Cutting Through the Fog Surrounding the Rossi/IH Dispute (Josh G)

@axil
On the contrary, the sintered Li coated carbonyl Ni particles look different - they are much more porous. It is just an observation.

Quote from Paradigmnoia

@Thomas Clarke

I think the copper in the ash was determined to be brazing rod, based on
commensurate phosphorus (flux), and was contamination introduced when
sawing open the old design which was made of various plumbing
parts.

Everything is possible on Rossi's planet.
* It would then be a coincidence that there was Cu in the ash when the
claimed (Focardi/Rossi "paper") reaction was p+Ni-->Cu?
* I would say that it would have been exceedingly clumsy to contaminate the ash sample in the way you suggest.
* Also, Rossi has admitted that he manipulated the sample.

With no Li in the fuel and standard distribution of Ni isotopes in the ash, which reaction would produce the excess energy? Even if we throw away normal nuclear physics knowledge, we should not mess with conservation of energy, should we?

Interesting, in the ash there are definitely particles similar to the Cu particles that contain Li. Would you expect the Cu to have Li contamination?

Background:
We have analysed fuel/ash from 2011 with a proton micro beam. The
reaction p+7Li-->2 alpha gives a very good signal (9 MeV alphas). We
could also determine the distribution of Cu, but the analysis has low
priority since we know the samples are manipulated. There are other
experiments relevant to E-Cat that would be more interesting.

Hank- thank you for your inquiry - you are the most polite and hardest working of Rossi's supporters. I used to be one of Rossi's supporters as well. There will be new information soon for everyone to digest and reach their own adjusted, hardened and / or enlightened conclusions.

Regarding your question, I'm not quite sure how to answer you and wanted to ask that you be a little more specific about what you're looking for. If I can provide a response that does not involve dry powder for the upcoming court case then I'll be happy to share some thoughts with you.

- Dewey

@Peter Ekstrom
If you look at the photos of the materials in the 2013 report, it is obvious there is all sorts of junk in there.
The copper in various analyses may have lead to the Ni-Cu hypothesis, rather than an a-priori hypothesis of Ni-Cu leading to finding Cu in ash.
Although it is possible the Ni-Cu hypothesis came first and was supported by sloppy ash recovery before more careful checks were done.
The copper hypothesis was eventually dropped, and use of ceramic vessels has apparently eliminated the Cu, confirming contaminant.
There was lithium in the Krivit-released analyses.

David - good to hear from you. I enjoyed the time spent with you at the French CMNS gathering in March. As you may know, I'm a shareholder in IH and I also work in development of the R&D sector looking for promising projects and researchers.

Things were not going well with Rossi and unfortunately, he chose to sue IH in what looks like a long-planned strategy. He also initiated a simultaneous character assassination and PR war effort against IH and some members of the team. I got caught up in that trying to defend folks like Tom Darden who are exactly what this sector needs. Unselfish, patient and cause-oriented investors. The first guys to show up with money in years and I guess that $11.5M for Rossi wasn't enough for technology that didn't work. His test bait and switch cycle gig is about up though. I can handle folks telling lies about me in the short term as I know the truth that is coming out in the long term.

No offense intended to the folks who support Rossi on this forum. Everyone has so much emotion and time invested in this guy. This is a difficult time for all of us.

Quote from Dewey Weaver

I didn't know that CimPy was an Italian journalist. Anybody know how to get in touch with him?

Somewhere it has been said "CimPy" is a nick shared among a bunch of users. I do not know if that is true, but "CimPy" (or similar nicks) has been very active in some forums/blogs for long time, including Mats Lewan's blog.

Maybe you could contact "CimPy" posting a message in one of those blog/forum - if not in Mats' one.

You could try, for example, to find out where the nick seems active in these days around one of these (the list could be longer, I searched only for few time)

http://www.energeticambiente.it/sistemi-idrogeno-nikel

https://fusionefredda.wordpress.com

https://barneypanofsky.wordpress.com

https://pathoskeptic.com

http://stephanpomp.blogspot.com

But should the tale about "a nick being shared among many" being true, you would not know which one will - if ever - answer you.
In any case, it seems as if the soul that gather "CimPy"'s (or - may be - the single hyperactive one) has to be classified as "pathological skeptic".

I warned you.

Paradigmnoia
I do not find it very interesting since Rossi already admitted that he manipulated the sample.

There is absolutely no Li in the fuel from 2011. If you ask very nicely I may even show you a spectrum.

@Peter Ekstrom,
So you have another analysis of the fuel or ash?
I have the Andersson and Schoberg 2012, The Krivit 2011(2012?), and the Edstrom et al. 2013 versions.

That there is no Li in the fuel is no surprise, but copper in the fuel would be. The Andersson and Schoberg 2012 had Li in the ash.

Could you please supply a spectrum, or other relevant data? Are these new analyses? Where did the materials come from?

Quote from Paradigmnoia

So you have another analysis of the fuel or ash?
I have the Andersson and Schoberg 2012, The Krivit 2011(2012?), and the Edstrom et al. 2013 versions.

That there is no Li in the fuel is no surprise, but copper in the fuel would be. The Andersson and Schoberg 2012 had Li in the ash.

Could you please supply a spectrum, or other relevant data? Are these new analyses? Where did the materials come from?

Yes, we have analysed the spring 2011 samples here in Lund. We have only run with the particle detector, but we may look with PIXE (x-rays). The samples came from a secret source. I'll send you a spectrum if you mail me and tell me who you are and why you are interested.

Here is Rossi's admission (anybody who reads J Nucl Phys will agree to the authenticity, this is classic Rossi caps):
"AS THESE SCIENTISTS CORRECTLY SAY, I SUPPLIED THOSE SAMPLES, IN
2011 (TO PROF. SVEN KULLANDER), AND I GAVE A SAMPLE FROM WHICH THE
COMPONENTS, THAT AT THOSE TIMES WERE NOT DISCLOSABLE, HAD BEEN
EXTRACTED, BECAUSE NOT YET PATENTED. I CLEARLY WARNED PROF.
KULLANDER OF THAT. SO WE ALL KNEW THAT TOSE ANALYSIS COULD NOT BE
TAKEN AS COMPLETE, BUT JUST AS A FIRST APPROACH TO THE PROBLEM. THE
COPPER FOUND WAS PROBABLY AN IMPURITY AND I MADE CLEAR THIS SUSPECT
OF MINE . IN THAT CASE THE SAMPLE HAD NOT BEEN WITHDRAWN FROM A
REACTOR BY A THIRD PARTY AND I HAVE NO DIFFICULTY TO SAY, AS I DID
WHEN I DELIVERED IT, THAT I HAD TAKEN OFF FROM IT THE PARTS THAT I
WANTED NOT TO DISCLOSE.

ANDREA ROSSI"

@Peter Ekstrom
I am well aware of the Rossi quote. I felt it meant that the Catalyst had been left out. (I am not sure how well one would take things way from a sample in any meaningful way without making it useless).
The main reason I am interested is that more samples means more reliable data. I do XRF stuff, and know how much things can wander from the ideal. But with enough samples, and the mean becomes meaningful, and the uncertainty can be judged.

Quote from Paradigmnoia

Peter Ekstrom
I am well aware of the Rossi quote. I felt it meant that the Catalyst had been left out. (I am not sure how well one would take things way from a sample in any meaningful way without making it useless).
The main reason I am interested is that more samples means more reliable data. I do XRF stuff, and know how much things can wander from the ideal. But with enough samples, and the mean becomes meaningful, and the uncertainty can be judged

Sorry, I'm not with you there. I have one set of samples from spring 2011. You cannot average my sample with the results from another sample.
Since Li give such a unique signal I can safely say that the fuel contains no Li and the ash (magnetic since it has been near a heating coil) contain some Li in mixed-in particles (probably the Cu particles).

I think Rossi's admission cam later when the separate Cu particles were known. It was then not possible that they came from a Ni reaction.

So the question is still: if there was excess heat, which reaction did it come from?

I can qualitatively look at the various analyses, and see what looks out of place, and what is consistent.
I am remarkably good at noticing anomalies and patterns in raw data.

As I understand it, the samples you currently have are the samples the late Sven Kullander had.

Why do you think that the Li is probably in the Cu?

Quote from Paradigmnoia

As I understand it, the samples you currently have are the samples the late Sven Kullander had.

Why do you think that the Li is probably in the Cu?

I'll do a Rossi, and then it's bedtime:
Yes
Because the spatial distribution is the same. If we had an x-ray detector we would be sure one way or the other. Unfortunately it was not available.

While poking around in the JoNP looking a copper references (strange overall) I found this little gem:

"The past three days have been holidays for most, but for us have been a tremendous period of work during which we made a historic page for what concerns our tech: for the first time, an E-Cat module, entirely produced by our USA Partner in the new factory ( a magnificence), charged with the charge made by the Partner’s CEO, using the materials we teached to buy, prepare,manipulate, treat, to make the charges, assembled , insulated, has started its operation, and the results are the same of the E-Cats built by us. This event means that for the first time an E-Cat not built by me, not controlled by me and not charged by me, not tested in my factory, but manufactured from third parties upon our instructions and know how has worked properly. This is the first unit of the plant that will give to the factory of our USA Partner all its necessary thermal energy, and is also the school ship for the employees. It is very important that it has been completely made by the Customer, not by me: it is the first of millions, but the first is always special. We celebrated with Coca Cola ( alcohol is forbidden in that factory). All the former plants, even if built in the USA, had been supplied with reactors cores made by me, so this is a very important step"
- JoNP July 8, 2013

Also found the Rossi E-Cat backstory:

"The first time I discovered the Effect has been in the USA in 1996, when I got about 3 watts, melting some Ni grains using a battery of 4 V as an energy source. I calculated ( miscalculated?) a COP 3. I was in Manchester, New Hampshire, in a small laboratory where I also worked in a steel carpentery to pay my expenses: when I came in the USA in 1996 I didn’t have money, because of what happened to me in Italy ( see http://www.ingandrearossi.com ) I had to live with 1,000 $ per month, which was not easy, because I had to pay 600/month for the rent of the apartment. In that period my daily meal sometimes was 2 boiled eggs. I used a lab of that steel carpentery during the free time to make my experiments. When the nickel melted I touched it with a finger and the finger ( left index, I am left handed) got burnt: it has been the sole time in my life in which to be burnt made me happy ( I am not masochist). Very happy. Before that day I had got effects, but not sure of the measurements, being the energies in the range of milliwatts, so very difficult to measure precisely with the instrumentation I had. I started working with Ni powders in 1993, when I decided that it was completely useless to go ahead along the path of electrolysis suggested by F&P ( which I studied very throughly) ."

Hank - While I await your response to my previous response to your request, I'm trying to learn more about you and found your book on Amazon. It states on the inside cover that the book is purely a fiction read. What was your intention in writing a book about the E-Cat that was fiction based? Also, I cannot find anything else about you with the exception of your posting history. Would you be so kind as to tell us a little more about your background? Are you an engineer or scientist?