The Playground

  • Since your are a moderator --- maybe some rules would be helpful. Is this thread moderated or not? If so, how will it be cut off if someone breaks from the dialog? I assume that you can talk about anything in the playground without being heard by adults. So what is the purpose exactly? And how many posts that are contrary before the thread is closed? I noticed on several sites that the conversation has been cut short. Where are the fences?
    A lot of people do not want to be slinging poop. And are only interested with the debate. The science of LENR. Are you guys sure about this?

  • @ Rigel


    Here are no rules, it is a playground build up as a reaction of the endless in circles rotating and thus pointless debates here in the forum, where in principle the only aim is to discredit the debaters through unsubstantiated personal attacks. If you what to do this, or if you like it, or need it (there are people out there you have such desires) then come over here to the playground, but do not complain.

  • It seems that we are advised to "walk on eggs" dealing with any member of the generation whose arrogance and ignorance has kept investigation of CF / LENR deeply underfunded and poorly understood by the broader scientific community and by the general public. The wording of recent moderator missive here was "diplomatic" enough, but seems to curry favor with a particular "elder", regardless of his position on LENR. An elder who seems here to make sure nothing offensive to the "received view" of say 1948 is even recognized without the ridicule of "authority". Here at this Forum we see a few other such elder scientists who contribute to the very necessary efforts needed to move forward with CF/LENR. Many of them avoid most such public venues precisely because they have grown so disgusted with "mainstream" dogma, and its enforcement by dogmatists. To some extent this Forum is being gradually taken over by a cadre of dogmatists who are firmly set to oppose even the notion of CF / LENR. Typically they are physicists and don't have much experience with quantum chemistry, for example. They often have not the slightest notion that the "coulomb barrier" can be undercut. Their dogma in this regard has directed them down a decades long colossal waste of government funding toward a very difficult goal of surmounting that barrier, by ever increasing temperatures (velocity) and pressures (density). They continue down this failed path and by dint of prior commitment come to Fora such as this to spread their gospel of mistaken judgements.

  • Then this is a good thing. I don't mind that I am wrong or missing critical information on the playground. No rules you say ? Are you sure and have checked with the rest of the Admins?
    If this is so, then Mary Yugo should be able to post here in THIS THREAD if not on the other threads. I hope you see what I am saying. This is your playground. This maybe hard to understand due the blog software. I mean, how to you keep a user in a same thread.... and not allow it to go off course?


    Regardless, I enjoy honest and frank dialog. I do not like the ad hominem attacks, but this PLAYGROUND is open, is THIS what you seem to be saying?
    So I do not seem like a hypocrite MY was in my opinion coming around to say what his point was. TY was a different story. I really want a 360 view. I hope this is possible.
    Thanks!

  • stephenrenzz - you're an animal! Which was is Sifferkoll?



    Dewey my son, if you recall Matthew 9:13 we take in to our hearts the following verse. "And by Gods grace alone, our lord and savior Rossi turned to his loving brother John to speak these words" -"we-ahh shall-ahh bring-ahh tha snakes-ahh to-ahh there-ahh knees-ahh".


    What is the hidden moral of that passage you ask Dewey? Much like the E-Cat....knees on snakes are not real.


    So I think it is John (yes the one usually mistaken for Mary). lol

  • Stephenrenzz - totally missed the mini-Rossi in the lower left hand corner. Two classics in 12 hours.
    If you end up with a couple of cycles, perhaps a rendering of Rossi listening to a Saturn V rocket engine test with his stethoscope? Even better, the picture of Rossi in his jacket in a steam bath or nuclear cooling tower scenario.

  • Oh dear Stephen - be careful quoting from the book of Rossi - you risk being stoned by the Fanhedrin.


    This was forwarded to me from the Church of a Poison Mind - it is written in the Book of Siffer, Chapter 1, Verse 27: "Write it many times and it will become truth!"

  • Stephenrenzz - totally missed the mini-Rossi in the lower left hand corner. Two classics in 12 hours.
    If you end up with a couple of cycles, perhaps a rendering of Rossi listening to a Saturn V rocket engine test with his stethoscope? Even better, the picture of Rossi in his jacket in a steam bath or nuclear cooling tower scenario.


    Oh you read my mind on the stethoscope!!! More goodies to come! haha

  • To some extent this Forum is being gradually taken over by a cadre of dogmatists who are firmly set to oppose even the notion of CF / LENR. Typically they are physicists and don't have much experience with quantum chemistry, for example.


    I find it rather refreshing to see that the LENR critics feel welcome enough here to participate in threads. I don't worry that they will take over, and, at any rate, I don't think that is happening. In their better posts, they add needed rigor to over-hopeful, hand-wavy speculation about various topics in physics.

  • Dewey Weaver-
    I asked that you were verified on another thread earlier today. I did this not as a Rossi advocate (for sure I think he is his own worse enemy) but to see if you represent IH in anyway that could be verified other than an email.


    You (and I will mention Skifferol-- so it's fair) and others spend so much time in personal attacks I am confused on why Mr. Darden or anyone from IH has not asked you to frankly to knock if off. I have spent a fair amount of money on investments that have not paid off. I just don't see how telling people that their IQ must be low if they do not agree with your point of view helps sway opinion. Is IH aware that you think everyone is dumb as f*ck? Especially if they don't see your point?
    Now since I have spent money (wasted btw) on technology in the past I don't see how you are doing IH any favors. Now if this is your personal Dewey money I could understand. I hate being screwed by people. But I sure as "crap" for a better word just do not get how this is moving your cause along.
    At least explain it.

  • Dewey Weaver-
    I asked that you were verified on another thread earlier today. I did this not as a Rossi advocate (for sure I think he is his own worse enemy) but to see if you represent IH in anyway that could be verified other than an email.


    You (and I will mention Skifferol-- so it's fair) and others spend so much time in personal attacks I am confused on why Mr. Darden or anyone from IH has not asked you to frankly to knock if off. I have spent a fair amount of money on investments that have not paid off. I just don't see how telling people that their IQ must be low if they do not agree with your point of view helps sway opinion. Is IH aware that you think everyone is dumb as f*ck? Especially if they don't see your point?
    Now since I have spent money (wasted btw) on technology in the past I don't see how you are doing IH any favors. Now if this is your personal Dewey money I could understand. I hate being screwed by people. But I sure as "crap" for a better word just do not get how this is moving your cause along.
    At least explain it.



    Rigel...intelligent minds are seeing right through Rossi's scam at this point. There was a time when many believed him, but he has now proven to be a scam-artist. Every time a question is asked about Rossi's criminal past in prison, his odd secretive ways, his rigging of tests in the past (the steam scandal is my favorite), his fake accounts he talks to himself with on his pompous blog (talk about an ego calling your blog journal of nuclear physics), the mysterious companies he has set up, the mysterious customer that moved in and moved out, outlandish answers are all Rossi supporters have to provide. Intelligent critical thinkers are no longer buying Rossi's lies and manufactured delays. To this day Rossi continues to operate in a shady secrecy.

  • I find it rather refreshing to see that the LENR critics feel welcome enough here to participate in threads. I don't worry that they will take over, and, at any rate, I don't think that is happening. In their better posts, they add needed rigor to over-hopeful, hand-wavy speculation about various topics in physics.


    Some, yes. I would say Thomas Clarke has been very constructive. I would also say that one "elder" is in the league of "authorities" whose ridicule has no place here. For example:


    [Re: the fawning comments by AlanG here.] It would be a great world in which the "elders" can be brought to aid a great cause. Unfortunately, as an elder of about Ekstrom's age, whose training was about 30 years later, I have to point out that Ekstrom may not likely be one of those helpful elders. I base this particularly on his contemptuous response to this request: "Perhaps you have permissions necessary to download the full text some such article and can bring us up to speed." referring to an article that may not be available to those without physics organizational affiliations. Ekstrom's response: "Yes I have access to the Indiana ion source article and I have read it. But I cannot see why I should do your job!"

  • It sounds like IH was setting up a pump and dump scheme. The first 11.5 million setup up the honey trap for the investor where by Rossi's IP rights brings in investment. Next, the relationship with Rossi is broken and IH cannot produce product. Next IH goes out of business and little of the invested capital is available for returned to the investors. IH never intended to manufacture a LENR product. The capital attracted to Rossi's tech would bring in money and then when Rossi is removed from the picture via a buyout, a failed performance test, or a legal case, Industrial Heat would go out of business with little capital remaining to be refunded to the investors.


    The bankruptcy strategy seems to be a tried and true way that successful money management makes money today among the moneyed elite bean counters. These people are not interested in product development, but in capital manipulation.


    It is a form of pump and dump but instead of stock as the means of capital acquisition, the attraction is IP, businesses, or real estate.


    A front company is used to acquirer an attractive property to attract a large amount of capital.


    The front company is then bankrupted after a major proportion of the capital has been redirected to the holding company.


    When all you know how to do is flip, that is all you will do. The bean counters will not risk going into manufacturing and expose themselves to the competition that comes with it when the old tried an true ways have always been a sure thing.


    D. Trump has used bankruptcy and casinos to divert capital to his parent company. His creditors lose money but not Trump. This is called the art of the deal.


    Mit Romney and his money management fund sucked the lifeblood from an valuable assets of an acquired company then after a year or two placed the hulk and worthless corpse of the company into bankruptcy.


    And according to Matts a similar capital skimming strategy is being used in the LENR marketplace: "IH/Cherokee, as has been suggested, has a track record of putting up companies based on emerging technologies or remediation projects, collecting public and private funding (or also this link), making the funds disappear and then closing down the companies with reasonable explanations for unsuccessful development of the technology or of the project."


    There is a ton of money in the environmental sector that can be skimmed and corporate and financial vultures and vampires are springing up to take full advantage.

  • Perhaps this shows a worthy example of the hobbled thinking that may be pervasive among skeptic "physicists" with little knowledge of the real world.


    Ekstrom's response: "Yes I have access to the Indiana ion source article and I have read it. But I cannot see why I should do your job!"


    Maybe you should take a step back and see what caused my reaction. I found your comment arrogant. And why do you need help from somebody "with little knowledge of the real world".

  • Maybe you should take a step back and see what caused my reaction. I found your comment arrogant. And why do you need help from somebody "with little knowledge of the real world".


    I don't and it is very likely we don't. I think it is appropriate to let those who may not be familiar with how some few elders can poison the discourse with their manifest academic ignorance paraded as "authority". At about your age, I've been there and seen that enough to know (Ph.D. 15 years ago, summa cum laude undergrad work, both at a major research university). Maybe you should step back yourself and see what comment by you led to my comment.


    "From your arrogant besserwisser comment one gets the impression that you knew what you were talking about. That is obviously not the case."


    Now, perhaps several 'microwave to proton' references later, we see that I know at least something of what I was "talking about". And there are many more such references concerning proton liberation/generation/isolation using exactly the microwave generator (magnetron, thyratron or whatever) from a microwave oven, or the power (20 to 50 W) and frequency equivalent (2.45 GHz). Further a fair number of these references might be reached in spite of your refusal to be helpful. Frankly, I find your arrogance just stupid, since your credentials should obviate the need for any such posturing. Further I think others here make a grave error in cutting you what amount to a "free pass", even though they claimed not to be doing so.

  • In the playground!!! I will dump a little nugget of my own. I think that ME356 is as phoney as the skeptics who spew out endless attacks on courageous researchers taking on the LENR windmill, to the length of "War and Peace" every year. Perhaps Hank Mills can stop begging him, and like Rossi, ignore them until they produce a steamer or get of the pot.


    And yes Mr. Ekstrom is like every dogmatic physicist who think that their disagreeing with someone is an invitation to intimidate them into stopping.


    Read this: http://nautil.us/issue/7/waste/einsteins-lost-hypothesis, Mr. Ekstrom. If Albert Einstein can consider the possibility of unexpected properties and reactions in the atomic and nuclear realm, so to, could you!

  • And yes Mr. Ekstrom is like every dogmatic physicist who think that their disagreeing with someone is an invitation to intimidate them into stopping.


    He's not at all intimidating. There's exactly zero power to intimidate in broad historical generalizations along the lines of: "we've studied such-and-such for 100 years, and we've never seen anything like that!" It is very easy to ignore that kind of broad-brush statement, and even enjoy it as being a little quirky. Peter Ekstrom also has made some genuinely insightful comments. I'm glad he's here!

  • Read this: nautil.us/issue/7/waste/einsteins-lost-hypothesis, Mr. Ekstrom. If Albert Einstein can consider the possibility of unexpected properties and reactions in the atomic and nuclear realm, so to, could you!


    I have read it. It is a sweet little story that is like a gospel for the LENR religion. Scientifically, Sternglass did not have the best of reputations and he even failed to replicate his own experiment! The article ends with a few heroes of the LENR world, e.g. Krivit's favourite Lewis-Larsen. A very nice attempt to make out that Einstein is part of LENR history!


    Thanks Eric and Alan for the support!

  • Mr. Ekstron, The point is NOT that Sternglass was right, (although that is still not clear) but that Einstein did not take the expedient course of chanting dogma, but encouraged him to be stubborn and pursue his research. He even acknowledged a theoretical basis upon which the proton generation could be based. Simply put he encouraged out of the box research and understood that the standard model was in no way complete or even necessary. Your "certainty" regarding any number of phenomenon is not at all the same, and that does in fact inhibit certain avenues of research. I would be far happier with your comments if they were delivered in a more open minded manner, at least accepting that the LENR results are at the least enticing and worthy of further work even if, in the end, that is futile.

  • The Grump,

    He even acknowledged a theoretical basis upon which the proton generation
    could be based.


    Yes. Unfortunately wrong, though.

    Simply put he encouraged out of the box research and understood that the
    standard model was in no way complete or even necessary.


    Yes, but sometimes people get too far outside the box and need to be
    brought back. Also, the main thing is not theory - theories come and go -
    but an enormous amount of experimental results.

    ..at least accepting that the LENR results are at the least enticing and
    worthy of further work even if, in the end, that is futile.


    I do, but some touch with reality is needed!


    This is getting way to pleasant for this thread, so I'd better stop before I get in trouble with the moderator. :)


    PS. I think it is a shame that Thomas felt he had to leave the forum
    because of something I can only classify as bullying. His dedication and
    knowledge will be sourly missed! The purpose of this forum is, I hope,
    to make progress by discussion. Not like The Other Place were the
    purpose is to promote dubious products.

  • I think, that this forum needs to have members with a solid and "established" scientific background like Peter Ekstrom and I'm also glad that he is here.


    It doesn't matter, wether someone seems to be a believer or a skeptic, because no one is forced to adopt the opinions of the other. But everyone here may benefit from the presentation of different views / facts and might become inspired to new ideas or solutions.