On Stephan Pomp blog, in a post about some theory of trickeries and the usual Rossi bashing, LENr denial,
http://stephanpomp.blogspot.fr…1298#c4439398307938716939
Øystein Lande made a sequence of post that is in fact a big synthesis where he put back the global situation, that skeptics manipulate by criticizing one by one not considering others , or denying without any consideration for facts.
A good job of synthesis that is worths reading
I keep it for the future and for the newcomers.
Quote from Øystein LandeDisplay MoreHello Pomp,
I think this is becoming a little repetitive now. But I think I will comment on the various articles you refer to, and start with Schumacher Part 1 (which I have also placed on the Schumacher site). Other comments will follow when I find the time ;-):
Comments to the Schumacher part 1 article:
A. "….Rossi, the inventor of the e-cat device"
Please be aware of following:
Rossi didn’t really invent something from scratch, but rather developed further upon what was done by Professor Sergio Focardi in the early 1990’s at the University of Bologna. He did nickel-hydrogen reactor experiments, and got Heat out larger than what could be explained by any chemical reactions.
Focardi further published a few papers in the 1990’s on the subject in a scientific Journal (peer-reviewed ;-)… )
- Focardi S, Habel R, Piantelli F (January 1994): "Anomalous Heat Production in Ni-H Systems". Il Nuovo Cimento A, Volume 107 A, Number 1, 163–167
- Focardi S, Gabbani V, Montalbano V, Piantelli F, Veronesi S (November 1998). "Large excess heat production in Ni-H systems". Il Nuovo Cimento A, 111 (11): 1233–1242. OCLC 204819206.
- Neutron emission in Ni-H systems. Il Nuovo Cimento A (1971-1996), Volume 112, Number 9, 921–931.
Authors: Battaglia, Daddi, Focardi, Gabbani, Montalbano, Piantelli, Sona, Veronesi. Retrieved on SpringerLink.
Later Rossi contacted Focardi with some creative ideas to possible increase power levels….
In Professor Focardi’s own words:
"After that, at a certain point ... I was running the risk of dying of a tumor. I was lucky, I found a good doctor who saved my life, and so I retired, I stopped working (as a professor, obviously), but kept on … then I did quit for a while … until Rossi looked me up……. and I could see that he had some innovative ideas; for instance, he immediately thought of using powder. Powder increases the surfaces involved……"
B. "Rossi is a controversial character with a shady history[3,4]. Hence the e-cat always had a credibility problem."
Yes, possibly,BUT there may be more sides to this story:
General Emilio Spaziante has recently pleaded guilty for corruption and has been sentenced to serve 4 years in prison: he is the officer of the Guardia di Finanza that closed Rossi’s Petroldragon and all the other factories twenty years ago. This fact may cast some new light on that strange affair, that finished by Rossi being convicted of tax evasion (which seems triggered by desperate tentative to escape some money from the bankruptcy caused by the pursuits), lack of pollution permit (because a change in the laws, despite clear support of the government before and some media) , but no fraud, despite clear witch hunt in the press, with unsupported accusation.
"one cannot fail to notice the coincidence in historical dates between the war against Andrea Rossi, now a major player in petroleum products thanks to his research and activities with Omar and Petroldragon, and the decision on the part of Camorra organized crime to establish itself firmly in the waste management business, and achieve a monopoly on waste disposal."
C. "……Fleischmann & Pons announced cold fusion at low temperatures. But subsequent attempts by most scientists to replicate the effect failed and since then most scientists are sceptical about cold fusion experiments."
I believe a more correct statement would be "attempts by the few important institutes that decided the faith of the F&P experiment, failed to replicate their results". AND the deciding Institutes where CALTECH and MIT.
BUT: Was the attempts done by CALTECH, MIT and other laboratories anywhere close to being scientific replications?
The deciding moment in time for Cold Fusion was the MAY 1989 APS meeting in Baltimore.
A frenzy of tests had been performed between March 23. and May 1. 1989. Tests at Caltech , MIT and in other labs. Tests based on data from "news articles" and "TV pictures", since Fleischmann and Pons did not reveal any exact lab data. So, These were very far from "scientific" replication efforts.
On May 1-2, 1989, a series of three "cold fusion" press conferences took place in Baltimore, MD at the American Physical Society meeting, the world’s largest yearly gathering of physicists. And Cold Fusion was pronounced dead and buried.
As The press after reported: NYT: "….the scientists on a panel at the American Physical Society meeting Tuesday voted 8-1 that they were 95 percent confident the excess heat was not produced by nuclear fusion."
Associated Press: "A panel of nine scientists on Tuesday disparaged Utah researchers' claim of achieving fusion in a jar, suggesting they were fooled by faulty measurements."
Professor Fleischmann was probably the leading scientist in the 20th century on calorimetry, so accusing him of fault by not "stirring" was a pretty offensive remark. And As it was shown later the Fleischmann cell needed absolutely no stirring.
SO from 2.May 1989 Cold Fusion was no longer part of mainstream Science.
It’s interesting to watch the press conference, where Nathan Lewis says they find no evidence of excess heat. Martin Fleischmann then replies that loading (Deuterium/Palladium ratio) is not high enough, whereupon Lewis replies: "The loading is more than high enough ! " – as if Lewis new anything about what the loading ought to be !!! Well in the early 1990’s Stanford Research Institute proved that loading needed to be at least 92% to have any hope of seeing excess heat. The Caltech, MIT and other laboratories where nowhere close to 90%, but rather down around 80% loading.
And that is the sad story how the science of Cold fusion got the worst start imaginable.
C. "It is also strange that an electrical heater is required not only to initiate but also to control a highly exothermic reaction; normally a cooler is used for this purpose"
As shown in some experiments an initial temperature is required to reach the condition of LENR. Also it’s possible that an active AC coil is required to induce electrical currents in the reactor material to sustain LENR, which has been shown by other scientists to enhance the LENR effect (like Celani wire).
D. "….measure temperatures of the reactor by IR camera rather than fluid calorimetry"
Of course, fluid calorimetry would be preferred, but would complicate the setup and increase the costs (It’s my understanding that it’s the related costs that prohibited fluid calorimetry in the latest test).
Anyhow: There is nothing magical to using IR camera. The spectral range for both IR cameras used was from 7.5 to 13 μm. In that range, the alumina is opaque. So they used the right cameras for the job, no transparancy issues.
E. "Andrea Rossi, the inventor, personally intervened several times."
I think the important issue here was the sampling:
"Do you think Rossi could somehow have manipulated these powders under your eyes?"
Bo Höistad:
"Of course we were very careful not to allow anything occult or hidden to happen, as a precaution. But the answer is no. We manipulated the ashes. Rossi was present, and he assisted in the operation."
My own comment here is that a 0,2% ash sample is not likely to be representative of the total.
F. "…not ruling out manipulations by wiring tricks"
It’s was the testers own wiring and equipment that was used, so Schumcacher imply that this last test is part of a larger conspiracy?
Well, I think not.
Let me end by saying that I don’t consider myself being part of the "Rossi church", but I find the story interesting enough to follow it closely. Because of Professor Focardi, Celani, Piantelli and others work on Hydrogen/Nickel systems. And Because of the whole history of Cold Fusion and it’s maltreatment by the Scientific community.
NEXT I will look at the Schumacher part 2....
EDIT: part 2
QuoteDisplay MoreI have studied the Schumacher part 2 article, and have the following comments (Also placed on the Schumacher part 2 article site)
"
Dear Mr. Schumacher,
I have a few comments to your article part 2 (ref. also my comments to part 1):
Thank you for a thorough and detailed analysis of the reported results.
My first comment here is that the reported isotopic changes goes far beyond all other similar reports within the LENR community. As an example we may refer to the many transmutation reports from Japan LENR researchers in Mitsubishi Heavy Industry and Toyota Central Research and Development Labs.
So is there another explanation except from trickery here?
Firstly it is unfortunate that they where not able to take more than a sample of 2,13 mg of the ash. This is only a 0,2 wt% sample of total ash. I therefore think this sample is not representative (as You also mention as a possibility).
The powder has been at a temperature between 1300 og 1500 degrees C for 32 days during the test, inside a sintered (and somewhat porous ?) Alumina cylinder. Surely one would expect some isotopic separation (and evaporation) to occur during this time, like
- Mg melts at 650 degC and boils at 1091 degC. Mg has probably evaporated and been absorbed by the Alumina substrate
- Ca melts at 842 degC and boils at 1484 degC. May therefore also over time disappeared into the Alumina substrate
- Same with Cl….
Even Rossi himself seemed surprised of the analysis.
Note also the statement in the report “The [ash] grains differ in element composition, and we would certainly have liked to analyze several more grains…..”
Similar the fuel sample was only 10 mg, or 1% of total fuel powder. Is it possible that also fuel sample is not representative? Ref statement in the report: “It should be stressed, that the quantities of most elements differ substantially depending on which granule is analyzed”
"
Further “Why did the role of Ni-62 change ?” and “No convincing theory is provided that would explain the experimental findings” and “Today´s knowledge of nuclear physics cannot explain these results, and unfortunately a new theory was not offered by Rossi and the Italo-Swedish research association.” :
Anyone that has followed the history of cold fusion since 1989, also know there has been (and still is) a large number of theories trying to explain LENR. Rossi and his colleagues have probably worked on their own theory, with or without success so far. I think there is still a road to cover to explain LENR, including E-cat. Since 1989 there has been a separate Paradigm in the scientific world that have observed and accepted the existence of LENR. The problem seems to be to find one theory that explains all observations. The Widom-Larsen theory may be one candidate….
And to repeat my comment from your PART 1 article: Note that the E-cat did not start from a theory. It started with professor Focardi, professor Piantelli and others experimenters findings of excess heat in Nickel/Hydrogen systems. If Rossi have something real, it’s because he has experimented and found an improved recipe, not because he is testing out a theory if his.
Anyhow: Shall we deny ourselves the dinner of new discoveries, because of lack of theory or experimental results not conforming to theory? Or to repeat what the Nobel Price winner (in physics) Julian Seymour Schwinger said of his attempt to publish papers on Cold fusion :
"What I had not expected was the venomous criticism, the contempt, the enormous pressure to conform. Has the knowledge that physics is an experimental science been totally lost?"
With regards to your comment on handling of samples, I commented this on my comment to part 1. Bo Høistad believe they had adequately control to avoid trickery…
“No truly independent test was ever allowed”. It was Sven Kullander who offered to do a test. It’s understandable that IH had some involvement to protect their trade secrets.
“Rossi never allowed testing of the same device twice.” If the testers where themselves satisfied with previous tests, why would they want to do another test of the same device? I think it is understandable that they would rather test possibly improved versions of E-cat technology.
"
Your last two questions may be the most interesting ones
“….What is the purpose of these papers?...” and “….why are they doing this?
Obviously, if you do a test, you would want to report the findings afterwards. So rephrasing the first question we may ask “why did they do the test”?
Then we need to do a little investigation:
Who asked for the test? According to the “Acknowledgements” in the report “….it was late Sven Kullander, who initiated this independent test experiment.
So: Why did Sven Kullander want to do this test?
Perhaps just SCIENTIFIC CURIOSITY?
"Curiosity is a delicate little plant which, aside from stimulation, stands mainly in need of freedom" Albert Einstein 1949
Possibly because he considered Professor Focardi a friend, and trusted Focardi’s findings of excess heat in Nickel/hydrogens systems ? And I’m sure Focardi told Kullander how he and Rossi met (Ref. my comments to Part 1),so, May be his intuition told him to investigate further?
May be because Kullander loved a mystery?
"The most beautiful experience we can have is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. – Albert Einstein 1931
Perhaps to obtain knew knowledge of nature?
May be because of “Pleasure to Finding things out”?
Perhaps he imagined Nature still have some surprises up her sleeves? Just As Professor Martin Fleischmann and Pons did, when they started their cold fusion journey back in 1983
"I'm enough of an artist to draw freely on my imagination. Imagination is more important than knowledge. Knowledge is limited; imagination encircles the world." – Albert Einstein 1929
Below is a few actual thoughts from Sven Kullander on the E-cat story
Reported from John Olov Hampus Ersa Ericsson:
“We talked about cold fusion and his views on Andrea Rossi. He told me about his deep respect for Focardi and how collaboration with him really makes Rossi look good. Sven also said that the reason why only he in the academic field takes cold fusion seriously is because he will soon retire and are not afraid of ruining his carrier.”
“Kullander told further about their personal experiences of a large number of people at the University of Bologna has been more or less concerned about the ECAT, the most active of course Focardi and Levi. He feels these people knowledgeable and up to serious, from the president down. Kullander feel even Rossi as sincere and serious and a very knowledgeable and skilled engineer but somewhat discursive reasoning when entering the field of physics. He also talked about discussions he had with Levi for a large number of tests that are not described but conducted by Levi, who personally knows the ECAT works.”
“Then he talked about his own test, he said that it proved that heat was made but he couldn’t say how, and he dont believe it’s cold fusion because that impossible by today’s science. But it could only be explained by cold fusion happening. He was very confused…”
“He also said that Rossi is definitely not a fraud and that his friend professor Focardi and professor Levi is absolutely not frauds. They are his friends and he trust them.”
