It was only a couple of years ago that Rossi discovered how to spell "independent".
Now it appears that he yet has to discover the meaning of the word.
If the ERV report suddenly has turned into evidence in a trial we may never see it.
Press Release - Cold Fusion (LENR) Verified - Inventor Sues Industrial Heat, LLC.
-
-
@H-G Branzell
I think we will see the ERV report pretty soon as evidence.
The original secret 2012 contract between Rossi et al and [lexicon]IH[/lexicon] et al is in the available evidence already. -
Jed Rothwell
From vortex-l
Here are some more court papers:
-
Cold nuclear synthesis in the nature is! Volcanoes are so formed! But it not the main process which will give new energy. The main thing is the model of the planet which should be made artificially in laboratory. You watch a subject in Google - model of the planet - I the first there.... New energy has to be simple as the bicycle, in Russian spherical!
-
In the old ages, people were counting as 1, 2, many.
1 is done.
2 is coming
N will follow fast... -
Michel said "In the old ages, people were counting as 1, 2, many. "
uno, duo ........ tres E-cat
-
perhaps Rossi might say uno duo tre F9
-
It's very sad that the ERV is (again) a person who was involved in the E-Cat story before
No one can talk about real independence here.But as stated in the press release, [lexicon]IH[/lexicon] and LC seem to made their own measurements which correlated with those made by Mr. Penon (ERV). And we know that this whole test wasn't designed to satisfy the general public but big investors.
Another thing of which I don't know whether it's good or not is the legal dispute between [lexicon]IH[/lexicon] and LC.
On the one hand it could heavily boost the innovation and speed of market entry of both.
On the other hand it could lead to a total hold of this innovation.This legal disput clearly looks like Rossi has something he can lose (the IP of his invention which is worth trillions).
And it's more or less this IP skeptics raise to question.
No one would defend an IP which is worth nothing due to scam :nuke:Now were LC made pressure with this press release, [lexicon]IH[/lexicon] has to respond in some way. The next weeks can be interesting entertainment :popcorn:
PS: hopefully @Mats Lewan is now able to confirm his symposium
-
Many different technologies from many different players...
-
Now, what about the Quark X, is it all Rossi's and will he be bringing it out as planned? If it is as simple and as easy to produce, maybe he'll just sit on the 1Mw till he gets his money and go ahead with the Quark X!
-
About Fabio Penon you have to re read the file.
It is normal Fabio Penon is the same ERV because he was chosen once for both test as the ERV.
he did the test of Ferrara, and unlike what Thomas Clarke said erroneously, the Ferrara test have no calorimetry doubt, because it was calibrated and confirmed by thermocouple. PLEASE stop spreading errors Thomas, you are above that.
ONLY critic of Ferrara is an electric conspiracy theory, that pushed the Lugano testers to double the wattmeters and add measurements everywhere, while screwing up on calibration of the calorimetry.As Jed Reminded recently, it is when Fabio penon and Rossi were present that the test was well made, and when you let physicist do the job, whether at Lugano, caltech or MIT, they screwed up like students.
Fabio Penon was chosen by [lexicon]IH[/lexicon] and Rossi for his competente, not because he is a friend.
it is the same man because it is the same contract.Rossi is not a daemon which can transform any honest and trusted man into a demoniac zombie just by looking at him.
Now about the test, I see no reference into Rossi's complain, about the reliability.
We know from his JoNP exchanges that it was far from 99.999% and I know that this is a critical requirement for any industrialists and for sales.
It would be a surprise if the reliability reported in the report would be good, even if it seems to be inside the agreed window.
Maybe [lexicon]IH[/lexicon] negociated a window which was too wide.note that Woodford invested 50M$ in real cash, and they need to pay 89M$... maybe they just need a funder.
note that neither Rossi nor Darden are innocent young chicken of the week.
It is a trillion$ business, so expect people to get as crazy as gangster who robbed a Casino and discuss how to share the cash. The most dangerous moment of a hold-up. -
the license agreement is published by sifferkoll
http://www.sifferkoll.se/siffe…sdce-16-21199__0001.2.pdfthere is the list of licensees (dunno yet if still applicable)
-
Here's a conspiracy theory for you. (cool) I make no claims for it.
[lexicon]IH[/lexicon] became angry that Rossi was developing the X-Cat without telling them all about it. They felt that all IP created on their dollar (they had already paid him $11M) should belong to them too.
When Rossi suggested that Penon should be the ERV - rather than Underwriters Laboratory etc - they agreed and even paid half the cost.
This was because they knew that Penon's documents and independence could be challenged. They let this happen because the customer company was already telling them that the system was working and that energy costs for their factory were going down, so [lexicon]IH[/lexicon] knew they had a good thing. Penon's lack of independence would be a useful legal tool if they decided to withold the $89M they had promised.
An early decision NOT to pay the ice-cream salesman if he didn't behave as they wished perhaps lay behind this decision. And explains Darden's interest in other Researchers into LENR.
All this is of course suggested without any evidence to back it up. Just musing.
-
@Thomas Clarke:
An average COP of 50 and a company that will probably be subpoenaed to show the energy bills to back either part claims, can hardly be called a measurement error. Factor in that the maximum power a wich the plant was connected was 250…
An average COP of 50 can of course be a measurement error if improperly measured - you known that well from Rossi's earlier experiments.
As for electricity bills: that is pure conjecture. Of course it would be difficult to draw any conclusions unless the claimed 1MW is a large fraction of the plants total power.
This test is much less well supervised than Lugano - which was thoroughly spoofed. In this case we have Fabio from [lexicon]IH[/lexicon] (whose competence appears to be control systems) and Penon (whose competence is nuclear physics). Neither has qualifications in calorimetry to my knowledge, nor in the more problematic issuse of how to detect errors in calorimetry from wrong siting of thermocouples, wrong assumptions about phase change, etc all of which, Rossi's favourites, could come into play here.
Which does not mean know these things are happening - Rossi could have been doing absolutely anything squatting in his shipping container for all those months including rewiring meters.
My point is that while this test sounds good - indeed if it were clearly helpful to a genuine customer, reducing bills, that would be a big deal, we know:
- The customer was "found by Rossi" and his relationship with Rossi we cannot tell
- The ERV is Fabio who has a previous record of doing very badly instrumented (thermography - no temperature control - wrong statements in report about thermography - other inconsistencies) tests for Rossi.
-
Quote
It is normal Fabio Penon is the same ERV because he was chosen once for both test as the ERV.he did the test of Ferrara, and unlike what Thomas Clarke said erroneously, the Ferrara test have no calorimetry doubt, because it was calibrated and confirmed by thermocouple. PLEASE stop spreading errors Thomas, you are above that.
Alain - you have crossed swords with me on this issue before - and lost (Lugano where you thought the "acceleration" could not be an artifact).
I have an idea of how it could be done - and spot calibration with TC would not prevent that. Of course the field is also wide open for other errors, such as misreading the input power. Penon is a remarkably dependent person for such a crucial independent test without (judging from the report and his employment history) the experimental qualifications in heat and electrical power measurement that would be expected.
-
Quote
Rossi is not a daemon which can transform any honest and trusted man into a demoniac zombie just by looking at him.
No - but he is a businessman who has an unerring talent for inducing scientists into making large positive calorimetry errors when measuring his devices. Perhaps this history is bad luck but given the obviously faulty setups on video and photograph, and Lugano, i would not bet much on that.
-
Quote
Fabio Penon was chosen by [lexicon]IH[/lexicon] and Rossi for his competente, not because he is a friend.it is the same man because it is the same contract.
There is a clear conflict of interest in Rossi's choice - so why you can say you know Rossi wanted him for competence I do not know.
As for [lexicon]IH[/lexicon] they have shown themselves remarkably bad at judging scientific confidence - look at Lugano, and the fact that they backed Rossi...
-
Quote
note that neither Rossi nor Darden are innocent young chicken of the week.
Quite. And neither are qualified scientists. The fact that Darden has swung such large amounts of money into action on hopes of rossi's stuff being real is what makes this story so fascinating - but it is not primarily a science story. (Though personally I find the science of the test reports fascinating).
-
Quote
But as stated in the press release, [lexicon]IH[/lexicon] and LC seem to made their own measurements which correlated with those made by Mr. Penon (ERV). And we know that this whole test wasn't designed to satisfy the general public but big investors.
I count it as very little additional validation that the same measurements were made by [lexicon]IH[/lexicon]. The devil is always in the setup that allows those measurements to happen. While direct falsification of measurements is always possible it has not been Rossi's previous style and i would not expect it here.
-
Quote
Unfortunately sub judice will delay report release until trial conclusion. Rossi chose the public arena in lieu of the report. Court publicity works in Rossi and
E-cat technologyfavour..Indeed, it may keep Rossi's disks spinning in the air for a bit longer.
Quote from ShaneDisplay More"We believe society suffers when technological advances and innovative experimentation are stifled; likewise, society and the industry suffer when results are promoted and claims are made without rigorous verification and precise measurement.
We value credibility through sound LENR research. That’s why any claims made about technologies in our portfolio should only be relied upon if affirmed by [lexicon]Industrial Heat[/lexicon] and backed by reputable third parties who have verified our results in repeated experiments."
After re-reading this in light of today's news, I read in their own words [lexicon]IH[/lexicon]'s justification for their actions in going beyond, or violating, the contractual terms as Rossi laid out in the lawsuit against; i.e. opening their own LENR lab, investing in other LENR players, doing their own IPs, and possibly even revealing Rossi's secrets to others in their portfolio, when they say: "We believe society suffers when technological advances are stifled".
Put simply, they thought that violating the contract was for the greater good, and a noble deed.The rest of their words starting with "likewise", appear to be their publicly aired legal defense for why they refuse to make that final payment to Rossi...It (test) wasn't "rigorous" or "precise" enough, not "reputable third parties" and no "repeated experiments"...as determined by us.
It is quite extraordinary, Shane, the way you can generate biased readings of the simplest text. Indeed this statement, interpreted now, makes it clear that [lexicon]IH[/lexicon] doubt the rigor of Rossi's testing. Remember we are pretty sure they thought the Lugano results were definitive - and I guess by now the information must have percolated through to them that that was far from the case.
You elaborate too much on the first sentence which is surely just the standard LENR backer statement that innovation should be set free from the shackles of institutional prejudice! The 2nd, 3rd, and 4th sentences (all the rest) reiterate a concern with experimental rigor which I applaud.
