Defending Rossi

I know, I’m the only man on campus willing to defend Rossi’s recent statements as presented by An inspector from the Florida Bureau of Radiation Control. However, I am doing so.

I got an e-mail from Stirling Allen which stated:

Liar Rossi Tells Florida Bureau He Has No Factory, No Nuclear Reactions – An inspector from the Florida Bureau of Radiation Control said that Rossi told him “No nuclear reactions occur during the process;” and “There are no radiation readings above background when the device is in operation;” and “Currently all production, distribution and use of these devices is overseas.” He’s either lying to us or to the inspector or both. (PESN; March 11, 2012)

http://pesn.com/2012/03/11/9602054_Rossi_Tells_Florida_Bureau_He_Has_No_Factory_No_Nuclear_Reactions/

Let me present my case in Rossi’s defense.

Rossi is reported to have made three statements:

  • No nuclear reactions occur during the process.
  • There are no radiation readings above background when the device is in operation.
  • Currently all production, distribution and use of these devices is overseas.

But first, the definition of lie, and truth must be discussed.  It seems that truthful is well understood, but there are two groups of people who well understand just how grey truth is — entrepreneurs, and lawyers.  Ultimately if there is a reasonable frame of reference where Rossi’s statements are true, then he did not lie — even if his statements would appear to be true from the most obvious of frame.

Consider these questions from the easiest to defend to the most difficult.

1 – “Currently all production, distribution and use of these devices is overseas.”

We followers of Rossi assume that he is building a factory in Florida, therefore falsifying this statement.  However, if Rossi is building a factory in Florida, and if that factory is not yet producing a finished product (even if it is producing a bunch of the parts thereof) this statement is true.  If he is not producing a device yet, then even if he is producing the equipment necessary to produce a device, he’s still not producing a device.  If he is producing a bunch of component parts, as long as he is not producing the finished device, his statement remains truthful.

Where it gets a bit dicey is if he is doing in-house testing of devices in Florida.  While he still would be fully truthful about distributing, he would not truly be truthful about producing such a device.  If he has tested the device in Florida, then the device could be seen as being “put to use”.   However, though  this may be technically true, it does not meet the fundamental understanding of this statement.  He ain’t makin’, sellin’, or sellin’ the resultant product of his device in Florida.  In addition, MIT recently ran a month long demonstration of an LENR device for a course.  If Rossi is “technically” making and using because he is testing, then MIT is just as guilty.  (Of course there’s a jurisdictional issue, but Massachusetts surely has similar nuclear laws to Florida.

2 – There are no radiation readings above background when the device is in operation.

My understanding is that if you are measuring outside of the case, this statement is consistent with the other statements Rossi has made.

3 - The hard one, No nuclear reactions occur during the process.  I don’t believe that Rossi could make this statement and pass a lie detector test.  I think there are a bunch of similar statements that Rossi could honestly make:

  • There is no fission reaction taking place.
  • There is (or might be) no fusion reaction taking place.  (Of course only if the test sample of the reactor core were seeded with copper.)
  • Depending how Florida law reads, “nuclear reaction” may be defined as a fission reaction and/or fusion reaction.  If so, then by the definition of “nuclear reaction” of Florida law, there would be no nuclear reaction.
  • No nuclear waste is produced.
  • No possibility of a nuclear explosion exists.
  • Rossi may have said to the inspector, “I use Nickel, and I use Hydrogen at temperatures lower than the melting point of Nickel.  Do you know of any nuclear reaction with those characteristics?

And the best one –

  • No nuclear reaction recognized by science is taking place.  As long as the scientific community disavows LENR, this statement would be true.

Now, in Rossi’s defense, it is quite reasonable to believe that an inspector, especially one who is particularly skeptical of LENR or one who is particularly supportive of Rossi’s work, would hear some or all of the above true statements, and interpret these statements to mean, “No nuclear reactions occur during the process.”  If this is what happened then Rossi was not untruthful.  He could only be held as untruthful if the investigator asked him to confirm the investigator’s language.

Rossi has surely been untruthful with all of us.  I am not by any means ready to believe that he had a 1Mw plant operating for a year back in August (I think) when he first made this statement.  He flipped all over the place on the location of the 1Mw plant, to where his statements cannot be truthful.  However, being untruthful to a government inspector seems to be a higher level of dishonesty, a level that could get one into serious trouble.  He may have lied to the inspector, but in the tradition of the presumption of innocence, I don’t believe that this is proven.

Lastly, most importantly Rossi is not necessary to confirm the phenomenon of LENR, to confirm the Ni + H variant or to confirm high COP LENR.  Even if Rossi is a total scammer who has nothing (which I don’t believe) LENR is still established here.

<— To main blog

About these ads

Tags: , , , , , , ,

186 Responses to “Defending Rossi”

  1. Brad Arnold Says:

    There is only one fact that is important: that Rossi is getting a COP over 6 from a LENR reaction.

    That is not under dispute in this discussion, only if he has a factory or if he was performing a nuclear reaction. Is LENR a nuclear reaction? That is arguable, since there is no nuclear material in or out (I know, I know, the word nuclear is in the acronym LENR…thank you left brainers).

    Rossi will be laughing all the way to the bank, with a Nobel prize under his belt to boot! By the way, are you guys still going to be so dead certain Rossi is a fraud when Defkalion’s independent confirmation is documented (I know, I know, you will then try to discredit the independent)?

    I don’t know why nobody told you
    How to unfold your love
    I don’t know how someone controlled you
    They bought and sold you.

    I look at the world and I notice it’s turning
    While my guitar gently weeps
    With every mistake we must surely be learning
    Still my guitar gently weeps.

    I don’t know how you were diverted
    You were perverted too
    I don’t know how you were inverted
    No one alerted you.

    I look at you all see the love there that’s sleeping
    While my guitar gently weeps
    Look at you all…
    Still my guitar gently weeps.

    • Bruno Says:

      Rad Arnold said: “There is only one fact that is important: that Rossi is getting a COP over 6 from a LENR reaction. That is not under dispute in this discussion…”

      Of course it’s under dispute! There has NOT been an independent test run by a competent and unbiased 3rd party that we know of. We only have Rossi’s word that “secret” companies or government entities have tested the device to their satisfaction. I could make that same claim. So can anyone reading this. It doesn’t prove anything.

  2. Craig Binns Says:

    Brad

    I see you’re not much concerned about evidence. Yes I will be surprised “when” Rossi gets a Nobel Prize. When he makes the deserts green, and gives half his profits to cure cancer in children I’ll be even more surprised. He didn’t make Tuscany green, if you will recall. Sorry about your unhappy guitar, by the way. You should give us a cheery poem, in these sad times.

    Roger

    This is nonsense. Rossi is a liar. He says there is no fusion, no factory and no working devices in the US. It therefore must be assumed that he’s a scammer until we find another explanation of why he might be lying to a Florida state official. Why he might be lying to the public needs no explanation, if he’s a swindler. That’s what swindlers do.

    Your, who cares about Rossi, cold fusion is still valid stuff is irrelevant special pleading. Read your own “about” page, where you take Rossi as an example of the wonders of CF applied in practice. Don’t go back on all this now. Confront your own misplaced former enthusiasm and credulity, and fantastical speculations about magic machines, and draw valuable from these errors.

    No 1 conclusion: don’t reason from consequences. Being good is not the same thing as being true.

    I can’t find a reference in your index to your page “A Case For Rossi”. It can, however be found on search. I commend it to all readers of this blog. The arguments against Rossi, found in the comments, have proven their power and their prophetic force. There ARE NO gamma rays, so there IS NO fusion. There ARE NO machines, so there ARE NO customers!

    Just as the Petroldragon NEVER produced ANY motor fuel. Not a drop.

    • Brad Arnold Says:

      Craig,

      I can see you’re not much concerned with about evidence.

      It convinced the Swedish Skeptics Society: http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3144827.ece
      http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/blog/post/2011/05/swedish-skeptics-confirm-nuclear-process-in-tiny-4-7-kw-reactor

      Here is a PowerPoint presentation by George Miley of the University of Illinois who has successfully replicated the LENR “cold fusion” reaction: https://netfiles.uiuc.edu/mragheb/www/NPRE%20498ES%20Energy%20Storage%20Systems/Nuclear%20Battery%20using%20Clusters%20in%20Nanomaterials.pptx

      According to Forbes, electricity will be “too cheap to meter” if Rossi’s Oct 28 demonstration succeeds: http://www.forbes.com/sites/markgibbs/2011/10/17/hello-cheap-energy-hello-brave-new-world/

      Here’s the latest, according to MSNBC it passed the test: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/45153076/ns/technology_and_science-science/#.TrNo9rJqwe4

      I see cheery/dreary as a self-fulfilling prophocy, where some people are simply not programmed to recieve good news.

      Imagine there’s no heaven
      It’s easy if you try
      No hell below us
      Above us only sky
      Imagine all the people living for today

      Imagine there’s no countries
      It isn’t hard to do
      Nothing to kill or die for
      And no religion too
      Imagine all the people living life in peace

      Imagine no possessions
      I wonder if you can
      No need for greed or hunger
      A brotherhood of man
      Imagine all the people sharing all the world

      • Craig Binns Says:

        Brad

        Thanks for the cheery ditty. Made my day.

        What sort of evidence is it when Swedish sceptics say there’s a nuclear process, but Rossi, confronted by a Florida official, says there’s no nuclear process. When he used to say there’s gamma rays, now there’s no gamma rays. Where’s his copper isotopes gone? Where’s his “enriched” isotopes of nickel? Now there’s a trick!

        You mean he’s really got something? A factory! And he’s lying to a state inspector, saying he’s got nothing. No, he’s a swindler and he’s been lying to us.

        He’s like the phoney seventeenth century Messiah, Sabbatai Zevi, who persuaded many Jews across Europe and Asia that he was the real thing. Finally brought before the Sultan of Turkey who invited him to demonstrate his miraculous powers or else, he announced he wasn’t the messiah at all and converted to Islam. Now, who was he lying to? Why, the Jewish public of course. He didn’t dare to lie to the Sultan.

        Wondrous to relate, some of his deluded followers stuck with him and became Muslims too. Their descendants still form a small Islamic sect. Some people NEVER give up, once a lie becomes established in their minds.

      • Brad Arnold Says:

        Craig,

        The truth is not of all people, nor for all occasions.

        Furthermore, never let your sense of ethics and morals stop you from doing what is right.

        Imagine, lying (or more likely not stating the explicit and absolute truth) to a state inspector. What a fraud!

        I wonder how many lawyers recommend to their clients that they incriminate themselves regardless of the situation? When that Nazi comes to your door asking if you are hidding any Jews, you wouldn’t lie or disassemble would you Craig??

      • Craig Binns Says:

        Brad

        Can I state it more plainly. ROSSI WAS NOT LYING TO THE INSPECTOR!!! He has been lying to us. If he lies to the inspector and then they find out he’s got a factory in Miami which has lots of robots in it making a million magic boxes which emit gamma rays, then he will go to jail.

        He knows about jail, and I don’t suppose he likes it.

        He’s been lying to the public and getting the lunatics in Byron to lie to Australian sheep herders, to get his hands on people’s money. He is a liar because he is a swindler. Not because he wants to start fights with the Florida state government, and spend years in a chain gang or whatever they do to naughty people in FL.

      • Craig Binns Says:

        Brucefast

        Have you redacted my last? Why on earth?

        No Craig, I haven’t redacted any of your comments. By my record, your most recent comment was a response, here

      • alaincoe Says:

        “According to Forbes, electricity will be “too cheap to meter” ”

        this sentences show that the speaker is abd in econometry and cannot change of energetic paradigm.

        it is true that the cos of fuel is too cheap to measure (below cent per MWh), but the fuel is not the cost.
        the revolution of LENR (like nuke is, but in too big chunks) is that the cost is only the investmenet and the maintenance.

        my quick computation with defkalion data is that it reduce the cost by a factor 10.
        efficiency is no more a problem relative to fuel, but we should think in term of work and capital.

        my computation, and DGT data are saved there in a post
        http://184.171.250.170/~lenrforu/lenrforum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=27&sid=2cdbc68e3a08d3becf5f15528b5ac94f#p28

        should be updated because temperature seems higher now, and price lower (cited in greek press)

    • kwhilborn Says:

      He made lots of “drops” of oil. It was not considered very high quality and when oil prices dropped…. You do the math what would you buy expensive crap oil or oil from the ground.

      Andrea Rossi was very rich. He did not run he stayed and hired lawyers and defended himself. A scammer type might leave for a beach in a country with no extradition.

      That was 25 years ago, and he was working on….
      Yes he was working on environmental chemistry. To me it allows more credence to Rossi…

  3. Craig Binns Says:

    Roger

    “Defkalion’s independent confirmation”? Defkalion ain’t confirming nothing, because they ain’t saying nothing, remember?

    Anyway Rossi calls them liars and clowns and his sidekick Stremmenos calls them liars and megalomaniacs. So it would be ironic if Rossi now turns to that outfit for confirmation.

    • Brad Arnold Says:

      Ironic that you would quote Rossi, who you accuse of being a fraud. Sounds like you are speaking out of both sides of your mouth Craig in order to rationalize a cynical and negative belief.

      http://www.defkalion-energy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=1237

      “Tests with the presence of high level Government officials have been concluded. Opinions and results were very positive.

      Announcements will be made upon mutual agreements, at a time yet to be defined.

      Tests continue with international Authorities in the coming weeks.

      DGT”

    • brucefast Says:

      Craig, sometimes your logic is extra-flawed.
      “So it would be ironic if Rossi now turns to that outfit for confirmation.”

      There is absolutely no need for Rossi to “turn to that outfit” for their confirmation (spelled replication) to be valid. The idea that Rossi would not have high COP LENR, but Defkalion would is ridiculous.

  4. Astral Projectee Says:

    This is a hard one for me and I have been following this in good hope and anticipation for over a year.

    I am not sure when Rossi said that he had a factory, but the inspector from the Florida Bureau of Radiation Control, Jim Stokes, met with Rossi in Rossi’s Miami apartment on Feb. 29, 2012. So that is when they had the talk.

    Peace!

  5. Simon Derricutt Says:

    Nice post, Bruce. I see you have dealt with lawyers – you can tell when words are twisted to imply an untruth when saying the truth.

    LENR is not fusion or fission – it appears to be simply neutron capture. The initial materials are not radioactive, and neither are the final materials by normal definitions – most materials we use are in fact slightly radioactive, and this is the background radiation we can measure anywhere using a sensitive Geiger counter. Whether a factory is being built in the States is a moot point – we just don’t know if there is one or where it is/will be. There are devices, so they are built somewhere, and we assume in Italy.

    So yes, the statements taken separately can all be true, and only together imply a lie. Rossi is a master of misdirection in his statements, and I’ll remind people here that he is an entrepreneur, not a scientist. A several-times failed entrepreneur, at that.

    In the end, I will judge him on what he does, not what he says. If he actually sells working devices he will make a fortune (and we will then see whether he does give half to children with cancer). If he also gives the Milan area money to clear up his previous pollution problems, then this would be useful, too.

    Brad – thanks also for the reminder of the songs. Apposite.

    • brucefast Says:

      I have dealt with lawyers — which is a surprisingly creative process. I have also dealt with “honest” entrepreneurs.

      Consider the company I discussed on a previous post that was working with Pacific Bell. They certainly weren’t scammers, we had the goods we were demoing. However, when asked how many people were working on the project, they, in a Rossi-esque way claimed hundreds. I asked my bosses how they justified that. They said, “You are using Microsoft tools, right? How many are working to make those tools better?” Pretty creative, huh. True? Well, only if you spell it right — truuuuuuuuuuuuue (you’ve gotta stretch it a little.)

  6. kwhilborn Says:

    We KNow LENR is associated with Low or NO Gamma Ray emmissions because of its nature.

    The Patent Joe Zawodny filed assigning the rights to NASA (or a NASA patent), is about the creation of “Heavy Electrons” (not really heavy but behave slower). ULTRA-LOW MOMENTUM.

    Anyways…. What happens if you mix Gamma Rays and a bunch of Heavy Electrons? Thanks for asking. You get Infra-Red. Harmess infra red.

    Excerpt from Widom-Larsen Theory – “3. “Absorption of Nuclear Gamma Radiation by Heavy Electrons on Metallic Hydride Surfaces,” [Cornell arXiv physics preprint server - arXiv:cond-mat/0509269 v1 10 September 2005, also submitted to a peer-reviewed journal]”

    If Andrea Rossi said NO nuclear reaction is occurring then that is a lie, as trading electrons into new atoms and beta decay are nuclear processes. Andrea Rossi could mean that no “Normally Accepted Nuclear reactions” are taking place. If I was a Nuclear Bureau Investigator and I went out on a call to investigate someone building reactors I would probably have a good chuckle when I realized it was some guy attempting cold fusion with Nickel and Hydrogen. I am sure they felt awkward about wearing their big red radiation suits as well (made that up, unsure if they had radiation suits.).

    LENR is a nuclear process, but probably does not fall within the accepted “danger zone” of the Florida Bureau of Nuclear whatevers. I am sure Andrea Rossi got off fine.

    Andrea Rossi has theories about what is occurring but on record he has claimed a bit of Copper production so he must know he has done something nuclear, and again I am sure if he explained this he would have gotten a few more chuckles.

    Andrea Rossi claims he is not making these here. This is true. He has claimed he is readying production here and making it possible for robotic assembly. Any comunity college probably has a robotics student or 2 willing to program robots to perform certain tasks. It does not matter what country they are in. he could be telling the truth about this.

    The e-cat produces no background radiation. I mentioned how LENR is associated with low or no gamma emmissions. In fact; (trivia) a LENR device could even absorb gamma rays from outside sources making them into safe infra red as well. Doctor George Miley has made that claim about his cell as well.

    If Andrea Rossi said “no nuclear reactions are taking place” then this would indeed be a lie. I think any bureau person would note (especially with absence of Gamma radiation) that no nuclear reaction is occurring. I am not sure if the Bureau considers this trivial, or whether Andrea Rossi is attempting to mislead. I would guess that it is the former. If I was the Investigator I’d be more concerned about how much sugar was in my coffee than radiation from Nickel/Hydrogen.

    Cheers.

    Once again. Heavy Electrons absorb Gamma Rays and convert them into harmless infra red light.

    • Craig Binns Says:

      Kwhilborn

      No gamma rays? He informed the inspector no emissions above 100 kW, the lower limit for gamma rays. That keeps the inspectors happy. In fact there are no emissions at all, for there are no functioning devices. For the rubes he has another story:

      http://www.e-catworld.com/2012/02/rossi-says-e-cat-is-absolutely-safe-no-gamma-rays-emitted/
      “Rossi has consistently refused to provide details of what is going on inside the E-Cat reactor, but he has mentioned that gamma rays have been detected. Recently in a video interview when asked about whether the E-Cat was a ‘cold fusion’ technology he said, ‘we have found traces of fusion because we have found 511 kev gamma rays at the output, which is the emission of a positron and an electron, and a positron is the product of a proton turning into a neutron, so we have some kind of fusion inside, but I do not think this is the main energy source.'”

      Different messages for different audiences. Truth told to the audience that can put him in the slammer. Scam legend reserved for the marks, as is swindler practice.

      • kwhilborn Says:

        I am not saying you would not get Gamma rays as they would have to interact with heavy electrons for the conversion. into infra red.

        They have said during testing that Gamma Rays seem to be close to what background radiation would be.

        Andrea Rossi does use lead shielding to be on the safer side anyways.

        I am not taking any information from Andrea Rossi in what I have said.. I find him a poor source of information.

        I have quoted from the Widom-Larsen Theory and also from Dr George Miley. LENR is associated with low Gamma Emmissions. most people confuse this to mean nothing nuclear has transpired.

        Andrea Rossi can claim whatever he wishes, but LENR is an accepted yet still unviable/uncontrollable heat source, unless we believe Rossi. I tend to think he is legit, but prefer facts over heresay. LENR is associated with low Gamma emmissions, and will remain that way in my books until someone shows they have discovered a way to thwart this.

      • Craig Binns Says:

        kwhilborn

        Rossi is specific about the 511 keV energy level of the gamma rays, which he invokes because this level is associated with fusion. He has also “found” transmuted copper. If you “tend to think he is legit” how can you possibly explain such claims?

        Low gamma ray emissions may well be consistent with your theories, which are definitely out of the mainstream, and which are regarded as very weak, even by non-mainstream standards, when it comes to describing how gamma rays get turned into harmless infra red. Not even visible light – infra red, dear God! Why not radio waves, while we’re about it?

        Again, I’m saying he’s not legit. Tell me: how can he be legit?

        LENR is associated with low gamma emissions. Phoney transmutation devices are also associated with low, in fact zero, gamma emissions. Mysterious military people on Rossi’s investment trust are associated with total secrecy and not knowing the names of the trust members. A totally imaginary trust would display the same invisibility …. And so it goes, on and on and on.

        Give me some positive evidence! And stop spinning mysteries out of nothing, like Rumpelstiltskin spinning straw into gold in the fairy tale.

      • kwhilborn Says:

        Dang Binns.

        Excerpt from Widom-Larsen Theory – “3. “Absorption of Nuclear Gamma Radiation by Heavy Electrons on Metallic Hydride Surfaces,” [Cornell arXiv physics preprint server - arXiv:cond-mat/0509269 v1 10 September 2005, also submitted to a peer-reviewed journal]”

        I gave you a peer reviewed scientific paper for yu to research if you had doubts. Absolutely nothing to do with Rossi.

        If you are arguing against LENR then your education needs updating.

        I would like to believe Rossi, however you seem to be quoting him far more than I ever would.

        NOTE: There is NO NEW SCIENCE in the WIDOM-LARSEN THEORY. This means that the Widom-Larsen Theory is a description of what is happening without relying on “new physics” (unproven theories like QRT).

        So if you are suggesting “My Theories” (how did these become mine), are not mainstream then you again need to update your education. Relying on your 20 year old physics book will draw you to the same conclusions in this case, so a better phrase might be “get and education” instead of “update your education”.

        It is you Craig Binn arguing against Mainstream science and quoting Andrea Rossi, and despite your fantasy we cannot make gamma rays into radio waves while we are at it.

        If you are going to argue against Rossi that is fine, but arguing against known science is as telling as wearing a dunce cap.

        Dr George Miley also has a “working” LENR reactor cell. He claims it can convert outside Gamma Rays into infra red. If you sent him an email calling him a moron do you think it would be him or you that came out looking silly?

        I have said I think Rossi is legit based on my own ideas on what levels a person would go to for a scam, and I think Rossi does not fit the scenario. I also have said I do not think Rossi is the person who will go down in history as bringing us this energy. Even if he is legit he is too slow and someone else is probably ready to pounce on this market with all rights to whoever proves it first.

        Argue against Rossi, but try reading a book or two before arguing against science.

  7. Craig Binns Says:

    Sorry, 100 kW should be 100 keV.

  8. psi Says:

    Some further useful background, from a less excited point of view than most of the recent posts, which seem very quick to cry “hypocrite” and “liar” without thinking through the possibilities, is here:

    http://e-catsite.com/2012/03/11/the-e-cat-and-the-us-navy/

  9. Craig Binns Says:

    psi

    Here is a typical “possibility” from your background source. If this sort of thing is the best evidence that Rossiites can muster, Rossi is doomed. And indeed all pro-Rossi “possibilities” are of quality. Here we go:

    “In light of the above information, one is left to wonder if PHLburg Technologies and/or Prof. Melich are not part of the investor’s trust that Andrea Rossi has recently mentioned as now being a major player in his Leonardo Corp.  While he remains CEO, he reports that his interests are now subject to the approval of the trust.  The interesting thing about such an investor’s trust is that it allows its members to make important business decisions, much like a board of directors, yet still remain anonymous.  In most corporate structures, the board of directors of a company are legally obligated to reveal their identities.  This is not the case with an investor’s trust.  This structure would be especially useful if members or representatives of a government or military organization were part of said trust.”

    “One is left to wonder …” Quite so.

    • Craig Binns Says:

      For “quality” above, please read, “this poor quality”. I think my keyboard’s gone nuts.

  10. psi Says:

    Craig Binns. Here is a quote from your authority:

    “This is nonsense. Rossi is a liar. He says there is no fusion, no factory and no working devices in the US. It therefore must be assumed that he’s a scammer until we find another explanation of why he might be lying to a Florida state official. Why he might be lying to the public needs no explanation, if he’s a swindler. That’s what swindlers do.”

    If this is your example of how to draw inferences, you would not pass my logic course. You see to think that calling people names in public is sufficient. You take people’s words out of context and twist them to your own uses. prefer the emotional to the analytic – “liar….scammer…swindler.” You You employ spurious argument by definition.

    Personally, I prefer to withhold definitive judgement until such a time as there is sufficient factual evidence to draw one. Reasonable people may disagree where this is. But you not only already know the answer, but feel compelled to force your conclusion on everyone. You’re acting like one of the jurors in 12 Angry Men. Bully for you.

  11. Craig Binns Says:

    psi

    There is no factual evidence of anything except that Rossi is a liar. He’s lying to Florida or he’s lying to us. That is the only inference for which unchallengeable factual data exist. Where there are NO data, Rossi’s supporters turn this into “wondering” about the “possibility” that he’s hiding some world-changing machine, or he’s got secret investors. On the same evidence, there are secret investors and magic machines up my cat’s ar$e.

    So, how long are you going to give Rossi to produce this “factual evidence” before you give up on him? If he has had the time and opportunity to produce it, and has not done so, your logic course must fix a time when you say, enough – there’s nothing there.

    How much more time must I give my cat to produce the machines from its fundament before I admit they’re not there and never have been?

    • Simon Derricutt Says:

      Craig – How long do we give Rossi? As long as it takes. It’s no skin off my nose if he never produces a working machine – someone else will, now that he’s made LENR a newsworthy subject.

      You can only prove that there is a black swan by seeing one and subjecting it to spectrographic and chemical analysis to make sure it hasn’t been dyed. A picture of one is just not good enough – photoshop is easy to use.

      So there is no cut-off date in reality – we can either buy a Rossi E-cat sometime in the future (and prove the existence) or get one from somebody else when that becomes available. Since you haven’t been involved in producing a new-technology product (or any other) you have no idea of the setbacks and difficulties involved. I am content to wait, and though I’m interested in the outcome I am not emotionally involved in the question of what lies or partial truths Rossi has told.

      Your cat may well surprise you if you wait long enough. You are trying to confuse what is a possibility (Rossi may produce working machines) with a severe improbability (your cat has such a machine in its nether regions).

      • brucefast Says:

        And, as LENR is proven independent of Rossi, it goes to the others, the scientists, to get past the skepticism. So far they haven’t done a glorious job, but the headwind seems like a hurricane.

  12. Roger Bird Says:

    Craig, enthusiasm yes, credulity no. I have said over and over and over and over and over and over…….and over that Rossi and Defkalion have not proven their case, and I even used those words: “not proven their case”.

    • psi Says:

      Roger, I agree with you. To say they have not proven their case, at least not to the satisfaction of everyone, is true. To conclude that Rossi is a scammer is to go beyond the available evidence, as far as I’m concerned. It is also fair to say that at least most of the recent criticisms hurled at Rossi based on the Florida Bureau of Radiation report lack the conclusive significance attached to them by Rossi’s most extreme critics. I appreciate your more balanced approach.

      http://coldfusionnow.org/?p=15088

      • Roger Bird Says:

        psi, I like how you say “To conclude that Rossi is a scammer is to go beyond the available evidence”. I could not have said it better myself; in fact I didn’t. I wanted to. But I couldn’t come up with the words.

        The debunkers criticize us for going beyond the available evidence, but then they go right ahead and do the same thing if it fits their belief system.

        Among the optimists, our enthusiasm may be misplaced, but our belief is sticking with the evidence, which is not conclusive either way. But when the debunkers accuse us of believing; they mistake enthusiasm for belief. I guess having any kind of emotion is suspect by debunkers.

    • Craig Binns Says:

      Roger, Indeed so, but you also say, in e-cat world “We have all the time in the world. Time is not running out.” which means that you’ll keep saying that the jury’s out, we can’t make any decision – for ever.

      Now, as I state, Rossi’s had ample opportunity, and ample motive, to produce something if he has anything. He has not produced anything. You have to set some kind of limit on your disposition to say: the jury’s out. Otherwise you’re backing Rossi.

      Remember the tobacco companies. First they dismissed the evidence about cancer. When that was no longer possible they kept saying, well the jury’s out. They would have done this for ever if they could have. It’s a pitiful stand to adopt.

      Rossi has not produced the goods. He has had a chance to. So he’s got nothing. It’s now up to his supporters to show that he has got something, and not simply to keep saying, well in the absence of evidence you can’t have any beliefs. There’s no evidence for Santa Claus. So he doesn’t exist. You don’t say, well let’s wait indefinitely in case some evidence comes in before we make our minds up. That would be ludicrous, wouldn’t it?

      • Simon Derricutt Says:

        Craig – I had to pick a hole in this too. Rossi has produced machines and public tests, but the tests were not of sufficient standard to convince a lot of people. The tests did apparently convince Petterson, though – a pretty prominent skeptic.

        At the start of big tobacco, doctors said that it was good for people, and the tobacco companies used this in publicity – an example of how medical opinion and science changes as more information becomes available. In my opinion, the additives used to make tobacco more manufacturable are worse than the tobacco itself.

        You continue to use the argument that if you haven’t seen it, then it can’t be there. This is not a good basis to argue from.

      • Roger Bird Says:

        Craig said: “You have to set some kind of limit on your disposition to say: the jury’s out.” Why? I am content to go to my grave not being sure whether Rossi is a crook or a hero. And I am not supporting him. I am certain that anyone who gives him money better first make sure that he has the goods.

        And I guarantee you that worrying about Rossi will not be one of my concerns when I approach death.

      • Roger Bird Says:

        Your assumption that he has had the time to produce the goods has no basis in evidence.

      • Roger Bird Says:

        But we all know that we have made up Santa Claus. Try God, as in Infinite Ocean of Divinity rather than the infinite ocean of no-consciousness that you materialists lives in. There is no evidence, other than the whole thing. An honest person would be an agnostic; they don’t really know. I don’t really know about Rossi. There is much evidence yes and no. I will wait. If he comes to my door and asks for money, he better have an E-cat that we can plug in and I can test in my front room.

        You are just very, very uncomfortable with people disagreeing with you.

      • Roger Bird Says:

        Craig,

        When I said “We have all the time in the world. Time is not running out.” I was referring to the hysterics who fancy that the world is going to end the day after tomorrow because of Anthropogenic Global Warming. Even if LENR is completely not real and all other green energy options are not helpful, the world will go on. We may have some problems, but life will go on.

      • Craig Binns Says:

        Roger, playing the God card I see? Jolly good show!

      • Roger Bird Says:

        Actually, Craig, it is an exercise in epistemology. And I thought that you were so smart. I stand corrected.

      • Craig Binns Says:

        Roger

        I am aware that in the USA, especially in extreme right wing circles, it’s possible to discredit people by labelling them as atheists, so that their arguments in other matters will not be attended to.

        I’m surprised to see you resort to this. It’s not regarded as good form this side of the Atlantic, where people don’t misuse religion like that nowadays; and it tends to be counter productive.

      • Roger Bird Says:

        Craig, I didn’t resort to it. Your failure to see the epistemological point surprises me and gets us off track. I could be an agnostic making the same point. I will say it again. If you are not an agnostic about exterior things for which there is no evidence, then you are arrogant and lacking in good sense. Now, do you understand?

      • brucefast Says:

        “Rossi’s had ample opportunity, and ample motive, to produce something if he has anything.”
        On this post, http://nickelpower.org/2012/01/03/why-should-rossi-prove-it/ I argue that it is Rossi’s best interest to not prove it. This thoroughly shows that thinking people could conclude that Rossi does not have ample motive to produce something.

        To suggest that Rossi has had “ample time” to produce a factory capable of mass production of e-cats, or ample time to weather the challenges of UL certification is ridiculous.

        Both your points are not made.

      • brucefast Says:

        Craig Binns, “I am aware that in the USA, especially in extreme right wing circles, it’s possible to discredit people by labelling them as atheists, so that their arguments in other matters will not be attended to.”

        The other card, the “you’re religious so your argument is irrelevant” card has been played often enough in debates. Just be careful that you don’t commit the crime you accuse Roger of by playing that card. (I’ve seen you get pretty close some times.)

      • Roger Bird Says:

        brucefast, he did play that religion card. My point was entirely epistemological, like how is it that we know stuff and what happens when we don’t have sufficient evidence to prove or disprove. The existence of God can’t be proven; so intellectually oriented people should all be agnostic. I am agnostic about (but very interested in) Rossi and Defkalion. Craig Binns just says that they are a bunch of lying scam artists. Big difference. Craig Binns is a true believer. He truly believes stuff which the evidence does not support. He can spout all kinds of circumstantial evidence that he says proves that they are crooks, but our circumstantial evidence does not even impel us to believe one way or the other. He is the actual true believer.

      • Craig Binns Says:

        Brucefast, my points have been made. I said Rossi should produce something and has had time to do so. That means, as you are well aware from the context “bring something into the public domain”. I did NOT mean that he has had time to set up a factory, and no inventor is required to do that in order to demonstrate proof of concept.

        His ample motive for producing something would be to become the most celebrated and richest person in the history of humanity.

        My points have been made, but clearly not understood by yourself.

      • Roger Bird Says:

        But Craig, your points don’t make any sense. Why should Rossi spend one second trying to make us feel good, certain, and all warm and fuzzy. If he is working on his project, how is making us feel good of any interest or benefit to him?

        As time goes by, more and more people will lose interest in what he has to say.

      • brucefast Says:

        My counterpoint, Craig, is that a smart businessman would not reveal a technology that he knows works, is not yet ready to mass produce, and the world doesn’t know works. Simply put, by not providing “the proof” Rossi avoids a lot of competition.

        Your statement, “Rossi’s had ample motive” is accurate only if attached to “an in my [Craig Binns'] opinion”. It is your opinion, but your opinion is not logically supported.

      • Craig Binns Says:

        Roger, epistemology?

        “the infinite ocean of no-consciousness that you materialists lives in … An honest person would be an agnostic; … You are just very, very uncomfortable with people disagreeing with you.”

        Yep. Thanks for the philosophy lesson. I’ll stick with my theory that you’re playing the ultra-right anti atheist card as an excuse to disparage someone who disagrees with you. It baffles us over here that this sort of stuff can be effective in as advanced a country as the USA. But evidently it is. Good luck to you-all!

  13. brucefast Says:

    I thought I was the only brave one. However newenergyandfuel.com has matched me. I love their analysis of the quality of the source of the information, the infamous Steve Krivit, also the issue of what specific questions were asked to get answers.
    Its really hard to say that an answer is untrue if the specific question is not known.

    http://newenergyandfuel.com/http:/newenergyandfuel/com/2012/03/12/trouble-for-andrea-rossi-and-his-e-cat

  14. psi Says:

    Hi Brucefast,

    No, you are not the only brave one. See also the link I just posted to the March 2 interview with Rossi by ColdFusionNow. Jumping to the land of conclusions on either side of this debate at present seems futile. Your effort to keep the discussion balanced by making relevant distinctions is much appreciated.

  15. Craig Binns Says:

    Brucefast, New Energy and Fuel brave? After saying NOTHING AT ALL about the detail of the Florida inspector’s report, but bravely confining themselves to personal artacks on the people who circulated the report (I for one am becoming familiar with this tactic!) they come to this absolutely preposterous conclusion:

    “This isn’t a story about Andrea Rossi and the E-Cat. It’s a story about Gary Wright, Steven Krivit, a bunch of follow along bloggers and readers.  There isn’t any E-Cat news.”

    Not a story about the ecat? That is a shameless and manifestly false statement.

    And then they say: no more e-mails.

    Brave? Then what would a blog without any intellectual courage, run by people who will not confront challenges to their beliefs, but take refuge in insulting their opponents, look like?

  16. Craig Binns Says:

    Rossi interviewed on March 2, reported in coldfusionnow:

    ““The robotized line is already under construction. The factory will be in the United States of America, the E-Cat will be a Made In The USA product, both in the industrial and the domestic version.”

    The Florida Radiation Board inspector doesn’t mention Rossi telling him that, which might have been of interest to him. “Already under construction.”

    Of course as suggested repeatedly in this blog, he might have been lying to the inspector, but I beg leave to contradict that. Does he want another period of imprisonment? He has been lying to the public.

    • brucefast Says:

      “he might have been lying to the inspector”
      Or maybe in the inspector’s eyes a factory under construction is not a factory — yet. Maybe the inspector has a Rossi bias? Maybe the state of Florida has a Rossi bias, and doesn’t want to destroy a new employer with irrelevant regulation.

      Truth is stretched? Yes. Truth is broken? How far must truth be stretched before truth is broken? And more importantly, who stretched the truth, was it stretched by Rossi or by the inspector, or maybe by the inspector’s superiors?

      You are great at wagging an accusing finger. You are great at interpreting all data in the most negative of way.

      • Craig Binns Says:

        Then the inspector has submitted a false report to favour a potential employer, by pretending he’s not going to be an employer. Truth is stretched and pigs fly. This is quite ridiculous special pleading, and displays the catastrophic effects of disproof of a deeply held belief. Is there any nonsense believers will not utter to avoid admitting the horrid truth?

        As I have stated before, I remember the effect on the thinking of supporters of the Soviet Union when Krushchev revealed some of the truth about Stalin. For a while, the same nonsense. Surely the report is an imperialist provocation etc etc …

      • brucefast Says:

        “This … displays the catastrophic effects of disproof of a deeply held belief.”
        Or this displays the catastrophic effects of disproof of your deeply held belief.

        What you must understand is that my belief structure does not need Rossi. If so, then my beliefs re Rossi are not that deeply held.

      • Roger Bird Says:

        “You [Craig Binns] are great at interpreting all data in the most negative of way.”

        This is why I say that Craig Binns and most all patho-skeptics have serious problems with their emotions or psychology or whatever else you want to call inner problems. The evidence calls for being agnostic about the whole matter. Craig is utterly convinced that Rossi is a crook. For someone who fancies himself a scientist, I don’t get it.

  17. brucefast Says:

    Hooo! Fresh thought.

    In the coldfusionnow article, it states, “The robotized line is already under construction. The factory will be in the United States of America” (emphasis mine)

    Could it be that there is no factory in the United States? Could it be that the “robotized line” is not being built in the U.S., but that once all of the parts, or the “robotic parts”, are built they will be shipped to the U.S.?

    • psi Says:

      This is an interesting interpretation.

      It makes sense to me that the robotization parts would be manufactured somewhere in Asia, even for a US plant. But regardless of where they are being manufactured, the supposed contradiction between Rossi’s statements about the plant is much like reports of the death of Mark Twain — greatly exaggerated.

      In any case, all this antagonism is just wasted energy. Rossi will deliver or he will not deliver. If the strength of the arguments currently being made against him, with the exception of the argument ad hominem, is any measure, then it would appear that the real skeptics are those who still decline to damn Rossi in advance.

      • Roger Bird Says:

        psi, thank you. You said it so well.

        Mostly all that we write here is an exercise in composition and communication. It will have no affect whatsoever on whether Rossi or Defkalion deliver the goods.

  18. Craig Binns Says:

    As I said, special pleading to avoid the awful truth. Fresh thought? You’ve had a dozen in the last half hour. All contradicting one another.

    Under construction somewhere else, but once constructed to mysteriously appear in the USA? Really? The robotised line is under construction; the factory will be in the USA, says Rossi. What would his readers conclude from that?

    Oh but it’s not Rossi who is to be examined about what he said to the inspector, or previously stated when interviewed. Instead we are to accuse a Florida state official of illegal bias, and submitting false reports to his superiors. No doubt there’s a plot and the whole State government of FL is involved in it. All because they want Rossi to create employment in their state. Improbable, in my view. Weird things happen in Florida but that’s over the top.

  19. Iggy Dalrymple Says:

    FANUC, a Japanese company, is a world leader in robotics.

  20. Simon Derricutt Says:

    I think a major problem here is that people are analysing every word uttered to try to wring the desired meaning out of it.

    Rossi does not speak English that well. He mixes his tenses and mistranslates things. He may think he is saying something different than we think from reading it. And of course he’s none too truthful. Add all this together and it seems better to go on what he does rather than what he says.

    If you have learnt Japanese, and in the park in Japan you see a girl walking her two young dogs, and you say you like her puppies – be prepared for a slap in the face. It’s so easy to get things wrong.

    • Craig Binns Says:

      Another fresh thought. And I mean “fresh”! Japanese girls’ “puppies”. Wow! I think you’ve gone beyond mere special pleading here.

      Have you convinced me of Rossi’s honesty? Alas, no. But your metaphors are striking, and not without a certain attractiveness.

      • Simon Derricutt Says:

        Craig – I get the gender of things wrong in French and German (they are not the same between languages). I also mess up tenses of things and cock up the grammar. Most of the time the people I’m talking to just understand (I think), but I may have to rephrase it. I know how easy it is to mis-state things in a different language than the one you grew up with. You may also notice I did not try to convince you of Rossi’s honesty – few of us here believe that.

        My point was that even if he was intending to tell the truth, he might say something wrong. And then there’s truuuuuuth, as Bruce puts it. And also his misunderstanding of the technology (he’s not a nuclear physicist). And also it seems he wants to tell people what they want to hear. And also there were quite a few things that seem almost certainly to be lies. There are a lot of reasons to not concentrate on what he says, but what he has actually done.

        He has run demonstrations in front of qualified scientists, and Petterson at least is still of the opinion that his device actually works substantially as stated. This at least does not rely on what Rossi has said. It may not convince you, but it does appear to have convinced the people that were actually there.

        There really isn’t any more news at the moment with either Rossi or Defkalion. Both have gone into stealth mode, which actually is a good sign. It can mean that they are about to crash and burn, but the more likely analysis is that they are hunkering down to get production sorted and haven’t the time for publicity – they’ve had enough already.

        We are thus in a time of uncertainty. One or both may be either about to go bust or to really produce something. We don’t know. We can’t tell from what Rossi says, anyway, and there is no point in analysing all his words for nuggets of information.

        There is no deadline to end this uncertain period. If one or both are scams, there’s no deadline except for the money men. If they are getting ready for production, they may have their own deadlines but miss them repeatedly – it’s new technology. I at least will sit happily on the fence until one is for sale – there is no point in getting upset about the delay. You just have to wait it out, and I think that your repeated accusations of scam/lying/swindle are probably not going to convince anyone to come off the fence and join you. I think most of us will judge the machines if and when we can actually buy them.

      • Roger Bird Says:

        Jesus Freaking Christ, Craig Binns!!! What freaking planet are you living on. NO ONE HERE IS TRYING TO CONVINCE YOU OF ROSSI’S HONESTY!!! It is as though we are speaking different languages. Really!

      • psi Says:

        What is your problem?

      • Roger Bird Says:

        psi,

        And what is the problem with brucefast, Iggy, myself, Simon, and the rest of us that we didn’t write such a succinct message to Craig and the other patho-skeptics: “What is your problem!!”

        I sometimes wonder why I even respond to Craig. My best message to him was to suggest that he should get a dog and practice Bhakti Yoga. This would help him to stop being undead.

    • brucefast Says:

      Simon, we are not only dealing with a language barrier, but we are dealing with “summary”. A lot of detail gets lost in a summary.

      • Simon Derricutt Says:

        Yes, Bruce, and it depends on how much knowledge the summariser has, too – may miss important points. In the interview on ColdFusionNow, the interviewer did appear to me to be fairly technically clueless, and just asking the questions from the sheet.

        Based on that interview, though, my estimate of the probability of being able at some point to buy an E-cat (sometime) has gone up a bit.

  21. psi Says:

    A great deal of the false hair splitting might be answered by Mr. Rossi himself. http://coldfusionnow.org/?p=15088

    • Roger Bird Says:

      psi, I confess that he sounded good. But I prefer something other than words. I am not saying that I disbelieve him or that he is a crook or that I am getting impatient. I will say that I have getting impatient with all the talk. I want to see action.

      • psi Says:

        Hey Rog,

        I understand. But given the overwhelming influence of arguments ad hominem in this debate, it is I think worth listening to the guy who all the throwing about of brains is about. People are saying very nasty things about him all over the internet. What is he doing? Well, he says he’s building a factory.

        Is he? We don’t know.

        But I’m not sure what the most vociferous critics think he would have to gain by telling us at this stage that he is when in fact he’s not. I realize there’s a conspiracy theory that licensees are now trying to sell-sub-licenses, and perhaps that would explain Rossi’s keeping up the dodge so as to collect a little more money to spend in jail. But this truly is a conspiracy theory of rather fantastic proportions. If it were true, it would be criminal conspiracy to defraud of unprecedented dimension.

        So, as much as a sympathize with your desire for more concrete evidence, I think patience may be a virtue in this instance.

        By the way, I realize in my above post the recipient of my question was ambiguous, and I apologize for any misunderstanding. It was directed at our local “skeptic,” Mr. Binns.

  22. Gian Mureddu Says:

    Craig Binns, your scathing and savage attacks are appalling!
    Has Andrea Rossi ever ask you or anybody for money?
    When somebody develops something quietly and then informs the public everyone attacks complaining “why didn’t he publish his findings”. When somebody informs the public and still works on his own project never demanding funds, refusing money from investors and using his OWN funds only, he gets called a liar, a scam, and swindler.
    How do you know?
    You told untruths, also hinting to Dick Smith.
    YOU ARE THE LIAR, and a little man.

    Gian Mureddu, Sydney, Australia

    I can supply my full address you coward!!!

    • Roger Bird Says:

      Gian, I doubt if your address will be necessary. Craig is a liar, this part is true. He paints his opposition with colors of “true believers” when in fact that is a Big Fat Lie, and then he attacks them for being true believer. For months, before you got here, he would be directed towards the site listing the replicators, but he would NEVER read that page. All he would do is cast lies against Rossi and anyone who was what I call an enthusiastic or hope optimist.

    • psi Says:

      Gian, I agree, but we she not lose notice of the fact that money has exchanged hands at rather high levels here. At least we are led to believe so by Rossi’s own statements and by the simple logic of the circumstance. At some point in the past Rossi was entirely self-funded, but that is no longer the case.

      Therefore it is not entirely out of the question that deception for financial gain could be at play here. Rossi’s had problems with the law in the past, although the reasons are unclear. It is not impossible that he has fooled some big time investors and this will all end badly.

      We should keep that outcome in mind as a possibility, as much as we might not like it. But notice how different that is than Mr. Binns’ outrageous and disrespectful prejudgments. For the present moment, I prefer to regard Rossi as quite likely in the process of achieving the goals he has set for himself. He seems remarkably composed for someone under such great pressure. He’s dealing with power players who do anything they can do to discredit and destroy him. Either he’s an incredible actor or he’s going to deliver. Time will tell which.

      • Roger Bird Says:

        psi, are you Simon in disguise. Your clarity of thought is scary. Bravo.

      • brucefast Says:

        Psi, I agree with Roger, you are a very welcome addition to this blog.

      • Brad Arnold Says:

        Ditto. There is a battle between those who preconceive scarcity, and those who preconceive abundance from technology. I had a friend ANGRY at me for suggesting a portable LENR generator for people in the bush. OMG, then they would REPRODUCE!! We can never reach hemostats!!!

        If a person’s knee jerk reaction is to deal with scarcity with conservation, then some of those people view abundance from technology as a threat! Go figure. That is just another reason Rossi is like Prometheus – look at how he ended up after helping mankind.

      • Roger Bird Says:

        Brad Arnold, you mind remind your friend that prosperity and education are both good birth control measures, especially education.

    • brucefast Says:

      Roger said, “For months, before you got here, he would be directed towards the site listing the replicators, but he would NEVER read that page.”

      When Craig did finally take a look at the replicators link, he humbly declared that he wasn’t a scientist, so he couldn’t judge their work. He would leave it to the “scientific consensus” (spelled wikipedia) to decide whether they had the goods or not.

      Craig seems qualified to declare with certainty that Rossi is a fraud, but totally unqualified to use the same analytical methods to determine the veracity of the scientists.

      Craig is a crock.

  23. psi Says:

    Sorry, please read “we should not lose notice….” in line one.

    PS — Roger, thanks for the kind words. I have a lot of experience with people like Craig Binns. Combining a judicious analysis of the merits of both sides of a case with a sometimes savage intolerance of blather is my specialty. I’m glad to help keep the conversation on a rational track.

  24. Simon Derricutt Says:

    Psi – also welcome from me.

    Craig is not the most rabid skeptic I’ve read, and has at times put some good points. He does fling around unsubstantiated accusals far too much, and uses the Wiki rather than studying the source material, which make his posts sometimes repetitive. He does tend to seize on any possible negative interpretation of any new announcement. I think he’s disappointed that Rossi has not yet put his machines on sale, and he can’t bear the necessary waiting. He’s not unusual in this. Some time working on a new product release would change his attitudes tremendously – I think he just lacks this experience. I would probably enjoy discussing things with him in a pub. I think he’d be less abusive in person.

    It is difficult to make sense of Rossi. Although a lot of the things he has said and promised would fit the “scam” hypothesis, other things point to him really having the device almost working. We need to know this status in order to plan our future home heating – if it’s not going to be available then we need to plan for something else. Personally I think it is most likely that he will deliver in 2-3 years, but this is more of a hunch than a well-based analysis. There’s not enough hard data to base an analysis on, after all. Much the same applies to Defkalion, though here I feel that they may well get a device into the market a little while before Rossi.

  25. psi Says:

    Simon says: “He does tend to seize on any possible negative interpretation of any new announcement. I think he’s disappointed that Rossi has not yet put his machines on sale, and he can’t bear the necessary waiting. He’s not unusual in this. Some time working on a new product release would change his attitudes tremendously – I think he just lacks this experience. I would probably enjoy discussing things with him in a pub. I think he’d be less abusive in person.”

    I’m sure that you are correct, Simon – somehow internet communications, while wonderful in many way, can also bring out the demon in all of us. Craig, come have a beer with us and let us proceed.

    Cheers,

    psi

    • brucefast Says:

      You guys have a rosy picture of Mr. Binns. He came out from day one as a hard skeptic; “he can’t bear the necessary waiting” hardly seems to apply.

      The thing that truly baffles me about Mr. Binns is his dogged determination to stay with this topic, and his almost phobic avoidance of the evidence found here.

      • Roger Bird Says:

        I have to agree with bruce about Craig Binns. I recall the bit about Craig finally reading the evidence (after months) but then saying that he didn’t have the expertise to judge it, yet he has the expertise to judge Rossi as a crook. Which sounds strange coming from someone who can’t seem understand our viewpoint correctly and seems like most patho-skeptics to be socially retarded.

    • Brad Arnold Says:

      What gets me is that people must be in the top 50% to be literate enough to participate in these threads. Then, they post things like “nuke’em,” or “Rossi is a liar and a fraud.” It is hard to understand why they bother…are they subconsciously trying to deal with the cognitive dissidence of on the one hand the promise LENR offers, and on the other hand their strongly held belief that nothing can ever get better? Hate to be presumptuous and psychoanalyze them – all I know is the better things get, the angrier some people become.

      • Iggy Dalrymple Says:

        Craig is a bureaucrat charged with dispensing subsidized housing at the Glasgow City Hall.

        Craig Binns
        DRS Housing Strategy Team
        229 George Street, Glasgow G1 1QU
        0141-287 8601
        http://gwsf.org.uk/uploads/glasgowhousingissuesreport.pdf

      • Roger Bird Says:

        I notice that one of the last if not the last posting from Craig Binns was saying that brucefast was trying to convince Craig to believe that Rossi was an honest businessman. I jumped on him about that and that was the last that I have heard from him.

        Iggy, how do you know that is the correct Craig Binns, and don’t you think that posting his personal info was a little unethical. I call upon brucefast to delete this thread, at least up to the possible revelation of Craig’s address.

      • brucefast Says:

        Roger, as Craig Binns’ business address is in the public record, I won’t delete it. I will ask that this information not be disrepected. If Craig asks me to delete it I will.

      • Simon Derricutt Says:

        If that really is Craig’s job, then maybe he does have a fair amount of experience with scammers!

      • Roger Bird Says:

        Also, if he is as much of a pain in the arse with people trying to get free housing from the government as he is with us, i.e. demanding prove and such, then he is definitely my kind of government hand-out artist.

      • brucefast Says:

        But when Rossi proves to be the real thing, what’ll it do to Craig’s methods of detecting scammers? Will it be a career crusher? Probably not, probably it’ll make him more human, especially to those with a shady history.

        ‘Reminds me of a friend of mine that was fostering a teenager. When the teenager went off and robbed a bunch of the neighbor’s houses, he got a bit harsh with the kid — staying within what is “legal”. Social services heard of it, found a couple of other instances where he had brushed up against the law, and declared him to be evil. Its amazing how much trouble a wonderful human being can have with the law. And its amazing how judgmental organizations like child protection services can be.

      • Roger Bird Says:

        Please don’t get me started on child protective services or how some people simply are clueless about how rewarding loving and raising a child correctly can be. Both CPS and bad parents can and will go directly to hell. And bad parents make CPS necessary and thus make life more difficult for the rest of us. CPS thinks that it is above the law, “for the children”.

      • Iggy Dalrymple Says:

        “Iggy, how do you know that is the correct Craig Binns, and don’t you think that posting his personal info was a little unethical.”

        It’s not personal info. It’s public info. I said nothing about our Craig Binns being the Glasgow housing bureaucrat. That was your conjecture, although now that you mention it, I think you’re correct, but it is possible that we could be besmirching an innocent bureaucrat.

        How careful is Craig about

    • Roger Bird Says:

      I prefer that Craig buy a puppy than he drink beer. The effect is way better, and although the effect takes longer to manifest, it lasts longer also.

  26. Simon Derricutt Says:

    There seems to be a failure on posting at the moment. I tried replying and the comment just didn’t post.

  27. Simon Derricutt Says:

    Bruce – Craig did say once he would be very pleased if LENR became something he could buy – in effect he’d be glad to be proved wrong. I think he’s avoiding the positive evidence in case he gets his hopes up too much, having seen too many scams in the “free energy” arena.

    Generally on the news, we only hear of scientific advances when they are complete or at least well-proven. Hollywood portrays science as certain, and advances being planned and the schedules kept to. Real science and technology is not like that. There are a lot of failures before success is achieved. Anony talked a while back about “making history”, and if you look back at historical events, the ones people find interesting now must have been pretty difficult to actually live through.

    • brucefast Says:

      Simon,
      This would imply the pessimist’s position: If I declare that it is “not so”, and it proves “not so” I will have been right, so I will have been “not hurt”. If I declare it “not so” but it proves to be so, well, I am not hurt for it being so — if nothing I at least was on the watch when it happened.

      I actually think that Craig’s position is otherwise. I remember as a teen I would proudly declare, “pick a topic, pick a side, I’ll argue the other side”. This is the heart of the Glasgow pub debater, I believe. How can debate happen, after all, unless someone is willing to take the position of opposition.

      In truth, this is why I haven’t expelled Craig from the blog. While he gets under our skin sometimes, he certainly does keep dialog going. That said, some, like the infamous Mary Yugo, are just too harsh, and too voluminous to have in the discussion.

      I have been involved with other boards that are very quick to kick people off. Its frustrating to only hear one side of a discussion, like hearing one side of a phone call. As a thinking man, one who isn’t always a yes man, I usually find myself expelled from such boards even if I generally hold the position of the board.

  28. Simon Derricutt Says:

    So – these are historical times right now. There’s a lot of confusion. We have to wait, and in these days when we can get most things pretty well instantly, we are not used to that. Roger has pointed out several times Craig’s wish for certainty, and that is definitely not forthcoming for a year or two, maybe more.

    Currently there’s no real proof that Rossi is trying to scam people, though he’s not been that truthful. I would hope that Craig and the other “patho-skeptics” take that point and stop accusing him of that until hard evidence emerges. There is circumstantial evidence, yes, but it wouldn’t be admitted in a court if it came to that. Steve Krivit also has what seems to be a personal vendetta against Rossi, so that he ignores any positive evidence and trumpets all the negative evidence he can generate. His latest post “ugo-bardi-andrea-rossi-may-be-a-believer-not-a-scammer” points at a less venal interpretation that could also be possibly true.

    Whatever the outcome, I think we’ll be able to buy an LENR machine (or make our own ones) in a few years, and the current storm in a teacup will be consigned to a footnote of history. The science is real, it’s just the technology that has to mature a bit.

    (Maybe found the problem – too long a link. If this one posts then I’ll know for future use.)

  29. anonymole Says:

    Rossi is an enigma, a mystery, a puzzle. And because of this condition he has become a superb topic for debate. What other topic, aside from religion, has garnered so much controversy, so much vitriol and spiteful argument – among people who are completely unknown to each other? Strangers squaring off and digitally dueling with bloody sabres for no other reason than the belief or doubt in Andrea Rossi and the associated subject of LENR.

    And the continued lack of real news, substantial evidence, just keeps the fires fueled high. This has become a fascinating social experiment.

    And now for my next contribution to the pyre.

    We will assume, for the moment, that Rossi is a man who yearns for acceptance and recognition. He makes broad announcements, creates supporting web sites, plans and executes demonstrations to highly regarded officials, noteworthy scientists, reporters, etc. He appears to be a man who wants to protect and nurture his reputation as an entrepreneur and energy engineer. He attempts to place himself in familiarity with well known names, names like National Instruments, HomeDepot, Seimens, CERN, NASA, the U.S. Navy. He appears to truly desire acknowledgement amongst such names and amongst his colleagues. If we can assume this simple premise then it would seem logical that the path to widespread acceptance and recognition of his discovery would be to allow a thorough, independently verified, isolated test of his device. A test where he is not present and where acceptable, certified authorities and scientists can unequivocally prove that his device is the real deal. This test will undoubtedly have to be performed, eventually, probably hundreds if not thousands of times. Why the delay? Providing the means to prove the discovery now would thrust Rossi into high acclaim and lift his reputation up from the gray mire it seems trapped within. As we’ve, for now, assumed this is important to him, and an accredited test the path to his absolution, then, what’s he waiting for?

    • He doesn’t need the approval of the world to do his work. Perhaps, but the above behavior speaks otherwise.
    • He’s a salt-of-the-earth kind of fellow and doesn’t desire accolades and adoration. Then why all the intentional publicity? A nose to the grind stone kind of guy wouldn’t want such exposure.
    • As a business man such publicity is useful to build awareness. Sure, but easily half of the publicity is negative. Allowing the negative to continue to build and fester will only compound the effort of overcoming the bad press down the road. First law of publicity is to first “get some”, the second law is then to nip the bad in the bud as soon as possible. An independent test would send all the naysayers packing.

    So, the simplest, most straightforward path to sending Rossi on the path to sainthood would be to allow such a test. If he is a man who longs for such distinction then why the mystery? Why the ambiguity?

    • Simon Derricutt Says:

      Anony – the mantra of the PR guys is that “there is no such thing as bad publicity”. Almost right, except maybe for a public hanging.

      • Anony Mole Says:

        Yes, I took that theory into consideration, and believe that it only really works for movie stars, sports stars and other celebrity types. For a product company, a financial company, an engineering company, etc. essentially any company who’s sales and potential profit levels hinge on a solid reputation, bad press is just that – bad. I doubt very much that Goldman Sachs want’s Greg Smith to continue to publicize his opinions… Or that Apple want’s any more suicides at their Foxconn factory publicized. Quick and decisive counter action is the only way to combat bad press.

        When the road to quell such bad press is as easy as allowing an independent test (again, one that will be repeated many times in the future), the reasons to not take that road are incomprehensible.

      • Simon Derricutt Says:

        The most kind explanation is that the devices (Rossi and Defkalion) are good enough to run a very controlled test, but either not good enough to match the published specifications or have meltdown issues if they are not carefully controlled. Since there are ways round both these problems, it’s not a good explanation. I think therefore that there must be some other problems with them both at the moment – possibly a COP around 2-3 if measured properly. Possibly they think that if that were to be proved it would be worse publicity than having people suspect them.

        Since I was going to take Defkalion’s published results and de-fudge the figures (and I think a lot of other people would have done this too) and find out the upper and lower limits of the COP, this could also be a reason for them not publishing the results. Even if they were missing a few useful measurements that would massively decrease the maths problem, there would still have been enough information there to get at the truth.

        So we have to wait and see what happens. I agree, a lot of things in this saga do not make sense.

    • psi Says:

      Anony Mole – Very good analysis and questions. I am at this stage still a “Rossi-defender” and hope to continue being one (http://shake-speares-bible.com/2012/03/15/andrea-rossi-and-charity-or-the-ox-the-cart-and-the-cow/). But such questions are worth a thousand ad hominems from those who are quick to cry “fraud.”

  30. hydroman Says:

    I have to say it is disappointing. All you Rossi defenders are psuedo
    believers! What i mean is this you hate skeptics because what you psuedo believers want is to create a united front that will make investors keep investing. You know the odds are slim that Rossi has a workable device! Yet it does not bother you one tiny bit that someone elses money is spent on this! You wouldn’t invest your own money! But someone elses money okay.
    most of you don’t know an hominem from an adhoc!
    You just don’t care who gets hurt. As long as somebody else invests their money. And all on the very odd chance that Rossi has something which you even don’t believe he has!
    Sick.

    • brucefast Says:

      Hydroman, this blog is quite different from the other ones. For starter, people are challenged with evidence here.

      The consensus on this forum is that LENR, specifically the Nickel + Hydrogen form of it, is a scientifically valid phenomenon. The evidentiary case is made here.

      We are not as sure about Rossi. I believe that the general consensus on Rossi is that he has what he has shown (he didn’t pull a conjurer’s trick). We also wonder what’s going on behind the curtain. There is a lot of belief that Rossi is having technical difficulties, so won’t be coming out with anything any time soon.

      “You just don’t care who gets hurt. As long as somebody else invests their money.”

      This is patently incorrect, at least on my part! When little old ladies are getting hurt, I care. Rossi has not given me any way of investing in his technology. I presume, therefore, that he hasn’t taken money from little old ladies.

      Rossi has taken money from sophisticated investors. These guys have money to risk. Loosing a few million, to them, is no big deal. Further, they understand the balance between risk and reward.

      Rossi is likely to have something. He is likely to be bumping into some roadblocks. An investment in Rossi’s technology might not pan out (risk). However, if it does pan out, it’ll pan out HUGE (reward.) This is a sound risk to take for someone with cash to spare. If I had a few million to spare, I’d want to risk some on Rossi myself.

      It is now time for you to demonstrate that you know “an hominem (sic) from an adhoc! (sic)”.

    • Roger Bird Says:

      hydroman, since you can’t read my mind, you will just have to take our word for what I have in my mind. Otherwise, you would be being unscientific, unless you really do claim to read other people’s minds.

      Given the replications of LENR and the eye witness testimony of hardcore scientists of Rossi’s demonstrations and the fact that Rossi worked with Focardi for years and some other data, I believe that there is a very good chance that Rossi has LENR-on-steroids. And given Rossi’s behavior lately, there is also a very good chance that he is having trouble controlling and sustaining the reactions.

      I assume that other LENR enthusiasts here, like brucefast, Iggy, et. al., have roughly the same mindset about Rossi as I do. Your appraisal of our attitude may probably be based upon your conviction that it is all complete nonsense. Since you are new here, I doubt if you have looked at the evidence that brucefast has been kind enough to present: http://nickelpower.org/2011/12/30/replicators-as-if-december-30-2011/

    • Brad Arnold Says:

      First, by using the pseudo name “hydro man” I wonder if you are legitimate, or just a paid shill for your industry. Second, given the evidence you are on very thin ice logically, and it makes me think you are prejudiced against Rossi or LENR.

      In the ebook “Secrets of E-Cat,” (Consulente Energia Publisher, 145 pages, 68 illustrations, Pdf format, 7 €, http://www.consulente-energia.com/cold-fusion-book-secrets-e-cat-by-mario-menichella-secret-ecat-andrea-rossi-focardi-energy-catalyzer.html ) author Mario Menichella says:

      “The probably better experimental work…carried out in Siena since the early Nineties, by a group of physicists composed by Sergio Focardi (University of Bologna), Francesco Piantelli (University of Siena), Roberto Habel (University of Cagliari), but it did not lead to a system capable of generating useful amount of excess energy for normal industrial or domestic applications. In Siena, in fact, the three scientists – using hydrogen and nickel as the two only “ingredients” of the reaction, plus an appropriate amount of heat supplied to the system – managed to get out a double thermal energy than the electrical energy provided in input.”

      All Rossi is saying he has improved the efficiency of the LENR reaction by about triple – not such an incredible claim given the time money and energy he has devoted, plus the public and semi-private demonstrations he has done.

  31. hydroman Says:

    A psuedo believers logic – I got a battery from Rossi when i put it into my flashlight it didnt work so i tried it on three other flashlights it didnt work when i put fresh batteries into my flashlights they worked! When i questioned Rossi he said they were good so i threw out my fresh working batteries and now am happy that someday my flashlight will work!
    You know he has to lie to protect the secret of his non working batteries!
    And what is a lie anyway? How do we define truth?
    Soon he will release a 45 MW battery!
    Made in a Robot Factory that is in Florida but isn’t!
    He has again cleverly lied to protect the secret of his secret location!

    • Simon Derricutt Says:

      Hydroman – if you threw away working batteries because there’s a promise that someday the non-working ones will work, then you would be a fool.

      Bruce and Roger have in my opinion pretty well summed up the consensus opinion here, so I won’t repeat them.

      Did you ever buy some of the first products from Alan Sugar (Amstrad), or Clive Sinclair, or Richard Branson (all subsequently knighted)? If you were lucky you got something that worked properly from Amstrad, Sinclair’s machines failed pretty often, and Branson’s first business landed him in jail. New technology is subject to delays and failures – remember Apollo 13?

      You’ll have to wait to buy a Rossi machine. If no little old ladies get ripped off, and some venture capitalists have to wait a long time for their payback, what difference does that make to you personally, except that you won’t be able to save money on your power bill as early as you’d hoped?

      Calling Rossi a liar will not change anything. If you want to do something useful instead, learn about LENR, get Piantelli’s patents from lenr-canr.org, and build your own machine.

    • Brad Arnold Says:

      Hydroman, that second posting reinforces my belief that you are a fraud, and have a hidden agenda. Ironic that you would accuse Rossi of lying, when you are obviously one. Nobody, given the quality of the reponses to your first posting could be so dense.

  32. hydroman Says:

    I am a fraud? Did you mean Frog? How could i be a fraud?
    I am fraudulent? Or flatulent?
    You sir or being dishonest! You don’t believe Rossi’s has anything!
    You are a psuedo believer.
    You want someone to invest in Rossi anyone except you.
    You do not care a whit who gets hurt or who’s money gets spent.
    All you care about is the odd 1 in a million chance that this works!
    Dense from you?
    Thats a laugh!
    Mr Arnold you embody the concept of “omnicredulism”
    Omni Credulous!
    Sorry you do not fool me.
    You do not believe that Rossi has anything.
    All you do is make silly arguments in his defence.
    For the purpose of getting “other” people to invest “their” money
    NOT yours!
    You are arrogant and immoral.

    • Roger Bird Says:

      hydroman, you are such a poor scientist. You believe in ESP, and even worse, you believe that you have ESP. I give Rossi an 850,000 to 1,000,000 chance of having LENR-on-steroids, not your ESP reading of our thoughts of 1 to 1,000,000. And all of the rest of your post is also based upon your amazing ESP powers, which unfortunately are silly beyond belief.

      I also give Rossi an 85% chance that he ***cannot*** control the reaction properly for commercial purposes, yet.

      You should change your name to espman.

      • Brad Arnold Says:

        Mr Bird,

        Actually, I think hydroman has revealed an agenda: he is trying to discredit Rossi so people won’t invest in his business (not that I am soliciting for that). There maybe a significant chance that hydroman is being paid to try and discourage investment in Rossi. This is a breakthrough. I spoke with Krivit personally, and didn’t get the impression he had the same motive, but I could tell he was holding something back (I figured then it was his smug superiority that he “knew” Rossi was a fraud, but now I wonder).

        Could it be there are paid agitators trying to discredit Rossi for the purpose of denying him start up capital?? Wow.

      • Roger Bird Says:

        Dear Mr. Arnold, You may be right, but I guarantee that if espman (hydroman) et. al. are being paid, they are recruited from amongst the patho-skeptics. Believe it or not, constant, little, detailed lies are hard to keep up. One big fat lie is not so hard.

        And frankly speaking, hydroman is so lame compared with Craig Binns. I don’t think that Craig was paid, but he was a patho-skeptic, and he was constantly coming up with good points. But near the end of his stay with us, he seemed to go off the deep end, like accusing brucefast of trying to get people to invest in Rossi.

    • Brad Arnold Says:

      Interesting reponse hydroman – I’d say you are dissembling and joking because I am correct in my evaluation of your sincerity. That’s right, the best defense is a good offense (i.e. “you do not believe Rossi has anything”), although preposterious. People have been giving you very credible reponses and all you can do is accuse me of trying to get people to invest in Rossi’s business?? Wow, you are a piece of work man.

  33. hydroman Says:

    I think simon derricutt has summed it up.

    “If no little old ladies get ripped off, and some venture capitalists have to wait a long time for their payback, what difference does that make to you personally, except that you won’t be able to save money on your power bill as early as you’d hoped? ”

    How much more arrogant do you want?

    “The truth be damned!” |

    Americans are often misinformed, occasionally downright dumb, and easily misled by juicy-sounding rumors. But while the right wing is taking full advantage of this reality, the Left worries that calling out lies is “rude.”

    Remember when Congressman Joe Wilson stood up during Obama’s State of the Union address and shouted “You lie”? He was chastised soundly by the pundit class. But mostly he drew heat for being impolite, and was compared to Kanye West and other famous interrupters.

    Revisiting Wilson’s foolish tirade underscores the state of our upside-down political world. Wilson shouted “you lie” in the face of truth, but President Obama is hesitant to speak up when he’s being slandered with bald, glaring untruths. The dark irony will continue as the Republicans take over the House this winter and the rumors and insinuations from extremist right-wing pundits keep circulating. It feels like no one with a loud enough megaphone has the courage to call a spade a spade, or more accurately a lie a lie.

    • Roger Bird Says:

      espman, the tone of your post is proof positive that you don’t care about other people. So get off your high-horse. Patho-skeptics not only can’t read other people, but they don’t care about other people. And you, sir, are a patho-skeptic. I’ll bet dollars to donuts that you have not even read http://nickelpower.org/2011/12/30/replicators-as-if-december-30-2011/ . Until you do read the entire section, then you are just a patho-skeptic; not a scientist, not a caring person, but a patho-skeptic, and a fabricator of other people attitudes and thoughts. You live in a fantasy of your own making so that you can feel morally superior and have people that you can hate.

    • Brad Arnold Says:

      More foolish retoric from a sophist. Your motive is to discourage people from investing in Rossi’s business. I suppose you’ll come back under another name now and continue your mission. Some people will do anything for money. You can easily show us your sincerity by posting under your real and verifyable identity.

    • Simon Derricutt Says:

      OK, Hydroman, I’ll try to give you another summing-up.

      We are pretty certain that a lot of what Rossi says is not the truth.
      We are pretty certain that he has something that works.
      We are pretty certain he’ll put something on the market in a couple of years or so.
      We are more certain that Defkalion will put something into the market this year, but only in Europe and not in the States.
      We are more certain that Defkalion has something that works as advertised.
      We are certain that LENR is a real phenomenon in Physics, and can be reproduced.
      We are certain that LENR has been demonstrated by NASA, SPAWAR, Mitsubishi,and many other scientists around the world.
      We are certain that anyone who invests in new technologies ought to know that they are taking a risk with their money, and we hope that people who who don’t know the risks don’t so invest – but we have no control and people are free to invest their money where they want. As far as we know Rossi has not asked the general public (little old ladies) for money, so we have to assume that the people backing him know the risks and the rewards. Defkalion have stated that they have used their own money so far, and no-one has come forward to disprove this statement.

      I don’t understand your rant on politics. What relevance does this have? In my opinion, Rossi is telling lies in order to protect his invention, since once this secret is out then a lot of people will see how simple the core idea is. Look up the method Marconi used to patent his radio transmitter/receiver, which also relied upon keeping things secret until after the patent was granted.

      Do some reading of the physics – you’ll find lots of evidence on lenr-canr.org. Get your facts straight, and argue from knowledge not unbased opinion.

      • alaincoe Says:

        +1
        none of your assumption, statement, opinion, seems unreasonable.
        note also that it is normal for normal people not to be informed of all, because we are not partners.
        if academics try to publish, business try to market first then advertise.
        also absence of data, mean nothing most of the time, not even negative. Last Woomera information seems reasonable, look true, but add no credibility nor truth to various claims. Sterling Allan message have more credibility since he is well known.

        same for Rossi. What says Rossi have, after experience, no good or bad value. between mistakes, hopeful lies, red herring lies, paranoia, hopes, you cannot trust his words…

        but what he said is feasible… many critics about his factory are symptom of incompetence and cliché… his pretended actions seems feasible and rational, especially since 2012… but feasible does not mean true. And also he is the kind to change his mind at each full moon.

        For DGT I am more affirmative since they proved they master better the engineering than the communication, acted rationally in the hypothesis they want a quick ending of doubt, and does not seems competent in key scam competences (communication, community management, web site, video, investments, delaying, red herring, claims). On the opposite, Rossi have some good point in scam competences, but not all.

        beside that LENR technology is proved, point. doubt is only on business actors around LENR.
        I am much more doubtful on outsiders, like Brilliouin, nichenergy, who seems either far behind, or just looking for budget…

  34. Ivan Says:

    Rossi is a fraud, Probably H/Ni reactions are true as piantelly claims, Rossi just invented in his maind a catalizer and pose to do what he is good for, lie, steal, fraud, manipulate. If I have a device has rosi says I will think in a absolute certain experiment and you do not have to do megawatts, a full test with water sending a fix volume and collecting the same full volume should be enougth there is no need to produce steam (actually is better for the test no to produce steam) so you have a know volume of water and the change of temperatures. then the calculations are simple and the prove clear.
    But Rossi wants to complicate thing and confuse every thing with a megawatt test that ended in ~1/2megawatt that was the power rated in the diesel generator. it smells to bullshit to me.
    Thanks

    • Roger Bird Says:

      Smelling like bullshit and proving bullshit to a scientific certainty are two very different things. We should wait for more certainty before we start calling people crooks. After all, what do we have to lose being patient and prudent and considerate?

    • Brad Arnold Says:

      “Probably H/Ni reactions are true…” This just goes to show how moronic what you say is. There is no ‘probably true’ about LENR Ni-H exothermic reactions (unless you think it is ‘probably true’ that the Earth is round):

      This phenomenon (LENR) has been confirmed in hundreds of published scientific papers: http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/RothwellJtallyofcol.pdf

      “Over 2 decades with over 100 experiments worldwide indicate LENR is real, much greater than chemical…” –Dennis M. Bushnell, Chief Scientist, NASA Langley Research Center

      • alaincoe Says:

        and last celani conference at CERN is clear, that
        it is not fraud, not error, not chemical, not negligible…
        His decision graph are very good.
        And we had the data since 89 at NASA GRC…

        so either it is real and nuclear, or real and “something new, powerful, and never seen before”…
        I’m a bit conservative, and LENR (especially WL) is a good candidate (occam razor), even if I’ll accept something new if LENR and QM is disproved… not yet the case.

      • Roger Bird Says:

        Brad, that was rude. Ivan obviously hasn’t seen or read all of the published reports that we have. Let us not make the same mistakes that scientists so often do, equating honest ignorance with “moronic”, which has a very ugly spin to it.

      • Brad Arnold Says:

        Roger Bird says: “Brad, that was rude.”

        Mr Bird, Ivan was rendering a very critical judgment based upon ignorance. Furthermore, the only way he could render such a judgment fairly is to be at least a little learned in the subject.

        I suggest you turn your guns on Ivan, instead of mischaractorizing my characterization of Ivan’s statement as equating “honest ignorance” as moronic. It was moronic for being slanderously presumptuous, and calling a spade a spade is exactly what was called for in my opinion.

        Whereas your characterization of my characterization as “rude” is obtuse since it appears that you are ignoring the meanspirited libelous nature of Ivan’s post, and are white washing it as “honest ignorance.”

      • Roger Bird Says:

        Brad Arnold, yes, Ivan was basing his judgement on ignorance. So are 7.1 billion other people. In fact, we are all way more ignorant than knowledgeable about the universe. As finite beings, ignorance is what we are best at, epistemological speaking. The first step towards real knowing is knowing that we are mostly ignorant. The universe is infinite and my knowledge is at best like 1 divided by infinity, which equals zero.

        Your comment was laced with venom, which I felt was unnecessary and cruel.

      • Roger Bird Says:

        To continue, Ivan, I presume, is unlike Craig, who deliberately avoiding reading the replicator pages. Now, that is moronic. That is being deliberately stupid. But Ivan is new here, and there is a good possibility that he did not read the replicator pages. I didn’t for at least a month since I got here.

      • Brad Arnold Says:

        Mr Bird said: “Ivan was basing his judgement on ignorance. So are 7.1 billion other people. In fact, we are all way more ignorant than knowledgeable about the universe.”

        So, are all those people posting on a thread about LENR, and taking a hostile slanderous attitude toward a great man, a pioneer in LENR? I certainly don’t fault Ivan for being skeptical of Rossi, what I object to is trashing Rossi when not knowing the most fundamental thing about LENR (that it is an established scientific principle). Even now he is only “inclined” to believe in LENR. Duh.

        So you excuse Ivan and hammer me, huh? Talk about false equivalence.

      • Roger Bird Says:

        I correct you for doing a malicious post at Ivan. This is what people did with Fleishmann and Pons, Elizabeth Kinney, the Wright Brothers, Galileo, Alfred Wegener, etc. etc. etc. These people were all right. Ivan is probably wrong. But the hurtful nature of your post is what I object to, not whether you are right or wrong or whether Ivan was right or wrong. Considering how wrong we all are about the universe, we should all be in a state of condemnation because of our overwhelming ignorance. If Ivan had deliberately avoided looking at the evidence, then I would also be giving him a hard time. At one time I was just like Ivan. Then I saw the Mike McKubre videos; so I should suddenly no longer be condemned because I had the correct attitude about LENR?

        Aside from the moral issues, we will have a huge uphill battle convincing people that LENR-on-steroids is for real, even when we get independent confirmation. If we start condemning people now who don’t fully grasp what is happening, we will be doing a lot a condemning and not doing a lot of convincing. People are funny about closing their ears when they feel condemned.

  35. Ivan Says:

    Thanks for your comments, actually I have e-read some reports and for that I am inclined to belive LENR is real. but I have no access to labs or able to test on my own so at the present is just a leap of faith. and my faith increases as I see this University people reporting positive results, my mind does not undestand why the goverments or rest of comunity does not embraze the research if LENR has been proved beyond doubt.
    Politics, economic interest, etc. this just shows how biased Humans are.
    About Rossi, I am not able to undestand why he opposes to a clean and strait test, I belive Rossi is a fraud and will cause enormous damage to the LENR Research. a good test should keep the good principle : “Keep it simple stupid”.

    • Brad Arnold Says:

      Just “inclined,” huh? So you don’t altogether believe that LENR is “real,” but you believe Rossi is a fraud? OK…I guess KISS is a good motto for that kind of belief system.

      • brucefast Says:

        Brad, I think Roger is right here. I think that Ivan is learning and growing. Further, it is really hard to find anyone who is terribly confident that Rossi is the real deal. He does a lot of fraud-like stuff.

        As far as LENR being real, well, it takes some hours of studying the data to really tell how well established it is. Give the man a break.

    • Simon Derricutt Says:

      Ivan – I think nothing in science is proved beyond doubt. Most proofs in any case are to six-sigma level, as you will find in the LHC’s search for the Higgs boson. So it’s not a proof, but overwhelmingly likely. Quality-control in industry also works to that six-sigma level (at least the good manufacturers do) and so you rarely get an electronics device (say a new phone) that doesn’t work straight from the box. You do occasionally get one bad one, though.

      Despite the repression of research in the last two decades, some scientists did continue and produced valid results, and the summing up of the experiments that didn’t work and those that did mean that some scientists now can pretty well guarantee that if they build a new machine, it will work. Not to the extent of Rossi’s and Defkalion’s claims, but nevertheless it will give out more energy than you put in, and transmutation occurs.

      As to why governments have been ignoring this (at least in public) you should read the text that Iggy pointed to at
      http://www.scribd.com/doc/59043870/The-Suppression-of-Inconvenient-Facts-in-Physics
      for a good analysis.

      I feel that Rossi and Defkalion still have some technical issues to sort out before their systems will stand up to a rigorous test. I think that Rossi has problems with starting the reaction (and stopping it reliably), and that both have a problem with making a consistent fuel that will work every time. As far as I can see, no-one yet knows all the parameters that go into a reliable system.

      In this arena you’ll find a lot of lies and half-truths among the statements from various people who are trying to make money from it – there’s a lot of money in it once the sales start. The scientists at SPAWAR, on the other hand, have severe consequences if they are found to be lying about their results, so you can pretty well believe them. Mitsubishi have also been involved – they have a great need for safe nuclear power in Japan, and they have the same standard of honour in their results. These at least are both good science and good results. Bruce’s A-list of replicators is also a good point to start. If you only look at Rossi, you will almost certainly get the impression that it’s a scam, and that is just not true.

  36. Ivan Says:

    The physics phenomena is proven beyon doubt, if you release an apple it fells to the ground, if you move a magnent in front of a electric wire electrons flow. if you put nickel and hydrogen at pressure and give is a kick of heat, more heat will be produced. we just need to prove the basic principle. The explanation will came later this is for the theorists, chemists and physics doctors phd’s etc. For us “normal humans” we just need a phenomena that works and from which we could get some benefit. for the scientific.
    comunity there is nobel prices, fame and regconition etc.
    Once the prime principle is proven a revolution will came, the collective human mental power will create the miracle.
    And … the fanatics they will always belive in any thing proven or not. and do not think because you belive I have to belive. and if I do not belive then I am a moron. this is the signature of fanatisim.
    Rossi behavior has the signature of a fraud, a one man band that has promises and then say secret customer has secretly aproved the test. and when NASA says lets do a simple test, no steam just lets heat water Rossi denies the test, so if the device works and NASA test and aproves Rossi will be instantly the richest men on earth, but he does not want to test…. Why? is something fishy about the e-cat. (I have seen enougth support in the LENR field to make me belive it is real). I wish Rossi is rigth but after reading his blog, and seen the test, It smell like a fraud. why does he do not like independent tests. there is confidentially agrements, and the cloncusive test still able to be done as a black box. no one sees the interior of a hot water heater tank but every time you connect it works, and cost you a bundle of dollars in electricity.
    This is exactly how I will prove it. connect the ecat to a 100 liter unconected to electricity hot water tank (water must be initially cold and volume mesured prior filling tank). recirculate the water with a pump from tank to ecat and back to tank, after some time calculate energy in and change of energy in water, you just have to mesure kw/h used by ecat, temperature in water inital and final and do some simple calcutation. there is no change in volume is a closed system is a conclusive test. even better if you have another ecat connected the same to another tank but without hydrogen this will be the control of the test because will only have the heat produced by electricity spent in the interior of the ecat.
    if you do not want do any calculation them you need another tank fully connect to electriciy and heat the water using its own element.
    then stop when you reach certain temperature. mesure kw/h.input.
    do the same with working ecat. stop the test when temperature in water equal to fully electric powered tank. mesure kw/h input. compare. and make conclusions.
    Kind Regards.
    Ivan.

    • Brad Arnold Says:

      Yeah, Rossi strikes a lot of people as a fraud. Of course they ignore his history: http://ecatfusion.com/e-cat/andrea-rossi-biography-the-e-cat-fusor-story

      Sorry, but convoluted frauds involving lots of parties is the least likely. So are 3 groups of science observers too stupid to recognize an obvious fraud. Also, there are enough other NiH results which suggest a LENR reaction.

      As his claim that he is getting heat from Ni + H is no longer extraordinary, Rossi’s claim is much less extraordinary. He is now only claiming that he has optimized a phenomenon that is known to science.

    • Roger Bird Says:

      Let us say that a genuine fraudster discovered something of real value. Would not that genuine fraudster try to market his device? I am committed to absolute honesty; but if I feel like going to Subway and I don’t want to get in trouble with my wife, I simply don’t tell her. Of course, should she suspect and ask me, then I am sunk. So I always make sure and hide the evidence deep in the trash. Even I have a little larceny in my soul. People of normal honesty, when presented with business challenges are bound to cut corners on the truth. This is why Rossi’s behavior does not lead me to believe that he is a pure fraudster. He worked so hard for 3 or 4 years with Focardi, it just doesn’t seem like he is a fraudster. And some of his demos were quite impressive (some not so impressive.)

      Roger

  37. Ivan Says:

    Brad and Roger, are you actually testing LENR or are e-desk (Google,youtube) scientists like me?

    • Roger Bird Says:

      Ivan, I am an e-desk guy just like you. (:->)

      I await further real news.

    • Brad Arnold Says:

      Of the two choices I am a “e-desk scientist.” Although, I seem to evaluate information with both my left and right brain, so get different results than a normal aficionado. For instance, when evaluating Rossi’s legitimacy you ought to also take into consideration the big picture of his behavior, associates, list of public and semi-public demonstrations, public statements and interviews, demeanor, and business plan. Instead, people tend to only use their left brain, and that means only taking into consideration certain information (i.e. Problem solves by logically and sequentially looking at the parts of things, prefers established, certain information).

      • alaincoe Says:

        Not sure I understand all your reasoning, but I think I agree.

        a big mistake of the pseudo-rational reductionist methodology , the methodology that human “serial brains” loves, is to look at few evidence and decide. To clean the fuzzy network of evidences around mostly behavioral and indirect. And worst of all you put the charge of proof on one side (judiciary system train us to do that), the null hypothesis (many consensus fraud in science is linked to reversing the null hypothesis, or simply using it).

        the parallel brain (the said “intuitive”, but simply parallel data integrating in fact) loves another method. It loves to look at all data, and try to feel a big schema of what is happening. evidences are not weighted so differently. It can make mistake, but different. It can be fooled by data incest (pretended independent data that came from same sources, thus adding no more value)., it can be fooled by organized buzz that introduce low quality data in the evidence pool.

        for me I have tools that can make a methodology.
        first every proposal should be treated as an hypothesis, with details. You should test your hypothesis, and note the one that are impossible, improbable, and compare them… No null hypothesis. Good theories can defend themselves without an advantage.
        as said Sherlock Holmes in the book, when you remove the impossible, stay , even improbable, the truth.
        however it is not so simple because the theory that you have tested might not cover all the possibilities.
        another tool is coherence in behavior. not so simple, because psychology is not hard science, and most of the population have very bad cliché about psychology, especially young people and powerful people… old losers, have experienced bad story because of misunderstanding others, so they often are better in psychology.
        It can positively give support to one theory, as being “not sure but very coherent”.

        then you have the “theory coverage”. in fact you should partition the possibilities with the most general theories, for which you have good answers, especially negatives…

        if there are holes, you know you have to propose new theories, and either eliminate or support them.

        From that theories, i get convinced that defkalion have a working devise and is sincerely confident in it…
        And this imply that Rossi is on something sincerely.
        Manipulation and fraud are not excluded for some demo, but it is not a big upfront scam.
        Theory of him having stability problems is coherent with DGT messages and engineering knowledge.

        behavior of finance, big corp and governments, is only coherent with self-delusion at top level, and conscious or unconscious fear of being punished for the communication vectors to that layer. Top lever seems sincere (otherwise they would take insider trade position).
        This argument could also mean that middle layer is also under the same delusion, otherwise they would take or try a similar insider trade, or market manipulation.

        Funny to image all a society in the same delusion.
        http://www.lenrforum.eu/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=40
        A good point for Roland Benabou theory.

      • Roger Bird Says:

        Brad Arnold, I am with you on the left-right brain deal. We ought to use our whole brain, it seems to me, intuitively speaking, of course.

        I did notice Rossi’s demeanor. I am no expert on acting or on con artistry, but I was impressed that he seemed to take it for granted when he was demo-ing the e-cat. I didn’t see how anyone could fake taking their incredibly important discovery for granted unless they had been having success with their discovery for years.

      • Simon Derricutt Says:

        Alain – in your post on the lenr-forum you pointed to the DeNinno experiment from 2002, which confirmed P+F. This appears to be a very well-run experiment – thankyou for pointing it out. They also noted a burn-out of one of their experiments, and the explanation seems true, that above the threshold loading level the probability of a reaction rises rapidly. This would also point to stability problems with Rossi and Defkalion – one more reason to run Iggy’s fluidised bed system to make a reliable reactor.

        Like you, I think that both of them have seen the reaction running and so believe in it themselves, and I think that both believe that they will solve that control problem shortly. I think it will take them longer than they expect, since they do not actually know what the problem is (no-one else does, either).

        I used to be a Failure Analyst in electronics. This is forensics – I had a failure of something and had to find the cause in order to stop it happening. An early report concerned driver transistors protected by a small overcurrent protection circuit. I proved that the protection circuit was in fact the problem, and that removing it would stop the failures. It took over 2 years before that change (removing one resistor) was accepted by the designers of the circuit and we stopped seeing those failures. My maths was good, the physics was good, and yet people would not accept that removal of the protection circuit was a good idea. It went against their principles.
        The same is happening with LENR. People “know” how things ought to work, and LENR goes against that. Like my problem with that protection circuit, it’s going to take time and a lot of hassling to get people to accept the truth. In my case, I had Manufacturing behind me once I’d got the reputation for being right on such things. For LENR, on the other hand, the people who say it works (and can prove it) are by definition not of good reputation – and no-one with money is fighting that corner yet.

        In order to get LENR accepted, we need to have an open-source way of doing it that works and produces a reasonable amount of power in the hundreds of watts if not kilowatts. I am not an e-desk scientist, though I do find the computer extremely useful in research. I’m testing things, so if it works I’ll know it’s an engineering solution and that anyone else can build one the same. There’s probably no way to get it manufactured or patented, so this will be open-sourced (if it works). When enough back-shed engineers have also made one, then it won’t be deniable. On Vortex you’ll also find people playing with hardware, and I would expect at least one of them will get a working device this year. They have a lot of good ideas.

      • Brad Arnold Says:

        A large part of the population simply thinks in black/white. Either something is true or it is false. Instead, via Schrödinger’s cat, things ought to be viewed as a probability instead.

        As far as getting consensus reality to accept LENR, it is already a scientifically proven phenomena, but why bother going further because as Rossi said at his first news conference/public demonstration: the time for words is over.

        Only successful commercialization and consequencial proven money making business plan will drive majority acceptance with the flood of R&D money it will bring. Simon, your example was normal: bureocratic inertia combined with ossified group think prevent most innovation. And Roger, most people get confused by the trees, so ignore the forest that their right brain is telling them is there. And Alain, you are right that there are many logical pitfalls that blind people asto what is probably real.

        Solution: monkey see, monkey do. Successful commercialization will lead to majority acceptance.

      • alaincoe Says:

        @Simon Derricutt
        about stability, I am more confident than you, after reading Defkalion explanation on their control system, and some discussion on vortex.

        first an unstable reaction could be stabilized by a cooling fluid near the reaction temperature, that quickly remove heat excess. it is hard if there is a delay, thus a solution is to stabilize the reaction for a very short term, where the thermal inertia is so big, and distance so short, that fluid is nearly locally isotherm. it leads to DGT pulse solution…

        With the new consortium help, Rossi might have found this easy solution too.

        otherwise some chemical/physical tricks (phase change? hydride phase change? high pressure solidX-solidY or liquidX/liquidY phase change…) might do the local feedback that is needed when it is getting too hot.

      • Simon Derricutt Says:

        Alain – I hope you are right. I have more confidence in Defkalion solving their problems first, since they have a group of engineers who hopefully get on together and talk about things. Rossi is on his own, it seems, so if he gets stuck in one idea there’s no-one to pull him out of it. It is easy to get stuck on a difficult problem, and explaining it to someone else is a useful way of seeing things differently and thus either getting new ideas yourself or getting someone else’s.

        The main problem I see is that the powder is not a good conductor of heat, so a local hotspot can trigger local extra reactions and form a small-scale chain reaction. It needs a nice trick to stop this.

      • brucefast Says:

        Brad Arnold, “A large part of the population simply thinks in black/white. Either something is true or it is false. Instead, via Schrödinger’s cat, things ought to be viewed as a probability instead.”

        Yes, Brad, Yes!

      • Roger Bird Says:

        So, what is the probability that the following are true, from my viewpoint:

        LENR — 98%
        LENR-on-steroids — 95%
        Rossi can control — 45%
        Defkalion can control — 70%
        Brillouin can control — 85%
        Bigfoot is a real, physical animal — 25%
        Bigfoot is some kind of dimensional shift thingie — 90%
        UFOs are little green physical men who traveled from distant stars — 2%
        UFOs are some kind of weird dimensional shift — 90%
        Alien abductions are real, physical abductions — .002%
        Alien abductions are astral or other transcendental experience — 99%
        Alien abductions are hallucinations — .2%
        Barack Obama is a political science retard — 110%

      • Roger Bird Says:

        I am wondering if I can use HTML on this blog to do paragraphs and other style goodies.

        This is a new paragraph

  38. Ivan Cevallos Says:

    I agree Defkalion seem to have a more logical approach, Rossi and Defkalion and others who want to profit of this technologies needs to understand that a Simple and clear test are needed otherwise it is a scam, without a clear test investors will be risking money believing the method is mature and is not so the scam is there. A sincere inventor needs to disclose to investors the strength and weaknesses of the invention. otherwise is a scam.

    • Roger Bird Says:

      Ivan, the only real “sincere inventors” have very deep pockets because they work for the government or are independently wealthy. All of the rest of the inventors are also business men or women because they have to be in order to get funding, and business people often lie occasionally. Believe me, I am a much happier person because I practice absolute honesty, but that does not change the fact that many people lie and business people and politicians tend to lie more often than most people simply because of the nature of their occupation. This does not make them evil people. My sister-in-law will lie 99 ways from Sunday in order to avoid confrontation or hurting someone’s feelings, and I think that this is a bad strategy, but that does not make her evil.

  39. Ivan Says:

    How you often occasionally lie, you either often lie or occationally lie, but not both at the same time.
    Your text seems to mean, that to be able to be a succesfull money maker you need to scam. so in this world of scamers we just need to be happy to find the lesser evil.
    In real absolute terms and how the real world is your absolute right. so you finally have agreed that Rossi is a scamer.

    • brucefast Says:

      Ivan, when I was a kid, I would often say, “I don’t think that …”, and my dad would frequently respond, “no, you don’t think.” His and yours is childish word manipulation.

      If Rossi really has a device that outputs many more times the energy he puts in, he is not a scammer in the sense that is discussed on this and other forums.

      Few believe that Rossi is as committed to truth as Roger Bird believes himself to be. In fact, it is about impossible to look at all that Rossi has said and produce a plausible scenario where he was reasonably truthful. However, this site will not shut down and fold up shop because the great Ivan has equated dishonesty with scamming, therefore declaring Rossi a scammer.

  40. Ivan Cevallos Says:

    Rossi main drive is money, then a successful independent, test where energy and mass balance is performed, in a closed system where real measurements are possible, will make Rossi an instant billionaire, as energy is every thing (food, transport, electricity, life, wealth. etc), but He resist an independent black box test!!! why?
    …because such a test will fail. (So he conforms to try to convince some few rich investors with his “tests”)
    I hope I am wrong and the world benefits of a great invention. but the more I look into it the less I trust Rossi.

    • Roger Bird Says:

      We are so lucky to have a mind reader amongst us.

      It is possible that a charitable person can understand how the laws of economics work and will work with the economy rather than working with a wish-and-a-hope. I am not saying that Rossi is a charitable person. He may be, he may not be. I do know that I am not a mind reader and I doubt that anyone else on this forum is a mind reader and there is no way to be certain.

    • brucefast Says:

      Ivan, “then a successful independent, test … will make Rossi an instant billionaire.” How’s that? Billions will be made, but by what mechanism will Rossi get the money? Won’t the Chineese copycats go out, make a very inexpensive system, and sell them by the billions undercutting Rossi?

      Maybe if Rossi is patient, if he develops his assembly line before proving his technology to the world, he’ll have something to sell. If he goes out and provides solid proof now, he’ll have 18 copycatters before he is out the door with a product.

      Your general argument is “he’s not doing it how I am sure is the smartest, therefore he has nothing.” This argument is only valid to you because nobody else realizes how smart you are sure you are.

      • Roger Bird Says:

        I made that mistake myself. I thought that Ivan was the smartest guy in this room, even smarter than Simon. What complete fool I was!!!

        Seriously, we are all very bright, but we are all very bright about different things. And I am not coming from the position that everyone in the world is equally intelligent. I am saying this because of my experience with you guys.

    • Simon Derricutt Says:

      Ivan – if you’ve read some of the other comments here, you should have seen our speculation that, if Rossi and Defkalion did a proper test, then their secret would have a high chance of being revealed. On a business level, they should therefore fix their final problems and get into production while trying to keep their secrets. It’s annoying for all of us that we can’t point at a definitive test and say “there’s proof!”.

      If it was you with this invention, would you let everyone know how it works and thus lose the chance of making money from it? They have both invested a lot of money and time, and they would rather make a profit from this rather than let the copycats make money instead.

      Take notice of what Bruce has written – he’s been in this situation (again, read earlier comments) and knows what he’s talking about. Christmas won’t come any faster just because you’re waiting as hard as you can.

  41. Ivan Says:

    Well …you assuming that an independent test need to reveal all secrets!
    NO.
    An independent test could and must be done as a black box.
    Is ok for Rossi to operate his device, but others should plan the test and make the messurments. and certify Rossi is not doing a hoax.
    And He will be an instant billionarie because goverments and people will queue to buy and licence his technology. He could create the largest franchise bussines in days. Any one who could demo a workable device will be an instant billionare in this e-time, See the trillions invested in the share market, there are lots of people with large amounts of money waiting to invest in the rigth technologie.
    “But no one has came with a overunity workable device.!!!!!!”
    I will put good part of my own money to invest in a workable device, even Dick Smith, (Australian billionarie) offered 1M for a test no even the device, just the test. and was declined.
    If any of you have a workable device raise the hand.
    I belive this will soon change, Piantelli The Father of NI-H reactions are working in the field and there is a convention in Italy as we speak where many brigth minds in the field are changing experiences.

    • brucefast Says:

      Let me see, Rossi goes out and proves that his device works, but he doesn’t reveal how it works. What happens? Oh yea, gazillions of bucks get thrown in the direction of absolutely anyone who thinks he might be able to get a similar LENR device going. What happens then? Oh yea, they get their own system going. It may, and probably will, use different techniques than Rossi’s, so they get around any patent protection in a single bound.

      Hmmm.

      As it sits LENR researchers are still cash starved. Rossi still gets a significant advantage from not proving absolutely that his device works.

    • Simon Derricutt Says:

      Ivan – a test requires that all energy put in and all energy put out is measured. The people doing the measurements have to know what they are measuring, otherwise they cannot meaure it. If you had ever done this sort of thing, you should know that.

      Would you bet your livelihood and all that you own on the chance that everyone involved in the test kept totally silent about what they had seen and understood? Also, any obfuscation of what is being measured would be regarded by skeptics as unacceptable for a valid test, thus you would end up with the same situation of people calling for a more open test.

      Rossi’s best option, as Bruce says, is to keep quiet and get his manufacturing costs pared down to absolute minimum, so that anyone else trying to compete has a stiff task.

  42. Ivan Says:

    …It is an interesting option…but the race is already on! Piantelly proved it with 2 to 3 COP, so now even NASA is involved. so Better Rossi hurry or the mass of grey mass of multitude of researchers will beat him up.

    • brucefast Says:

      Yea know, Ivan, on this you are right. Both Brillouin and Defkalion are pushing to release a product. Last month Defkalion promised that they would release results of their independent testing yet this month.

      I think if another party provides solid proof before Rossi does, he will be hurt. If Rossi doesn’t come out with solid proof within a week of another source doing so, he will be hurt.

      However, there are more possibilities than Rossi’s a straight shooter that has the goods and Rossi is a scammer. It could well be, as has been theorized on this site more than once, that Rossi is having some sort of technical difficulties with an otherwise functioning system. This may result in Rossi not being able to bring out his version on the day that others bring out theirs.

      Alas, I don’t terribly care which company or organization comes out with that solid proof. Once the proof is provided the results will be an energy revolution. (One might think that the month long COP = 10 demonstration at MIT would do it, but that event seems to have gone all but unnoticed.)

      • Iggy Dalrymple Says:

        Proof of the science is important but “proof of the pudding” (an affordable functional retail product) reigns supreme.

    • brucefast Says:

      Oh, “now even NASA is involved” is a bit funny. NASA announced replication of the Pons, Fleischmann experiment back in 1989. They still state this on their website.

  43. Ivan Says:

    Simon, We know what we mesuring, In is going electricity, Power=voltage*current, and if the voltage is a wave you need to time it by a power factor. (this power is mainly spend as heat, some magetic fiel will also be created)
    the output is Heat, and if you have a constant volume of water say in a sealed presurased environment you just need to mesure temperature. the change in temperature to be more acurate.
    The test have to actually make a balance of energy and a balance of mass. when I say a balance of mass, is not acceptable to send the steam to the environment.

    • Simon Derricutt Says:

      Ivan – if the people doing the measurements cannot see what they are measuring, and do not know all the parameters, then they would be fools to put their reputations on the line. The test would not be valid. If they have not seen all the power leads (and checked for power in the earth lead, for example) and physically checked everything themselves, then they would not know all the power coming in. Similarly on the power out – there are ways to sneak in extra power that would not show on the metering (hot water from another pipe, for example, or magnetic induction coils). The people doing the measurements must therefore have complete access to the device under test, and thus would understand how it works. A total ‘black box’ test is thus not possible, no matter who says they can do it.

      If it were me doing the test, I would insist on full access and, if denied full access, I would report that as making the test worthless. I’m certain that any reputable engineer or scientist would do the same, especially given the intense scrutiny that any test is subjected to.

      • alaincoe Says:

        right.
        Even if in theory you could make perfect blackbox testing, in fact there will always be doubts?.

        Also the system to test should be very simple. DGT had a good idea to propose testing the bare reactor. It seems they used the bad experience of rossi to decide that.

        also the testers should be allowed to see the machine. and eve, if not oppened they will have access to tradesecret (like the pulse modulation mode). It is dangerous for the company to let testers see all of that without legal protection.
        A well negociated NDA is mandatory.

        the behavior of Dick Smith about NDA (refusin any NDA) is simply kiddish, and even give doubt on his honesty.

        however the testers shoudl be big enough to negociate a NDA where they can criticize, and even alert of fraud or of bad results. I think it is already the case for DGT independent testers.

        in fact unlike Rossi, it seems that DGT is not afraid to have intelligence agency, through the independent testers, know the secret of his reactor.

        I think that DGT understood that the LENR is so critical that it will be copied like PC, but that you can make cash if you capture the market early, sell quickly, and continue to innovate.
        just don’t hope to be alone on the market, and don’t hope to keep your IP.
        Off course, CIA will (already?) know Hyperion design, and they will tell US corps (US administration is serving the business, and intelligence is mostly economic), but it will let one year to be rich, before US copycat dump the market.

        for China, they will concentrate on their market first, and globally there will be so much work to do quickly that all workers, even well paid, will be profitable.

        Trying to protect the IP might be an error on such an emerging market.

  44. hdraman Says:

    Andrea Rossi
    March 27th, 2012 at 8:13 AM

    Dear Antonella:
    We know perfectly who some puppeteers are: our intelligence system is working together with the Law Firm we have engaged for this issue. We are collecting and analyzing every single phrase the Puppets, Snakes (and Clowns) are publishing in paper press and in Internet. We prefer not to sue puppets and puppeteers ( and Clowns) so far because we will be stronger when our working plants will be public: at that point we will give to the Court all the necessary evidence to win both on criminal and in civilistic fields this battle. For now we are just preparing all the necessary publications, comments, evidence, documents, addresses, etc, etc. I start the battles when I am sure to win. So far they had the sensation that our Group can be libelled for free: it is not so. All the proceeds that we will earn from these trials will be donated to families we have already selected that need money to cure the cancer of their children.
    If you are interested to this issue or have information for us, please contact
    info@leonardocorp1996.com
    Thank you for your kind attention,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  45. Simon Derricutt Says:

    Despite all the talk, we’re still waiting for some believable indications that either Rossi or Defkalion have solved their problems. I think we’re still in that fence-sitting mode of just not knowing whether there will be a product to buy in a few years or not.

    On the positive side, though Celani’s replications seem to be having success, and a rough calculation on energy density corresponds somewhat with Rossi’s statements. The consensus from a while back seemed to be that the front-runners were having problems with control and reliability, and it looks to me that that may still be the case.

    I expect this blog to pick up a bit next year as we’ll suddenly have a lot to talk about.

  46. brucefast Says:

    Sorry Simon, the comment you responded to was a spam. Its a game these guys play to get higher search results from google. You’ve always got to watch out for sweet words that have no context.

  47. Simon Derricutt Says:

    Bruce – it did cause me to re-read some of the stuff we wrote back then, and the conclusions at that time still seem valid now. I’m still working the problem here, and I expect there are a lot of others doing the same, so next year should be interesting. I’m putting more effort into doing stuff than writing at the moment, so I’m not going to be contributing that much for a while.

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


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 64 other followers

%d bloggers like this: