Put this into the crucible of common sense

Ian Bryce says:

However they fell out about July, with Defkalion CEO Alexandros Xanthoulis developing and offering their own version of ECAT called Hyperion, which reportedly includes technology procured from Rossi without consent.

Industry observers have been baffled by this apparent petty squabbling over a world-shattering nuclear technology. If Rossi LENR is real, there will be Nobel Prizes. Imagine Nobel laureates attacking each other over “stealing my technology”! Not credible.

Under my hypothesis, they are really squabbling over the EARTH-WIRE technology, which was used to mislead the worlds scientists, and they perceive as worth millions.

How many people on this site find the latter statement to make any good sense whatsoever.

  • Who thinks that Defkalion could possibly value the “earth-wire technology”?
  • Who thinks that Defkalion and Rossi could possibly believe that this “earth-wire technology” is worth millions?
  • Who highly respects the Australian Skeptic Society for carefully presenting quality scientific skepticism?

Sorry, Ian, but I personally find your hypothesis hypthetic.

<— To main blog


About these ads

Tags: ,

34 Responses to “Put this into the crucible of common sense”

  1. brucefast Says:

    You know, I’m sitting here wondering if this post is just too mean and vicious. It really is rather mean and vicious. However, calling the very honorable looking list of Defkalion board of directors is also mean and vicious. This kind of lame argument is not what scientific skepticism is about. Scientific skeptics don’t just come up with inconceivable hypotheses and claim that they have protected science from a wacko. Scientific skepticism must meet the honorable standard of science.

    Ian, save your name. Get rid of your line of reasoning that defames the board of directors of Defkalion from your web page. Withdraw and retract the suggestion that the Rossi/Defkalion thing is a squabble over a defrauding technique. Let me know that you have done so, and this thread with all of its comments will disappear.

    Defkalion board of directors:
    George Sortikos CEO
    Engineer. . Former banker and industrialist (ceramic high tech). Former Chairman of State Bank ETVA (Greek Bank of Industrial Development) ’80-’90 and founder of Omega Bank ’90. . He was also chairman of the TIF (International Fair of Thessaloniki).
    David Christian Aurel CEO
    Swiss Banker with extensive experience in project finance and logistics. Former president of Bank of Montenegro.
    Alexandros Xanthoulis Board Member

    Economist (Macroeconomics). Greek-Canadian. Former official of the EU heads the Energy and Financial Reconstruction of the EU delegation in Central Asia (90).
    Chris Stremmenos Board Member
    Chemical Engineer. Professor (retired) at the University of Bologna, Italy, former ambassador of Greece to Italy.
    John Hadjichristos Board Member

    Mathematician. Extensive experience in software development, Management Information Systems and Project Management. From 1992 to 1999 he served as CEO of computer systems Telemedia SA, while from 1991 to 1992 general manager of software systems Cibar AU. From 1990 to 1991 he worked at Marketing & Sales Intrasoft SA as a responsible banking sector.

  2. Iggy Dalrymple Says:

    How can a skeptic speculate on a theory based on intricate details when he was not present?

    Reminds me of ancient theologians debating over how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.

  3. brucefast Says:

    Its not that different from hypothesizing that some particular person is a child-molester. I mean really, when the board of Defkalion seek a new business opportunity in the future do they really want the head of the skeptic society (hypothetically) accusing them of attempting to procure a fraud device?

    Oh, the same could be said of what I have said about Mr. Bryce. However, he agreed that a question mark was better, and said he’d add it. His next posting (best I can tell) also makes a statement rather than asking a question. I am only holding his case up and asking people to look at it. Oh, I am asking them to look and laugh, but only because I believe it to be laughable.

    When Mr. Bryce makes the corrections he promises, when he quits with the defamatory statements, and when he creates hypotheses that are at least feasible (this last one is beyond credulity), I will happily retract or redact the inflaming stuff I have said. I know that everything said on the internet is diligently logged and backed up somewhere, but it will be removed from this site.

  4. Iggy Dalrymple Says:

    I’m My Own Grandpa

    • brucefast Says:

      Thanks, Iggy. I’d heard of this song, but had never heard the song. In truth, without the illustrations, I could never have followed the logic.

      Maybe that’s Mr. Bryce’s problem, maybe he’s his own grandpa. In fact, as the conjecture sure seems possible to me, I’m sure of it. Oh man, now I’ve opened myself up to a libel suit.

  5. Brad Arnold Says:

    Ian Bryce, by calling Leonardo and Defkalion’s working LENR generators ““earth-wire technology,” is demonstrating his extreme skeptism and ignorance:

    “In order to hide 12.5 kilowatts of energy a minumum of 50 amps of current as 240 volts would have to flow through that ground wire as well as one of the others, it does take two wires to complete a circuit. 50 amps of current flowing through that small gauge of wire would make it glow and would be very easy to detect as it would melt the insulation on the wires and short back down the length of them to the plug leaving molten dripping plastic in its wake.”

    Therefore, as far as I’m concerned, any bad treatment of Ian Bryce (as far as his ridiculous and derogatory ““earth-wire technology” label is concerned) is OK.

    • brucefast Says:

      Brad, what are your qualifications?

      Specifically, I am looking for someone who is truly qualified to comment on Ian Bryce’s assertion that 130 kw of heat in a quart sized container could not be dissipated by a flow of cold water at 1 liter per second. Dr. Levi said that his 1l/s water was being heated by 33 deg Celsius, which equates to 130 kw.

      I am not qualified to determine the heat transfer equations. I know that there is a lot of unstated data such as the surface area of contact between the hot surface (core) and the coolant water. However, it seems reasonable, as Ian Bryce says that it is impossible, to assume a maximum reasonable surface area. I would assume, therefore that the water pours through multiple channels in the core, with heat dissipating fins wherever possible, that sort of thing.

      Personally, as the container was welcomed to get to 500c, I find it hard to believe that this rush of water through it could not have dissipated the heat. As I have seen Mr. Bryce hack, slash, and declare everywhere he goes, I highly doubt that he has seriously worked out the math. My bet is that he took a gut conjecture, and declared it as fact. Who cares that he is declaring (without any contextual conjecture by the way*) an independent Ph.D. Physicist to be full of it. If I were Dr. Levi, I’d have half a mind to sue Mr. Bryce for libel.

      * http://nickelpower.org/2012/01/31/inadvertent-miswiring-of-leads-is-the-cause/#comment-5958

      • Brad Arnold Says:

        I’m sorry Brucefast, I am a Night Auditor at a hotel, without a college degree. Although I am a member of Mensa, my strong suit isn’t math. Although, I am surprised that people can’t generally see that Rossi (and Defkalion) are behaving completely different than one would who was running a scam. Furthermore, the idea that is is “bad wiring” accounting for Rossi’s results is simply preposterious and is the result of magical thinking.

        BTW, I wouldn’t go to a (in)famous skeptic to find out the true liklihood that a black swan event was genuine.

      • Jonathan Says:

        If it was being heated by 33°C, then it could. If it was being heated to 33°C, then it probably couldn’t.

        The specific heat capacity of water is about 4.18 J/g.K. That means it takes 4.18 J of energy to raise 1g of water by 1 Kelvin.

        1K is the same temperature difference as 1°C, the zero point is different as you don’t[*] get negative Kelvin temperatures.

        1g is approximately 1ml, the exact conversion rate depends on the temperature and pressure.

        1W is 1 J of energy every second. So a 4.18w heater would raise the temperature of 1 ml/s of water by 1°C. To raise the temperature of 1l of water by 33°C would therefore require about a 138kW heater. If heat was lost elsewhere other than to heating the water, then you would need a higher wattage heater. So if e are measuring the minimum output of the heater, we are in the right ballpark with 130kW.

        [*] in the same way that you can’t go faster than the speed of light. Maybe you can.

      • Simon Derricutt Says:

        I agree with Jonathan’s maths – nothing astounding about 130KW being used to heat 1 litre/second by 33K. That is after all a high flow-rate since your own home hot-water system will deliver maybe 7 litres per minute (around 1/9 of this) and uses maybe 20KW to do this, raising the temperature by around 40K. Getting this amount of heat-transfer capability in a capacity of around 1 litre is also not that difficult – look up the sizes of commercially-available heat-exchangers on the net.

        It is impossible for it to snow in the Negev Desert in Israel. It’s too hot and dry, and the climatic conditions just will not allow it. Anyone who says it has happened is a fraud, and any photographs of such an event must be photoshopped to fool people. Now google it.

      • brucefast Says:

        I think the real question is, how fast can the water suck the heat out of the container? If the water-contact portion of the container is kept relatively cool, how hot will the worst hot spot have to be? Within the water, will the temperature variation be kept to sufficient minimum that so that some of the water isn’t boiled off while other parts are still quite cool.

        Put it in a much more earthy way. When I take a block of ice and place it in a pot on the stove, portions of the water will be bubbling away merrily, far before the ice has melted.

        Ian Bryce, as you can see, I understand the challenge. The challenge might have merit. However, you have declared that an independent Ph.D. physicist, specifically one in the area of energy, made a mistake and didn’t realize his error. (Point of note, according to the Krivit interview, Dr. Levi has been in intense dialog with the other Ph.D.s in the U of B physics department. They are all part of the error.)

        Ian Bryce, SHOW YOUR WORK! Show the body of your case that a 1 liter container cannot possibly pass 130kw of heat into water without becoming white hot and without flash-boiling the water. Surely, if you are going to declare an independent physicist to be wrong in his area of expertise, you have already done the work.

  6. brucefast Says:

    Lets consider this piece of Bryce logic, “If Rossi LENR is real, there will be Nobel Prizes. Imagine Nobel laureates attacking each other over “stealing my technology”! Not credible.”

    Premise 1, Nobel Laureates are angels.
    Here is my entire rebuttal: http://tinyurl.com/2hlz3g
    Believe me, the list of badly behaved people who have received Nobels is a lot longer than this.

    Premise 2, Both Rossi and Defkalion are potential Nobel Laureates.
    Rossi certainly is. Defkalion, well, only if Rossi is found to be fraudulent, and Defkalion’s technology works. Do you really understand what has to transpire for this to be the case? Rossi works for years to perfect something. He perfects a parlor trick. Defkalion studies what Rossi pretends to have, and makes the real thing work. Now there’s an argument from incredulity.

    Conclusion, Neither Rossi nor Defkalion would dare to sully their name in case this sullying causes them to be looked over for the Nobel.

    Problem 1 – Rossi already has a painfully sullied history. The best argument that Rossi doesn’t have the goods is that his reputation is so sullied. Is a squibble with Defkalion going to show on the radar when the “he is not worthy of the Nobel” arguments are made? Well, maybe, on page 9623.

    Problem 2 – Again, Defkalion isn’t really in the running for a Nobel at all.

    Problem 3 – This invention is worth hundreds, nay thousands of billions of dollars. No-one in their right mind would pass over a Nobel (worth 1 million) for a measly trillion bucks — get real!

    Ian Bryce, I match your argument from credulity with my own lack of credulity. I bet my incredulity beats yours to the jury of public opinion hands down.

    • alaincoe Says:

      anyway inventors are not good candidates for nobel.
      Rather theoricians…
      if their theory is checked, Widom-Larsen-Srivastava are good candidates, or any sucessful theorist…

      anyway, nobel often refuse to celebrate controversial theoy. Einstein got his nobel for photoelectric effect, not relativity…

      on peace nobel, first they make “politically correct mistakes” like with al gore, right or wrong with climate, hi is a huge scientific liar 100 time more than rossi ans michael moore together.

      about arafat, the nobel with rabin seems not stupid, thanking changing of vision from terrorism to negotiation… could have succeed if Israeli, after rabin assassination, did not decide to play double game by supporting islamist to fight this secular lord, protecting Christian Arabs from discrimination… so badly that they took the full power after… anyway nobody clean here, neither the belligerents, nor the local and global power around… giving a peach nobel price is not an angel tag, but a “good will” hope.

      about cold fusion, I think they will avoid to touch that domain, and fight the bloody hand of the “consensus”. they will wait for all CF denier to be dead.

      • brucefast Says:

        Your discussion around them “only being interested in theorists” may be correct. I am not a Nobel follower.

        alaincoe, “I think they will avoid to touch that domain, and fight the bloody hand of the “consensus”. they will wait for all CF denier to be dead.”

        Oh, I think not. Once cars are driving down roads, and zipping past gas stations, CF (by whatever name) will no longer be controversial. There is a huge difference between discovering something so practical, and discovering something that the common man never touches, like the big bang or the oddities surrounding the speed of light.

  7. Greg Goble Says:

    Defitnitive statements in regards to snow is false. Rare events requiring specific environmental conditions are not impossible. Both the “says it has happened is a fraud” and the “to fool people” claim are used here to confuse, fraud, and fool. Thanks this helps as much as the “I am my own grandpa” song chart does. Confusing confusion is now confused and confounded. WOW

    • Simon Derricutt Says:

      Greg – yep I agree it’s false. Black Swans again. I’m happy with reasonable skeptics; if you can show good enough data that something happens then it is accepted. If the theory does not allow it, then by observation the theory must be wrong, and we should explore the phenomenon rather than say it doesn’t happen.

      I’m sure that Randi would be really happy to give away his million dollars for demonstrable ‘supernatural’ effects. This would be a major breakthrough, too, but in a different way. Very few ‘psychics’ take up his challenge. All have failed so far, but there may still be that black swan waiting to be found.

      With LENR, a lot of people seem to take joy in quoting theory and saying that it can’t happen. I can’t see where the profit is in doing that. Enough people have done the work that no reasonable person can dispute the results. The actual amount of heat output is currently disputable, at least for a month or two, but shortly there should be solid evidence. Indisputable? Probably there will still remain people who refuse to look at the evidence. Maybe they should join the Flat Earth Society (though the FES is a bit tongue-in-cheek and is more of a protest group, I think).

  8. brucefast Says:

    This is why: http://www.livescience.com/18415-ecat-cold-fusion-fraud.html
    There’s a similar article on msnbc. I don’t have a link.

    The fact that Mr. Bryce is given respect because he is associated with the Australian Skeptic Society is the reason I am angry!

    Mr. Bryce, you will learn what a true scientific skeptic is, or you will wither away into obscurity — or my name ain’t Nathan Arizona.

    • Brad Arnold Says:

      I think the point is that mass media outlets are searching desperately for “news” they can publish, and controversy sells newspapers.

      I recently saw a movie rated “S” (I think that was the letter). It meant that people who had “fixed beliefs” ought to use caution watching it because it would cause them to experience possibly uncomfortably cognitive dissidence.

      What I am trying to say is that there are many of our fellow citizens who simply are dead set on what is true/false, and it is a black/white thing. Along comes a unique miraculous clean energy technology that is very very cheap, and they will predictably get very angry and upset, and will very likely go so far as to use magical thinking to deny it.

      By the way, if you live in South Dakota, you might genuinely think the Earth was flat (just like you can massage the math to make the planets revolve around the Earth). It is just a stunted perspective – God bless all of us. Any press for LENR is good press now.

      • Iggy Dalrymple Says:

        “By the way, if you live in South Dakota, you might genuinely think the Earth was flat”

        Incidentally, the fellow that I mentioned last year who claimed to be a flat-earther was from N Dak. He also believed that earth was the center of the universe and the sun & stars revolved around earth. The scary part is that he was a former nuclear power plant worker.

      • Bob Says:

        Brad, I grew up in south Dakota and thought the earth was flat until I visited the black hills. Its all a matter of what your perspective in life is. I have lived long enough to seen a number of things developed that many say were impossible at the time. When people say that, they just aren’t looking at the problem from the right perspective. Jules Vern saw things different in his day, was he crazy. Time is the judge.

    • brucefast Says:

      The MSNBC article that bit Bryce’s s*** is:

  9. jetmech Says:

    what new rossi thing is there to discuss?
    there is no rossi ecat device available
    why do skeptics comment on a device that is not
    available? Only a secret customer has such a device
    and he is secret! There currently is NO Rossi Ecat
    device that is available for testing or anything else!
    All we have is speculation is it LENR? Is it Cold fusion?
    Is there a factory? Is there any competition? Does Defkalion have a device?
    NO one knows
    So what is there to be skeptical about? Nothing nada!

    I think it goes like this


    The same scenario!

    • Iggy Dalrymple Says:

      “So what is there to be skeptical about? Nothing nada!”

      So why are you flapping your jaws? Like the atheist’s funeral,
      All dressed up and no where to go.

    • Simon Derricutt Says:

      Thanks for the link, Jetmech. It is interesting and well-written, and the point is taken that you can find an odd scientist or two who is fooled by the scam. It is also amazing that Keely managed to keep it going 26 years. Maybe not so easy in the days of internet, but a salutary lesson in scamming.

      In this case, there have been enough experiments that the reality of the physics should not be in question even though why it happens is not agreed. The “new” claims by Rossi and Defkalion are thus only on the time to start-up and the coefficient of performance.

      Shortly we should have 7 groups testing Defkalion’s machine and publishing the results. As I’ve said before, this is such a big bet by Defkalion that it’s pretty inconceivable that they do not themselves totally believe it works – and these are some pretty high-powered people. Rossi’s tests have not had the same authority, sadly, but his believability will rise a bit with Defkalion’s tests.

      So don’t give up just yet. Wait and see Defkalion’s results before you give up on getting cheap energy this year. A cock-up with Defkalion’s tests would be a setback, though….

  10. Greg Goble Says:

    ya’ll probably saw this already… I just read it and liked it…
    so posting it now…
    With warm regards and electrifying anticipation…
    What if Low Energy Nuclear Reaction (LENR) really works? By Christopher Calder January 4, 2012

  11. Bob Says:

    I think there is a 50/50 chance that we will get no news this week of the defkalion testing. With the two 48 hour runs the testing may not end till Monday some time, depending on gaps between test runs. The Greek government was mentioned as being the first tester. We all know how fast governments move. It will take several days to shuffle the data, several days to write the report and several days to revue the report and rewrite said report (that’s a fast track for government). It will be handed over to Public relations people and they will sanitize it further. With luck we will see the data the following week.
    The who of the tester are a very important. I want to see the list of those stepping forward to and who wants to see if its real. My list of people would be as follows:
    This is who I expect to be on the list, who do others expect to see.

    If everyone insists on anonymous participation I will be very disappointed and little progress will be made. Lets hope for names and robust reports.

    • Simon Derricutt Says:

      Bob – I noted on the Defkalion forum that Monday is a national holiday in Greece. Since generally the Greeks don’t work weekends, either, it is possible that the first day was setting up equipment, weekend next two days, then holiday on Monday, so maybe Tuesday to actually start the 4-day test, finishing Friday. Then there’s another weekend… so they start to write things up a week tomorrow.
      I might expect to see Mitsubishi in the list as well, perchance?

      • Craig Binns Says:


        I can understand not knowing in advance when the results will be available. But why don’t we know when exactly the test will be performed, and exactly who is to conduct it?

      • Iggy Dalrymple Says:

        And by Tuesday most of Greece may have taken early retirement.

      • Simon Derricutt Says:

        Craig – no idea why this has not been done. Very bad PR, though. It seems strange that they chose this particular long weekend – maybe to have a bit more time for running…. Seriously, I’d expect to have some announcements from them, if only to say the test had started.

      • alaincoe Says:

        yes, we hare seen too many holywood film, where timing is at the next second from timetable…

        I see two possibilities… with or without weekend…
        either they setup the test on friday, and run it during the weekend, swapping the reactors on monday holiday, getting results at the end of tueasday…. writing the report for publication at the end of the week…

        or they prepare the setup on friday,
        take a long weekend, start the tests monday morning…
        swap the reactors on wenesday… gather the result on friday…

        write the report nextweek…

        it seems that the webcam and publication of testers id and testers protocol was only an option “if teh tester agree”, and i assume that normal fearful tester like a big corp or an public body, will refuse such barnum…

        too bad.
        have to wait for one week more for the world to collapse.

        another funny possibility is that the Greeks keep the announceof preliminary resulst for their “clean monday” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clean_Monday

  12. Greg Goble Says:

    The emerging LENR manufacturing sector will be HUGE or even huger or even the hugest ever ever seen. Marketing and public relation strategies are developed concurrently with development of final product approval. Fully in the news by September, LENR product manufacturing reality will alter politcal candidate platforms in the U.S. and worldwide. I believe Rossi et.al. plan unlimited op. ed. “demontrations” of the actual approved product for sale and that this will prove to be a superior marketing stategy than any demonstation of a prototype by a competitor. I predict that Ecat product unveiling will be an immediate response… if they are ready.
    Go here and read about this…
    With warm regards and electrifying anticipation…
    “ National Instruments is working with Universities and Research Centers around the world to empower researchers and scientists who are working on magnetic confined fusion, inertial confined fusion and Low Energy Nuclear Reaction.”

    • Greg Goble Says:

      Oh meant to include… sales people will have demos… after an op. ed. they may say “go ahead and keep that one… it’s good advertising”. Models will be given to advertising firms for photo shoots… Make a gift of a few to the Board of Directors and President of Chevron asking them for a product endorsment review contract… doubtful… how about Tiger Woods or Madonna? The point being is, we may have quite a few of these around before they go on sale; SOP for preparing the market for a new product..

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 64 other followers

%d bloggers like this: