Rossi also hasn't realized that an impeachable character puts patents at risk. He needs to hope and pray that IH doesn't decide to put some focus and resources into that one as well.
Cutting Through the Fog Surrounding the Rossi/IH Dispute (Josh G)
- News-Feed
- Closed
-
-
Axil and Frank - you guys need to stop while you're behind. You're making a mess speculating with what you've been told by Rossi. Why do you assume that everything he feeds you is based on truth?
-
WO2015127263-PAMPH-131 was a goldmine of IP
-
Dewey,
You asked where the COP 50 came from:
MIAMI, April 6, 2016 /PRNewswire/ — Leonardo Corporation announced today that on March 29, 2016, Leonardo Corporation received independent third party validation of the overwhelmingly positive results of a nearly yearlong test of Leonardo’s 1MW Energy Catalyzer (“E-Cat”). According to the inventor, Andrea Rossi, the E-Cat generates a low energy nuclear reaction (“LENR”) which produces excess heat energy at a cost substantially below more traditional energy sources. According to the independent third party report, over the 352 day test period, the E-Cat consistently generated energy at a rate in excess of six (6) times the amount of energy consumed by the plant, often generating energy exceeding fifty (50) times the amount of energy consumed during the same period. According to Andrea Rossi, Leonardo Corporation considers the results of the third party test to be “an overwhelming success” and that “the world is one step closer to the realization of a commercially available new, clean and efficient energy source.”
The independent third party validation test was performed by Dr. Ing. Fabio Penon, a Ph.D. in Nuclear Engineering, at the behest of Leonardo Corporation and one of its licensees, Industrial Heat, LLC. as both desired independent third party verification of the sustainability of the energy production of the E-Cat over a prolonged period. “The results of Dr. Penon’s test was consistent with the measurements taken by the representatives of Leonardo Corporation and Industrial Heat respectively during the course of the test” said inventor Andrea Rossi
David French (Patent Atty; Ret.) did a very detailed write up about the suit, pointing out that any outright lie in the filing would not go over very well in court. So if Rossi made up the 50 COP, it will be noticed immediately upon reading the ERVs report to the judge. I don't think he is THAT dumb to make such a mistake, but one never knows for sure.
-
Shane
Do you have a link to the write-up of David French?
Best regards
Frank -
Well, we aren't making much headway with clearing away this fog...are we?
If Dewey is being straight with us, he is who he says he is, IH's defense is fairly simple: The 1MW did not pass the 1 year test. It just doesn't work. Neither has anything Rossi given them worked.
He may be right, but I believe Rossi has a say as he initiated the legal action, and from what he has said publicly -to his legal detriment if lying, this is equally straight forward from his vantage: The 1 MW worked marvelously, better than expected, and IH is reneging on the final payment. Also that IH has abused their patent contractual terms.
Wish we had that ERV report. Then maybe we could lift this damn fog!
If it claims what Rossi is saying, IH will have to prove the Ecat was rigged, and/or Penon was incompetent in not seeing it was rigged, or complicit with Rossi in carrying out the fraud. I guess they (IH) must have some proof, which would explain why they padlocked the 1MW plant.Dewey; have you read it (ERV's report) in your capacity, or gotten 1st hand feedback on it's findings?
-
-
Quote
(1) If IH are lying, Rossi is likely to win although I don't discount many complexities
The premise here was that IH was not lying (see above). And it is the simplest assumption - anything else is libelous.Quote
(2) Rossi is not even half rational - the court will not be interested in Rossi's rationality, they will be interested in facts in two distinct areas (I) the Patents and Information property - are they valid, which I suspect you think they are not. (ii) the contract. They may conclude (a) if the Patents and Information Technology are not 'safe' the contract is invalid then everyone will loose. (b) the Patents and information technology is 'safe' i.e. the Rossi Effect is 'real', but there has been a 'breach of contract'. If they rule there has been a 'breach of contract' they may rule against Rossi or they may rule against IH et al or both.(3) Rossi's stuff does not work - If The court rule the Patents and IP is worthless i.e. 'they do not work' and 'they are not or will not be useful' then this opens the door to further claims from people who have incurred 'damages' for example Woodford and the alleged Chinese investors all of whom could then theoretically sue both IH et al and Rossi.So to me, both of the actors in this little game have most to loose if your scenario (3) is correct so I disagree with you, I think your Bayesian logic has let you down on this one.- You speculate as to what the Court will conclude when the only comment from a lawyer I have seen makes the point that most such cases never get to Court.
- Whether IH lose from this action or no is irrelevant here, they did not start it.
- You argue that Rossi is likely to have something because he would not take this step (the legal action) if he had nothing. This is not logical. On many different grounds! (I could expand).
-
Axil and Frank - you guys need to stop while you're behind. You're making a mess speculating with what you've been told by Rossi. Why do you assume that everything he feeds you is based on truth?
I am an equal opportunity speculator. I will be pleased to speculate on any info released by IH. Not releasing any info might be called for to advance the legal position of IH but it does produce a speculation vacuum for those who are interested in this subject.
-
Andrea Rossi
May 2, 2016 at 4:39 PM
“Jacky”:
The QuarkX will be a very big surprise for everybody. Nobody can imagine what is coming up. I am very pleased of how she is growing up and by the day I become more optimist about the outcome of this new masterpiece of my great Team. The beautiful of her is that if F8 will turn out to be positive, the consequences will be fast and diffused.
F8.
Warm Regards,
A.R.Well Rossi sure is hyping his Quark. Nothing new there as he always does that with his latest and greatest new gadget, without having proven his last. But I am curious what IH thinks in light of the falling out Dewey?
The contract is still valid and IH owns this Quark, if they want it, and if it is real. Do they want it...just in case, or could care less what he claims, and accomplishes at this point?
-
Shane D - I believe that the ERV claims a COP in that neighborhood. You'll have to be the judge on whether the integrity of the data supports that claim or not. You'll be able to figure it out light years before any judge gets to review the file.
The projection of the E-Cat as a steam source for a giant dim sum factory is the best I've seen but I don't want us to get too far ahead of ourselves. I'm not sure if it will be breakeven or not either. It sure would be nice if we could figure that out one day.
-
Shane D - I've read the "ERV" report. It is beautiful, wonderful, sexy, exciting, stimulating, fabulous and incredible. Until you study the data........
Rossi hyped this for months and then left you all hanging, hiding behind a lawsuit which was months in the making. How did so many of his followers just null out on that and jump to the next promise? This might be the true "Rossi Effect". Time will tell.
-
How did so many of his followers just null out on that and jump to the next promise? This might be the true "Rossi Effect". Time will tell.
Dewey,
No one on any of the LENR blogs have invested money in Rossi, other than you. Maybe you could answer your own question?
-
Thomas
You said:
(1) The premise here was that IH was not lying (see above). And it is the simplest assumption - anything else is libelous. Disagree, what about your assumption Rossi is lying?
(2) You speculate as to what the Court will conclude when the only comment from a lawyer I have seen makes the point that most such cases never get to Court. And you don't speculate on scientific matters even though you are not a scientist?
(3) Whether IH lose from this action or no is irrelevant here, they did not start it. Disagree
(4) You argue that Rossi is likely to have something because he would not take this step (the legal action) if he had nothing. This is not logical. On many different grounds! (I could expand). No I have not, but I have speculated on a number of opposing hypotheses.Is that the best you can do Tom, I think you should concentrate on the science, or become a 'cherry picker'.
Best regards
Frank -
Maybe not the right thread, but since it is linked to the divorce of the parties - a question to all here and out there who are more or less following this opera: Does anyone have a clue on where Rossi is currently developing his Quark-X and prepares the mass production? He claimed once he has 33 employees and many other personnel in standby (!?) waiting to setup a mass production line including worldwide sales and service.... Launching such a game changer technology won't work with this little team so he must have at least one bigger partner that is doing business on a worldwide base and use their distribution channels. I found it also interesting to learn that he was able to design and develop his Quark-X while being under supervision (?) of IH or at least the cameras all day long at the warehouse. Hard to imagine that he had all the ressources, time, engineers (?) etc. to perform such epochal R&D work while babysitting his - sorry - IH's 1MW plant.
His current company / R&D location now must have offices, labs, workshops...a good number of people did a great job in unveiling the 1-year test location so maybe there is another chance to trace his current activities? He says he is playing tennis every weekend with his wife? Probably nearby where he lives / works...?Thx
-
Where is the fog that needs to be cut?
It is clear as crystal that Rossi never produced anything that works and with more brains than God gave to a wooden duck (courtesy MY) IH would have realized this before buying a one way ticket for a trip with SS Rossi.
Everything else about the Rossi - IH romance is of secondary interest.
The above statement applies equally well to any other LENR investment that is part of the IH portfolio. Eventually Impossible Heat will experience Indisputable Heat from disappointed investors.
...
Thank you sifferkoll, a dislike from you is a compliment.
Things are not really going your way, are they? -
Tom
I recommend you read 'fully' this: http://www.infinite-energy.com…ustrial-heat-lawsuit.html thanks to Shane D for this. In fact I recommend everyone seeking some insight to reduce the 'fog' to read it.
In fairness there appear to be a number of 'flaws in Rossi's complaint which he still has chance before the deadline to rectify.
Then of course we will have to wait for the defendants reply and then Rossi's reply to their reply. If Rossi's stuff doesn't work as you claim, the patents and I think the contract will be invalid. It will be interesting to see if IH alledge 'fraud' in this respect or they concentrate on their right to use the IP the way they have done and intend to do so. Cant see them continuing with this tack if:
Rossi never produced anything that works and with more brains than God gave to a wooden duck (courtesy MY)
It looks more likely the case will focus on the 'contract' so we will have to wait and see.
Best regards
Frank -
Shane D said, "Tom,Instead of "cutting through the fog", you managed to make it even thicker."
That is Tom's Job.
-
About the broken link to my paper regarding Mathisian physics and LENR, here are two new links, hopefully not broken:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/icqo…ryGuideMay2draft.pdf?dl=0
https://drive.google.com/open?…nqCJFoFccdOG5uTUZsa1JWcmM
Sorry for the delay, but I am in a very different time zone from most of you, so by the time you get going I am already winding down, usually.
@Thomas Clarke you wrote:
"So: I'm not sure what you mean in this context. While excess heat could perhaps be viewed as the byproduct of high energy particles, it would be very difficult for high energy particles to be the
byproduct of anomalous heat since this breaks the second law of thermodynamics."I don't mean that the nuclear reactions are byproducts of anomalous heat, but rather that they are byproducts of the process that generates the anomalous heat (which is not itself what we would normally define as a nuclear process). Those nuclear reactions may contribute to the anomalous heat production, but they are not necessary for the production of excess heat. But of course there's no way for you to understand what I mean until you read the document linked to above, since what the argument I'm making is based on a theory that is outside the contemporary mainstream physics paradigm.
-
4- If IH own the IP I think they can do what they like with it unless there are restrictions in the contract, so that would I think be down to the 'fine print'.
As I understand IH does not own Rossi's IP, but have a license on it, to use it in some territory.Frank - is the Brillouin "demo" in DC the basis for Rossi's claim that IH shared his IP with others?
I did not see any reference to a real demo, but a simple show with prototype presented to the audience, and slides... Maybe i should get more
see
http://www.infinite-energy.com…Congress-News-Release.pdf
http://action.larouchepac.com/lenrThe most convincing demo seems to be the smile of a Larouche's missionary
Brillouin has always made only electrolytic apparatuses: go to read all their patent applications made before their agreement with IH, and you will find confirmation of what I am saying ( I know their patents by heart, because I have studied them and probably I know them better than themselves : I wrote about 100 pages of notes about their patents ). And now the singular coincidence: they make the agreement with IH in April 2015, and Voilà, they made a public demo in Capitol Hill ( Washington, DC) with a device that is the Copy-Cat of something I am familiar with. Nothing that Brillouin has ever made before the agreement with IH. What a coincidence !!!
This is pure mistake.
It is many years that Brillouin work on their dry system the HHT, which is based on Qwave excitation like the WET wet system.just follow the news on lenr-forum.
