The psychology of Andrea Rossi - Why DIYers deserve our attention, while Rossi does not.

From my POV it is a (mild) waste of talent that all these people work on "replicating" a Rossi device that we have no reason to expect works. Why not other more plausible (according to many here) systems?

The beauty of Rossi's "hot cat" is that it is simple enough for amateurs to build, difficult enough to measure that you need care to avoid artifacts, and a glowing tube that might emit kW of free power is much more emotionally satisfying than an electrolytic cell.

Dear Majorana,

One of my readers came with the idea that the 1MW test will be a failure however Rossi being the world's best scammer -will be celebrated as a hero.
Your idea Rossi is narcissistic therefore we better should ignore him completely-is also very interesting. Actually not Rossi is important but his generators- after 5 years from the first demo at Bologan U. we still do not have the absolute certainty thta it works LENR+ style (that is COP over 3 and power density over 1000W per gram reaction mixture.)

I am spending many hours daily searching for LENR info and I can tell you that without Rossi it would be indistinguishable from hopeless- at least for somebody focused on technology.
IF Rossi has indeed solved the LENR+ problem than his narcissim would be not a serious flaw.

If he and his team works really seriously, then the technology is naturally in continuous
development that is a general rule I know from experience.

Peter

Dear H.G. Branzell

I m convinced thta there were essential changes from 1MW plant 2011 to the present one; Rossi's problem seemed to be with controll long start-up and shutdown- remeber the Cat Mouse issue- no details known. He needed some stimulation method beyond thermal shocks,
If you read my blog you could see that I consider re-design normal and I do not expect positive-positive results i.e. system ready for mass commercializtion THEN; massive excesss heat is the awaited positive. High COP values- decently uniform from day to day is satisfactory.
What do you want tell more exactly about team work at Rossi?
Thanks!
Peter
hanks

DIY open science is the fastest way to demonstrate the existence of LENR/Chemical induced nuclear reactions and by that spread the knowledge which is critical for this tech to develop without dependencies to single people like Mills, Rossi, Kesche and other self proclaimers with weak-to-none transparency.

DIY open science LENR has so far clearly demonstrated a number of weakness' of thermocouple measurements, pyrometers and thermal imaging methods. This is GOOD science, even if in the end no effect can be found.

If the effect can be demonstrated beyond doubt, well - we are all aware of the importance of that.

(Deleted comment.)

I have just posted a thread on the psychology of Andrea Rossi and others.

Occam's Razor suggests that the simplest solution is most often right. That may be applied to both Rossi and Randall Mills.

They are both charismatic and very persuasive. They select their followers after in dpth meetings where the unwitting are hypnotized.. Those that cannot be hypnotized are de=selected from demonstrations and testing. for example' Levi's rediculous performance at Lugano is best explained by this form of undue influence.

Mills generally subjects potential investors to lengthy presentations. Donald Trump freely admits that he uses these techniques to make sales. Forbes magazine has an article how he is using these subliminal tactics to garner support for his election.

I submit that this psychological expanation is a simple account of how the Lugano professors performed in such an inept manner in 2014.

I am sure they have been embarassed and wonder how they had authored such a magnificently awful Luganp reprt.

There is a common feature of both Brullouin, Piantelli and Rossi. They all use Nickel/hydrogen system and a stimulus system.

So either they all got it or none of them has it.

Triggering and stimulus is a vital ingredient. I think there's the failure of many or all replication attempts.

To sum up what I've stated earlier on triggering;

1. Brilliouin is using electrical stimulation on their reactor.

Ref. Mckubre stated on Brillouin: "The fact that the Q pulse input is capable of triggering the excess power on and off is also highly significant.”

2. Swartz have discovered something interesting:
"Astonishingly, it has now been discovered that high intensity, dynamic, repeatedly fraction- ated, magnetic fields have an incremental major, significant and unique, complex, metachronous amplification effect on the preloaded NANOR⃝R -type LANR device"

"H-field pulse sequence was delivered (dH/dt ∼1.5 T with 0.1 ms rise time × 1000–5000 pulse"

Ref.

http://www.iscmns.org/CMNS/JCMNS-Vol15.pdf#page=73

3. Rossi is using some kind of electromagnetic stimulation....

I have tried to Ask him several times on stinulation, but he allways says "no comment" or "confidential"

A reason why Rossi will not comment on stimulation of the core may be because Piantelli allready have patented such mechanisms, as I referred to Below.

So Rossi is using stimulation, but don't want to talk about it, since he may "get Piantelli on his back"?

The only thing I find in the Rossi patent claims are "reinvigorating" reaction by "varying" a voltage source.

Which could mean varying AC voltage with some high frequency (at what Herz?), and thereby creating some extra stimulating magnetic fields....for "reinvigorating" the core.....

But he can not state it in his patent, since it is allready protected by Piantelli.

4. More on stimulation, this time from Piantelli patents:

"........impulsive trigger action consists of supplying an energy pulse"

".....trigger means (61 ,62,67) for creating an impulsive action (140) on said active core (18), said impulsively action (140) suitable for causing......"

http://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/claims?CC=EP&NR=2702593A1&KC=A1&FT=D&ND=&date=20140305&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP

".........an impulsive application of a package of electromagnetic fields, in particular said fields selected from the group comprised of: a radiofrequency pulse whose frequency is larger than 1 kHz; X rays; v rays; an electrostriction impulse that is generated by an impulsive electric current that flows through an electrostrictive portion of said active core...."

"- an electric voltage impulse that is applied between two points of a piezoelectric portion of said active core; an impulsive magnetostriction that is generated by a magnetic field pulse along said active core which has a magnetostrictive portion."

"Such impulsive triggering action generates lattice vibrations, i.e. phonons..."

http://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/description?CC=WO&NR=2010058288A1&KC=A1&FT=D&ND=3&date=20100527&DB=worldwide.espacenet.com&locale=en_EP

5. Bockris: "It is interesting that the excess heat, caused by RF stimulation, reaches a maximum value and, after a certain time, falls to zero. A possible explanation is that the RF stimulates only the deuterium nucleus at the near surface of Pd. It is well known that, due to the 'skin effect,' high frequency alternating currents are felt only up to a certain depth (called 'skin depth') "

Ref. Bockris et.al:

http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/BockrisJtriggering.pdf

6. Mckubre et. al paper:

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

The small energy yield and intermittency of the PdD system is obviously a big hurdle for development. The transistor had the same kind of problem in it's infancy. It is likely there where many unbelievers of it at the time.
The most functioning seams to be presented by Hagelstein/Swartz but where did the 101 lecture go? Why stop putting it on display???

The NiH system seams to have the solution to both the drawbacks of PdD; energy yield and repeatability. DIY open science should keep working on the Piantelli-Rossi-Brillouin line to get closer to truth.