Jed Rothwell: Industrial Heat Don’t Believe ERV Report

Quote

That said, how in the world can there be a dispute between two parties, one claiming a COP50, and the other...well we don't know what Barry West is claiming, but I would assume COP1? We are not talking about a little difference of opinion, an honest misreading of some instruments...we are talking a huge, huge gap. I just can't account for that without resorting to professional corruption, or gross incompetence by one of the parties involved.

You would understand if you had paid attention to what skeptics and more recently Jed say about Penon!

The whole history of Rossi is tests that fake COP, if you can fake 3, you can fake 10 (even 50, but we don't know Rossi's Penon measurements were average 50, more likely 50 in SSM when heater is off).

It will be fascinating what is the problem with this one. Rossi seems to like mismeasuring input power measurement but he has also done the wet steam trick.

@Thomas

In your opinion, how much of an error on COP could result from using instruments (e.g. flowmeters, etc.) outside their certified range of operation?

[EDIT: Just to be clear, I am not trying to secretly feed information here, I am honestly just asking if in your opinion errors like that could lead to such large miscalculations]

Binding arbitration: arrangement where two parties agree to present their arguments and evidence to a neutral third party and to be bound by the arbitrator's decision. Frequently the arbitrator is required to rule for one side or the other, although compromise settlements may sometimes be negotiated.

It seems the ERV is stipulated in their contract as having sole authority to determine whether performance criteria were met.

I wouldn't want to be IH's attorney pleading a case before a judge of "We agreed to conditions and we agreed upon an umpire, but we now need to change both."

Note that the observer might not be Barry West. It could be another person or persons making observations for IH. There is no compelling need to assume corruption at this point, but a conclusion of incompetence is impossible to avoid if Jed's account of IH's conclusion and the path that led to it ends up being borne out by the facts. If the suit goes to trial, hopefully we'll find out more.

I'll admit that this is a disappointing turn of events for me. I've watched Rossi since 2011, and I've been willing, contrary to my own better judgment, to look past the many peccadillos (if they can be called that). In this case, at a basic level I trust IH to make better arrangements to measure what input/output there was than Rossi. Hopefully now there will be less allowance made in these forums for less-than-rigorous testing in the name of maintaining trade secrets. I will continue to monitor developments out of hobbyist duty (equivalent to professional duty in other contexts), but I am pretty doubtful at this point that anything promising will later emerge.

Quote from Shane D.

The options seem fairly limited...No?

The options do indeed appear to be limited. I wonder what Huw Price will discuss in his next essay.

They say people can get tied up in these Internet forums Rossi is a great day time soap opera He has been robotizing plants for 5 years now He could clearly be the one trying to scam IH Only time will tell But my bet is now that Jed is right

If this ERV-2 is able to make Rossi checkmate, why it was not already published?
IH has probably no restriction from the attorney and being faster is an advantage in principle.
peter

Shayne,
Be very very careful about the rather wild claims of IH's version of the ERV.

Note very carefully how Chinese whyispers are seemingly spinning the story out of control.

Note particularly how those (i.e. Yugo & Clarke) are suddenly 'in love' with IH and
acting as their surrogate press agents. Only a few weeks ago IH were their enemies.

Just beware of the 'spin'.

Cheers Doug Marker

Somewhere, over the sea, the e-Cat Xs are coming out of the robot factory. IH is a VC, and whatever else they may be, it is greed of profit, and fear of loss that drive their company. Doctore Rossi, battle scared with the garbage-to-enery experience, learned lessons that bolster his defense. The basic reality of COP plus whatever, is changing the world, drastically for the better. The Saudis sell oil as fast as they can, and the oil companies divest there holdings in oil producing land. That can give one a glimpse of reality, where LENR replaces fossil fuel energy.
Love your summary, many thanks. Don't worry, be happy.

I was around in 1989 and this all seems reminiscent of what went on with the Pons/Flieschmann breakthrough then.

Quote

@Thomas
In your opinion, how much of an error on COP could result from using instruments (e.g. flowmeters, etc.) outside their certified range of operation?[EDIT: Just to be clear, I am not trying to secretly feed information here, I am honestly just asking if in your opinion errors like that could lead to such large miscalculations]

I'm no expert on flowmeters but the classic known issue is Defkalion (initially a Rossi licensee who went on to form a high profile LENR company with exciting public demos) who obtained false results from a flow meter. The issue was that it did not distinguish positive and negative flow - reading all as positive. Therefore by using a low flow rate with turbulence/steam bubbles etc they could make alternating negative/positive flow read all positive and get a much higher apparent flow rate. There is technically no limit to this mechanism. DGT were unmasked because DGT Europe got suspicious, and they did not respond to DGT Europe's concerns repeated many times that they should tighten this specific loophole. BTW there are some flowmeters that cannot exhibit this bad behaviour.

http://revolution-green.com/lenr-defkalion-bad-measurements/

My feeling is that Rossi has tended to suffer from electrical mismeasurement, or heat mismeasurement (TC siting, dry vs wet steam) not flowmeter problems. But who can tell?

Quote

Note particularly how those (i.e. Yugo & Clarke) are suddenly 'in love' with IH and acting as their surrogate press agents. Only a few weeks ago IH were their enemies.Just beware of the 'spin'.Cheers Doug Marker

There is always forgiveness for repentant souls. When IH were saying Rossi's stuff was all good I naturally felt that they lacked technical expertise in reviewing the evidence. They have lots of money and it would not be surprising if they beef up technical expertise.

But I think there is also an issue about not being able to see another pattern. If you are initially convinced that Rossi (inheritor of Piantelli) is a real inventor of brilliance with genuine product you don't tend to look for obvious errors in mis-measurement etc. Your technical guys are focussed on getting him to reveal the knowledge needed to replicate the ecat, not cross-checking his measurements.

Everyone here who wants more money for LENR research should be glad the $89M is not going to Rossi, and hope that IH emerge from the lawsuit without much financial damage since they now have a large war-chest to direct at the LENR work that will be most likely to show genuine results.

I don't think that will lead to positive results - but I'm in favour of good science resolving mysteries. Any mysteries in Ni-H or Pd-D systems should be resolved. And maybe claims of companies like Brillouin can be either proven or debunked. Either would be nice.

Quote from Thomas Clarke

Everyone here who wants more money for LENR research should be glad the $89M is not going to Rossi, and hope that IH emerge from the lawsuit without much financial damage since they now have a large war-chest to direct at the LENR work that will be most likely to show genuine results.

So Tom, nice to see you believe LENR will soon be showing genuine results, I would say that is a result in itself and perhaps a genuine change in your thinking, I commend your objectivity on that. But re Rossi v IH who can tell the difference now between the 'astroturf' and the green grass. Oh the fog of war.

If I were a skeptic I would say there seems to be a strategy to 'pick them off one at a time'; Rossi is in the spot light at the moment, others work diligently and without much publicity doing great work, I hope they keep it up but beware, you may be next. Keep your powder dry.

Best regards
Frank

Quote

So Tom, nice to see you believe LENR will soon be showing genuine results, I would say that is a result in itself and perhaps a genuine change in your thinking, I commend your objectivity on that.

I meant "reveal genuine results if they exist". My strong expectation is they do not. But I also strongly support clearing mysteries of this sort up and debunking false claims. If real claims are found that would be immensely exciting.

Spin up spin down, wave or particle, quantum supposition. I suppose it could be both or all at the same time. I Genuinely thought for moment the (e) cat was alive but no, its dead in your world. One day Tom you will have a revalation and

Quote from Thomas Clarke

here is always forgiveness for repentant souls.

Joking apart (and I know how you like a joke) I do believe skeptisism has an important role to play here. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_skepticism

I wonder though Tom in your dealings with this issue re Jeb saying IH does not believe ERV report that you have left the very commendable realms of 'skeptisism' and hold a 'position' in the absence of 'facts' which is of course not objective.

"Skepticism is a provisional approach to claims. It is the
application of reason to any and all ideas—no sacred cows allowed. In
other words, skepticism is a method, not a position."

— The Skeptics Society

Best regards
Frank