the universities is a very valid explanation.

      • Roger Bird Says:


      • maryyugo Says:

        brucefast said “I used to, then I posted this:

        And you are using Sterling Allan and Hank Mills as a source of reference? The guys that think Obama went to Mars? That’s very funny.

  30. Iggy Dalrymple Says:

    Rossi says the eCat does not use tungsten.

    • Roger Bird Says:

      There is really no need to believe Rossi when he says that it does not use tungsten. If I were looking at the possibility of becoming the richest man in the history of the world, I would certainly not tell the truth when it was necessary to lie to keep my secret. On the other hand, he may be telling the truth. But trust me, if someone were to guess exactly right on, Rossi would lie. And you can’t see nervousness via email.

  31. Roger Bird Says:


    I am flattered.


  32. Peter Thieberger Says:

    Roger, your prejudiced view of science and scientists is surprising. What might the psychological reasons be? Did you have difficulty handling the material in high school or in college? Or perhaps, you were traumatized by a bad teacher? The reasons may also be much more profound. I am sure you will agree that from the mental health point of view it is always good to analyze such issues and to bring them to the surface.

    Most scientists I know are hard working, honest and open minded. Some of the frontiers of physics are nowadays pushed by huge and complex experiments, each requiring the work of hundreds of physicists. You are right that very few become famous, but they all do the excellent and difficult work that is essential for making the discoveries that expand our knowledge.

    • Roger Bird Says:

      Peter Thieberger, that was cute. Actually, I take my appraisal of scientists from how they treat those who they do not agree with. I don’t work with them, and I couldn’t possibly be so stupid as to think that they are all the same. But how they treat, say, those who successfully use homeopathy or Alfred Wegener or those who successfully (heal) use raw milk or Stanley Pons or, golly, I could go on and on and on. They act like middle schoolers. I recall some small conclave of scientists and not so scientists in the Andes trying to figure out how the Incas built those amazing walls that have spaces between the individual stones that you can’t get a credit card into. Some slightly goofy guy tried to demonstrate that the Incas used parabolic solar furnaces. I admit that it was a goofy idea. But some female scientist ripped that poor guy with such venom; it was horrible. It was ruthless, cruel, unnecessary, and heartless. But that happens all the time with scientists. They are so much into their heads that they don’t have much left over of their inner light for their hearts. And I know this because I have done the same thing, not in the Andes, of course. I am also a headcase; and I have to take a deep breath when I am dealing with people who don’t think as I do and don’t think as well as I do.

    • brucefast Says:

      Peter, I e-mailed you on how to add a picture to a post. Did you get it? I am very interested in your proposal for how Rossi could have faked it. (This, I find, is the best kind of proof that he is a fraud — that at least he could be.)

      Somebody has suggested that Rossi spiked the feed water with H2O2, but I think that such would affect the boiling point of the water, and would have shown up on the calorimetry. Further, I understand that boiling aqueous H2O2 is mega-risky.

      • Peter Thieberger Says:

        Bruce, I didn’t get your email. In the meantime I checked with Mats Lewan and he tells me that he arranged the wires for the clamp-on ammeters himself for one of the tests he witnessed. That would rule out my proposed scheme. But I’ll be happy to post my drawing anyway. It is just an example of how things may be different from what they seem.

        As to hydrogen peroxide, it does affect the boiling point, especially at high concentrations (150C, 302F for pure H2O2). But not much for the 2% stuff we buy at the drugstore. It does increase in temperature when it decomposes but there would be a lot of oxygen gas generated, and it would be quite expensive to do.

      • brucefast Says:

        I would be interested to see what you have even if it has been eliminated. To upload pictures, do the following:

        Go to imgur.com, create an account, and upload your images to there. When you click on an image, it gives a number of embed string options. Cut and paste the option labeled
        HTML Image (websites / blogs) into your comment.

      • Peter Thieberger Says:

        OK, done.

      • Peter Thieberger Says:

        Here is an example of how the ammeters could be fooled

        Mats Lewan from NyTeknik sent me an email stating that he can rule out this possibility for the test he witnessed.

  33. Peter Thieberger Says:

    Roger, how can these silly scientists believe in atoms over homeopathy? Don’t they realize that there is no need to choose? They should learn a whole lot more about psychosomatic effects.

    But seriously, there are some things that scientists just know, that may not seem that obvious to you. Could they be wrong? Of course but the probability in some cases is infinitesimal. For example, the theory that the earth is round was very controversial 500 years ago, but now we know that it is a fact. Could we be wrong? I don’t think so.

    That solids, liquids and gases are nothing but collections of atoms and molecules is equally certain, but not as obvious because you can’t see them. When you dilute a solution to the point where it is very unlikely to find a single molecule of whatever you dissolved, most scientists believe that there cannot be any beneficial effect remaining. That is just rational, logical thinking, not pigheaded nastiness.

    • Roger Bird Says:

      Peter, I am unsure of what you are responding to. You yourself admit that I can see the curvature of the Earth, but no one can see the workings of the atom or groups of atoms. The means by which scientists know the quantum world cannot even be seen. They are at least two levels above being able to see the quantum world. The means by which scientists know the quantum world could be taken as a positive. But every other possibility is a negative. You can’t prove that the lattices of metals do not focus the force of incoming protons. This does not mean that the force of incoming protons is not focused. It just means that we can’t prove it, just as we can’t prove any negative. It is an open question, and perhaps Rossi et. al. will be able to answer it. But until that happens it remains an open question.

      Since we now have dark matter and dark energy, sort of invented concepts to explain unexpected phenomena, and we have neutrinos twice measured faster than the speed of light, I would think that we might set aside our sense of certainty and keep an open mind.

      • Iggy Dalrymple Says:

        I figure a neutrino powered spaceship would enable reverse time travel……but would it grow hair?

      • Roger Bird Says:

        Iggy, I don’t believe the reversing time bit. If the neutrinos actually went faster than light, then that puts into question the theory that FTL travel would reverse time. Don’t you think?

      • Roger Bird Says:

        Iggy, you are either a big, fat liar, or else a heavy hitter in the critical thinking department. I am unable to tell from my end. So, I want to know, what do you think of Rossi’s E-Cat? Is it real, unreal, deliberate fraud, you don’t know, your 45% sure, or what?

      • Iggy Dalrymple Says:

        I believe Rossi’s devise works to a degree but is not ready for the retail market. I do give him credit for bringing LENR to the world stage.

        Defkalion is now claiming that they put an initial $15,000,000 on the table contingent upon the eCat operating uninterrupted for 48 hours. Defkalion claims Rossi walked away.

      • Roger Bird Says:

        Rossi walking away doesn’t sound good. Perhaps they insisted upon a string, and their report would not mention that string.

    • Roger Bird Says:

      Peter wrote: “Roger, how can these silly scientists believe in atoms over homeopathy? Don’t they realize that there is no need to choose? They should learn a whole lot more about psychosomatic effects.” Peter, when someone is hurting, theory must step back. You cling to your theories like an insecure old widow clings to her husband’s casket. It does not matter if the theory of homeopathy violates certain known facts about the physical world. It only matters if it works. The same principle applies to Rossi’s E-Cat. What difference does it make if the E-Cat is violating your precious laws of physics if it works?

      • Craig Binns Says:


        Agreed. Now let us see it at work. It’s pretty easy to see whether a 1 megawatt power plant exists or not, or 200 five kilowatt plants. What’s the problem? The local power supply company can show me its nuclear power plants, and anyway I have ample evidence that they exist, even though I might know nothing about nuclear fission, and have no theory about how the plants work.

        But Rossi – he won’t let us see the e-cats clearly. Let the clients tell us how happy they are (like satisfied homeopathy patients) says he. OK, who and where are these guys? we ask. Not telling you, says he …

      • Roger Bird Says:

        Craig, the only difference between your approach and mine is that I may be a little more patient. But if we don’t see some major positive movement from customers and others within the next year or so, I am going to have to forget about Rossi and the E-Cat.

      • Iggy Dalrymple Says:

        BTW, I know a nuclear power plant operator that is a member of the Flat Earth Society. He also denies the holocaust and the US moon landings. I know a biochemist medschool professor who doesn’t believe in the AIDS virus.

      • Roger Bird Says:

        Iggy, that was pretty cute. The only one that I can even get close to is the one about the AIDS virus. Many people do not get sick with many illnesses because their bodies are stronger/healthier than those who do get sick from those very same illnesses, or because they are immune to the particular illness in question. However, whether that applies to the AIDS virus or not is an open question, a question that I will not be testing on myself.

  34. Iggy Dalrymple Says:

    My post about the neutrino was a joke. I wouldn’t know neutrino from guano. I only went as far as physics 101.

    I do have a facebook buddy who’s a physicist and formerly in the astronaut program.

    My old Marine buddy, Col Ike in San Diego, was also in the astronaut program.

    They’re both watching the cold fusion debate with interest but haven’t declared any belief yet.

    • Roger Bird Says:

      As much as I am hopeful and fascinated about the E-Cat, it ain’t so until someone else, completely independent of Rossi, tests it and says it is so.

  35. Roger Bird Says:

    Despite what some people here may think, I have not abandoned the scientific method for hearsay and hope. I am just more patient and more comfortable with uncertainty, and I am very uncomfortable with slamming someone until it is certain that they are scammers or self-deceived.

    • Iggy Dalrymple Says:

      Google translation:
      So the rift between you was not due only to non-payment of first installment repayment, said Mr. Rossi?

      “Not sure. We had finished the 15 million dollars of first dose, but Mr. Rossi did not sign the protocol of receipt, asking him to meet parameters such as the stable operation of the device for at least 48 hours. This was the real cause of the interruption of cooperation, but not celebrated in the media because they want to continue a deleterious confrontation. Us us interested in real progress, and this success. The technology will present a few days the world will be entirely Greek and appreciate its contribution to the overthrow of what exists in the energy market.”

  36. Craig Binns Says:


    You “know a nuclear power plant operator that is a member of the Flat Earth Society”. At least he knows where his power plants are located, and how they work. Or at least I hope so!

    By the way, in what jurisdiction do the mysterious buyers of the Rossi e-cat operate their device, which is claimed by its manufacturer to function through nuclear reactions which are unknown to science? Any safety issues here? Would you be happy with something like that across the street?

    • Roger Bird Says:

      Craig, even if Rossi says that his E-Cat works via nuclear reaction, and even if his E-Cat works, he CAN’T know that it is via nuclear reaction. He is just eliminates chemical reaction and assumes nuclear reaction. He CAN’T know it at this point.

      • Craig Binns Says:


        You tell us he CAN’T KNOW whether a device which he constructed himself, and which he is allegedly supplying with isotope-enriched nickel, works via nuclear, chemical or (for all I know) gravitational forces???

        And people are buying them?

        I DEFINITELY don’t want to live anywhere near one of these things!

        Glad to hear you’ve “not abandoned the scientific method”, by the way.

      • Roger Bird Says:

        Craig, I will stand by what I said. I think that there would have to be a lot more study and experimentation to know what is going on.

    • Iggy Dalrymple Says:

      No, Craig, I wouldn’t feel real comfortable with a 1 MW LENR reactor across the street from my home. I wouldn’t be comfortable with a large steam boiler across the street from my home. That’s why most people choose not to live in an industrial zone. I know one group that routinely sleeps with a hot nuke in their home. That’s the US Navy….and it appears they are the likely purchasers of Rossi’s initial batch of 13 one-megawatt reactors. One poster (on another board) said they were headed for China Lake Naval Weapons Center.

  37. brucefast Says:

    I am of the mind that the vast majority of the members of the flat earth society have their tongue firmly planted in their cheek.

    • Roger Bird Says:

      brucefast, I don’t see how it could be any other way. Perhaps it is a secret society. I can see the curvature of the Earth in an airplane. It may be a secret society whose members eschew seriousness. (:->) In which case, I might join. (:->)

    • Iggy Dalrymple Says:

      This guy is (or was) a cyber-acquaintance. He seemed to be sincere and cited a book which claimed that the Earth was the center of the universe and the sun & stars revolved about the earth.

      He claims to be from a family of nuke power plant workers. His name is alleged to be Corum and I would bet that he’s a brother or cousin to this Corum. http://www.nuclearassociates.com/who-we-are/leadership-team/

  38. 450c is Plenty Hot for Steam Power « nickelpower Says:

    […] This also shows that continuing enhancement path that I discussed under A Case for Rossi. […]

    • Iggy Dalrymple Says:

      Now Rossi speaks of a single 13 MW thermal plant order by a military customer. Do you think this is the 1st customer simply combining its original thirteen 1 MW units into a single large unit?

      • Roger Bird Says:

        And should Rossi actually make a 13 MW plant, then that would be a lot of E-Cats, 689 (13 * 52) to be exact. Just the plumbing would have to be very exacting and impressive. That is a lot of work for a con, and quite expensive.

  39. Craig Binns Says:


    “To be exact”, 13 times 52 is 676. As brucefast has suggested, leave it to others to do the theoretical stuff.

    • Roger Bird Says:

      So, I used 13 * 53 to get 689 rather than using 13 * 52. I don’t know exactly how many E-Cats Rossi used. Craig, I suppose that you think that my arithmetic mistake means that you are so much smarter than I am that I should just butt out. I just have more of my inner-light devoted to social and human concerns, and I know that it is very unlikely that a con would spend 3 years tinkering and hobnobbing with a nuclear physicist without any monetary gain. And anyway, we are not dependent upon Rossi. We have SRI, who, I suppose from your perspective, are a bunch of lying con artists also: http://ecatnews.com/?p=1430 And we have many others: http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/BarnhartBtechnology.pdf And yes, this does not prove that the E-Cat works. But as for me, it does prove that cold fusion is real. Whether they can actually do something useful with it is still uncertain for me.

      • brucefast Says:

        Roger, let Craig slide. His greatest joy is in pointing out that someone else is wrong. (even in an inconsequential math error.) He craves the day that he can say “I told you so”! He does this by finding very safe topics to pick a side on (free energy) and choosing the obvious side. (The last 10,000 free energy attempts have failed, this one will to.)

        When “I told you so” goes the other way, well, that’ll be interesting.

      • Roger Bird Says:

        Dear brucefast, I am 75% sure that Craig has picked the wrong energy project to be able to say “I told you so.” In fact, I will be saying “I told you so” to others. [Roger gloating prematurely!!!]

      • brucefast Says:

        [Roger gloating prematurely!!!]

    • Iggy Dalrymple Says:

      Craig, you are wasting your valuable time here. You could be making big bucks advising DOD, SPAWAR, or DARPA. You could have saved them $26,000,000.

  40. Roger Bird Says:

    brucefast, please put this where it belongs:

    So, I calculated that to replace my furnace, I would need at least a 5.403 kW Rossi heater. I figure that this would be in the dead of winter, going 24/7. Here is my figuring, and I appreciate any input: I use 4.3 CCF (hundred cubic feet) of natural gas per day in the worst part of winter, from my utility bill. 4.3 CCF per day times 102.9 kBTUs/CCF equals 442.470 kBTUs per day. 442.47 kBTUs per day times the conversion factor of .293 kBTU/kWh equals 129.681 kWh per day. 129.681 kWh per day divided by 24 hours per day = 5.403 kW per hour.

    If a 10kW E-Cat is generating electricity at 30% conversion, that would be 3000 watts for electricity with more than enough left over for heat: 7,000. My worst electricity month showed 22.5 kWh per day, or 0.9375 kWh per hour or, rounded to 1 kW. That means, despite what someone else calculated, a 10kW E-Cat would be more than enough for my house.

    Of course, if you want to send back some to the utility and make some money, then more E-Cats is better, depending upon the price vs. how quickly everyone else catches on.

    • brucefast Says:

      Hi Roger,

      Your calculations are fairly good. Heat usage us usually higher at night than in the day, so you may want 6 or 7 kw of heat at least, to be safe. Even that is pushing it a bit.

      On the 3kw of electricity issue, if you don’t have a buffer contract with your utility, I don’t know if this will do. Even though you are using an average of 1kw of electricity, you will have peak moments when your usage is higher than that. Now, you can buffer into batteries, but you end up with a lot of cost in batteries and an expensive inverter. If you can sell power back to the utilities, then at 3kw you are laughing — making money.

      You are correct with the 10kw e-cat – 3kw power generation = 7kw available for heat, equation. If the generator is in your home, you can recover the full 100%. That said, early adopters that are counting pennies are going to be disappointed. The cost of e-cat systems will diminish at a rate of about 50% every two years until they find their true cost. So if a 10kw e-cat costs $5,000, the rest of the heat installation will cost about $5,000, and the power generation will cost about $5,000 more for a total of $15,000. Two years after you pull this off, the cost will be $7,500, and 2 years after that it’ll be $3,750. Is it worth the 12,250 for the energy for those four years? By a pure dollars and cents calculation, probably not. But you will be the first on the block to heat and power your home for free. You may also end up with an e-cat system that eventually develops collector value.

  41. Iggy Dalrymple Says:

    “There is no such thing, at this date of the world’s history, in America, as an independent press. You know it and I know it.

    There is not one of you who dares to write your honest opinions, and if you did, you know beforehand that it would never appear in print. I am paid weekly for keeping my honest opinion out of the paper I am connected with. Others of you are paid similar salaries for similar things, and any of you who would be so foolish as to write honest opinions would be out on the streets looking for another job. If I allowed my honest opinions to appear in one issue of my paper, before twenty-four hours my occupation would be gone.

    The business of the journalists is to destroy the truth, to lie outright, to pervert, to vilify, to fawn at the feet of mammon, and to sell his country and his race for his daily bread. You know it and I know it, and what folly is this toasting an independent press?

    We are the tools and vassals of rich men behind the scenes. We are the jumping jacks, they pull the strings and we dance. Our talents, our possibilities and our lives are all the property of other men. We are intellectual prostitutes.”
    John Swinton, NY newspaper writer speaking at his retirement banquet.

  42. Iggy Dalrymple Says:

    News from E-Cat.com
    “(The ECAT uses regular Nickel, thus eliminating some of the theories that rely on nano-sized particles to deal with the nuclear barrier effect).” I was under the impression that Rossi was using nano-powder. Maybe he’s using foam, sheet-metal, screen, or foil.

    Sounds like Rossi is planning to be a wholesale heat seller:
    “Rossi is planning to set up a division to produce and sell thermal energy and adding ECAT plants to the district heating grids and later electric grids.”


    • Roger Bird Says:

      Rossi has been so dishonest and so full of hot air that nothing that he says is of any value. This does not mean that LENR is bogus. It means that Rossi’s word is bogus. When we get something substantial from Rossi, then his word will be upgraded from bogus to something better.

      • Iggy Dalrymple Says:

        I don’t consider Rossi to be dishonest. Not credible but not dishonest. I believe that with Rossi, no thought goes unspoken. When circumstances change, he doesn’t bother to cover his tracks. He probably doesn’t remember his words from a week ago. His verbosity is both an asset and a liability. His big mouth put LENR on the map and at the same time raised a lot of skepticism.

        I reserve the tag “dishonest” for malicious lies. He may put out a few false signals to taunt the enemy, but not to maliciously tease his followers.

        The late conservative business tycoon, Ed Ball, had a favorite toast, “Confusion to the Enemy!”

    • Simon Derricutt Says:

      Thanks Iggy – previous announcements from Rossi have mentioned the powders, and the difficulty of making them.

      According to this, the ECAT is stable up to 200°C, and has a maximum temperature of 260°C. So at maximum temperature it’s unstable? If it goes unstable, the Nickel melts (that’s 1455°C).

      Nice pictures – they’re CGI but look almost real.

      On the ‘technology’ page they quote Jed Rothwell. I wonder what he thinks of it?

  43. Iggy Dalrymple Says:

    via ecatworld

  44. can i lose 10 pounds in a month Says:

    I read this piece of writing fully on the topic of the resemblance of most
    recent and previous technologies, it’s amazing article.

    • Craig Binns Says:

      You can lose as many pounds (I mean £ sterling) as you want by investing your money in the Rossi e-cat scam. Where’s everyone gone, by the way? Only me and the spammers left!

      • Simon Derricutt Says:

        Craig – I’ve enjoyed your replies to the spammers, anyway. At the moment it looks like the majority of the people working at things haven’t the time right now to spend much time writing about it. That’s a good sign, and I’m expecting a raft of announcements this year as a result.

        With the Defkalion demo, you should be able to see that they are further along now and some way ahead of Rossi. Still quite a way from being able to go buy one, though, by the look of things. Such demos as we’ve seen, though, mean that other people trying for a commercial device have realised they need to work a bit quicker – could be the reason for a bit more secrecy and a bit more urgency, so less to talk about overall right now.

        It could of course also be something to do with the holiday period….

        From what I see over at Revolution-green, the spammers are even more active overall now, with around 10 times the spam as real people commenting. We need a revolution in spam-busting software, really, to kill the stuff at source.

      • iggydalrymple Says:

        At the moment, I don’t know how how to invest in LENR. Although I believe in the viability of the technology, there are too many “up and coming” new energy technologies in this horse race, to settle on one.

    • Craig Binns Says:


      “With the Defkalion demo, you should be able to see that they are further along now and some way ahead of Rossi.” I am not able to see it, I’m afraid. The Rossi demo has come to nothing. The Defkalion demo had the same flaws: no independent control, data on screen provided by Defkalion, not independently checked. Machine remained connected to external power supply. I am most suspicious of these features, but as always, nobody will be more delighted than I if it turns out to be kosher. That it was staged to calm the fears of disgruntled investors seems to me to be the best explanation for the demo, however, and I expect nothing of significance to emerge from it, any more than from Rossi’s similar – and similarly-motivated – exhibitions.

      • Simon Derricutt Says:

        Craig – doing things in front of a live audience of the calibre that they did shows a lot of confidence that their system would work. It’s true that such a demo could be rigged and that all the possible fraud has not been eliminated, but the risk of perpetrating a fraud there is pretty high – a high chance of being caught out very publicly which would instantly destroy their reputation.

        Yes, it’s still possible that it’s fraud, but pretty unlikely and I at least accept it as being the truth as they know it. The investors would have been happy with a private demo, after all – no need to run the risk of a public one.

        Recently I saw a program on C4 that “proved” that the ’69 moon landing was faked. This despite the laser-reflector placed there a bit later that has been since used to measure the Earth-Moon distance to around 3mm by a laser-station in Texas and the photos from telescopes of the tracks and debris left behind. There’s always some conspiracy theory.

        In Defkalion’s case, though, there is a lot of other research that points to them at least being on the right track so it’s reasonable to expect that they’ve seen successes. Since they have a group of scientists and engineers, it’s also pretty likely that they would progress faster than Rossi (on his own) has.

        Reading up the corroborating evidence on lenr-canr.org is quite a bit of work and takes time – a lot of the maths there is beyond me as well, so would be gobbledygook for most people. Seeing what they did, the measurements and conclusions though should be enough to convince most people that there is something real there. The question therefore is not whether it happens but whether it can be reliably and repeatably performed. To me, it looks like Defkalion are doing pretty well on repeatability by now.

        You’re not alone in not believing it, though. I looked on the BBC news site to see if there was any report of it, but found nothing. Maybe worth reading http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg84795.html for a somewhat cynical (though accurate) view on the reasons. Belief in Cold Fusion is still a reputation-destroyer and will lose you research grants.

      • iggydalrymple Says:

        Craig wrote, “The Rossi demo has come to nothing.”

        Craig, how can you say that, when one of the co-sponsors of the test, ELFORSK, claimed “The results are very remarkable”?

        Do you think you know more about nuclear science than ELFORSK?


      • Craig Binns Says:


        I stand corrected. The Rossi demonstration hasn’t come to nothing. It’s come to ELFORSK calling its results very remarkable. Great. OK.

      • Peter Thieberger Says:

        What is truly remarkable is how a bunch of presumably serious physicists can be as naïve and incompetent as the members of this “independent” test team:


        They are probably very good at teaching their own specialties. But expertise in nuclear physics doesn’t make them competent in power circuits or fraud detection. But it is really worse than that, they seem to have lost their common sense and whatever they should have learned in physics 101. For example, when they saw temperature increasing for a short period after the power was turned off they immediately concluded that this was evidence for a self-sustaining reaction. The most straight forward explanation of course is that the heat from internal hot parts continuous diffusing towards the surface. This phenomenon is sometimes called thermal overshoot. It is also the reason the first day of summer, when the solar energy input is at its maximum, is not normally the hottest day of the year.

        If I discovered a mistake like this one after submitting a manuscript to Arxiv, I would immediately withdraw the manuscript

        Fortunately Erickson and Pomp set the record straight:


      • iggydalrymple Says:

        Dr Thieberger, a year or so ago, someone posted a video of someone apparently conducting cold fusion cooking charcoal in a microwave oven. The experimenter’s “proof” was that the carbon apparently transmuted into iron. He demonstrated by 1st showing that a magnet did not attract the charcoal, but did attract the transmuted “iron”. You debunked the claim by stated that the carbon changed into “magnetic carbon”.

        Well, now there’s a new similar video showing the same phenomenon…..this time by a Dr Egely.

        However, this time, there is a cited patent:

      • iggydalrymple Says:

        OK, my mistake. While the patent is by Dr Egely, it doesn’t seem to describe his microwave demo shown in the video.

      • iggydalrymple Says:

        Here’s another article by Dr George Egely:

      • Craig Binns Says:


        Don’t miss out the good stuff produced by Dr Egely! Mere transmutation of carbon to iron (found in nature in the cores of giant stars) is not the only thing Egely has invented.

        See http://www.toolsforwellness.com/54848.html. He has invented the Vitality Meter! In case you want to buy one, here’s how to operate it.

        “Place the device on a level surface, remove the cover, and place your hand near the wheel similar to the above photo. Your hand should not touch the device in any way, yet after a few seconds the sensing wheel will begin to turn. As you build a relaxed but concentrated state, the wheel will turn faster and faster. If you have been active in spiritual work such as mediation, you may be able to make the wheel stop and change directions SIMPLY WITH THE POWER OF YOUR MIND CONTROLLING YOUR AURA ENERGY.”

        Using this device, you will be able to measure your “Vitality Quotient”. What is this? Here’s what we are told: “According to research the vitality quotient seems to be influenced by two factors. First, your etheric energy or higher dimensional energy (HDE) is a key input. The Chinese call this energy your ‘Qi.’ The Asian Indians call it ‘prana.’ Europeans refer to it simply as ‘energy.’ This energy is of a higher dimension than energy we normally encounter such as light, sound, electricity, etc. such that it is vibrates faster than the speed of light. That is why it has been so difficult to measure in the past.”

        But George Egely’s wheel contraption measures it just fine! To keep it in top working order, lubricate it with a few drops of snake oil from time to time, I recommend.

      • iggydalrymple Says:

        Craig, he sounds like a versatile inventor. Just what this world needs.

      • Craig Binns Says:


        The world’s got more than enough mountebanks and charlatans. But perhaps you disagree. That would explain your enthusiasm for Rossi and Deafscallion.

  45. iggydalrymple Says:

    Craig, there have been important scientists, leaders, and inventors that dabbled into weird stuff. Samuel F.B. Morse was into the occult and claimed foreknowledge of the Titanic disaster. There are or were 2 or 3 astronauts that claimed sightings of ufos. Nobel winner Brian Josephson believes in the paranormal. One of WW2’s greatest generals, George Patton, believed he was Hannibal reincarnated. Just because you’re weird, doesn’t mean you can’t be effective.

    • iggydalrymple Says:

      And don’t forget, one of the Siemens brothers reported mysterious powers of the Pyramids at Giza.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 72 other followers

%d bloggers like this: