The Playground

    Quote

    Jed Rothwell has developed hatred for two LENR developers: J.Hadjichristos and A.Rossi. R Mills has produced less results for far more capital invested yet remains unhated. Mills has gone through about 100 million in capital in 20 some years, Rossi 11.5 in a dozen years and J.Hadjichristos was salaried and left LENR research destitute. Emotional thinking holds no quarter to logic.


    OK, so Defkalion and Rossi got less money under false pretenses than Mills managed to corner over 20+ years of producing nothing tangible. So what? That makes Defkalion and Rossi better than Mills somehow? They just got caught quicker, that's all.

    @Peter Ekstrom


    You mentioned Elforsk. Some time ago, I wrote an email to CEO, Magnus Olofsson, regarding Rossi's background, previous failures, lack of accomplishments, etc. etc. and a summary of the critiques of the hot cat experiments. I received a polite reply. Others also wrote him. Since that time, we have heard very little about Elforsk support for Rossi. I doubt that there has been any more money from them for this cause. I think they took an objective look at Rossi and decided not to send good money after bad. That's a guess. I could be wrong. Anybody know the last time Elforsk spent money for matters related directly to Rossi?

    Jed wrote:

    Quote

    And other facts, that seemed to indicate otherwise, were available to me, while still others were published openly in 2013:lenr-canr.org/acrobat/LeviGindication.pdfThat report still indicates something may be going on. You can ignore it, dismiss it, or pretend it does not exist, but there it is.

    It's not just me. Many competent people have carefully analyzed the paper and dismissed it on the grounds that it is bad science and completely unreliable results.


    Quote

    It seems likely that other people have real heat from Ni-H systems. That alone gave Rossi a measure of credibility. You won't admit that because you dismiss all of cold fusion, but people who are seriously interested in the subject -- as opposed to drive-by debunkers -- have to look all results with an open mind.You have the luxury of dismissing everything.


    I don't "dismiss everything" about LENR and I am not a "drive-by debunker" whatever that is. I took a very carefully longitudinal look at Rossi's past history and current "work" and determined with only the most minimal doubt that he is a you-know-what-which-can't-be-said-here-and-is-an-f-word. I know nothing about most of LENR. I have no interest in results of minimal scale or from isoperibolic calorimetry. Rossi claimed to have a reproducible high power result and provided data one could examine. That is what interested me. I also looked closely at his thermoelectric device claims and project including obtaining my own documents from the FOIA. That is hardly a "drive-by" debunking.


    Quote

    You have no responsibility here. You do not publish papers or give talks at ICCF conferences. You may not even be giving us your real name. That simplifies the problem for you. As I said, a person can easily be right 90% of the time in science just by saying "it won't work; there's nothing to it." You get a great track record and the APS lets you write a "What's New" column. No one will hold it against you in the instances when blindly predicting failure backfires, and it turns out the new discovery works. However, if you are in I.H.'s position, it is not so easy to dismiss Rossi, or to magically know that he was a fraud before doing your own tests.


    As you often do, you miss the point. Of course, my real name is not Mary Yugo. I thought I told you who I was years ago but if I didn't and you still want to know, contact me (now at maryyugo [at] yahoo [dot] com). We probably know some of the same people. But that doesn't matter. I never asked anyone to believe me because of who I am or what I accomplished in the past.


    As for IH's position, it was and is untenable. There is no demand that they know Rossi was a f___ before doing tests. The problem is that they did *not* do tests or anyway not proper tests, before committing to give $11.5M (!!!!) to the guy. They could not have looked at his record with Petroldragon and DOD thermoelectric projects. Or if they did, they were incredibly negligent. And they either used incompetent experts or they used no experts at all, relying instead on what Rossi told them or perhaps what Levi and the professors told them. We just don't know what due diligence they or Woodford did. I asked Woodford on their own Q&A forum and they *refused* to say. So there is no magic here at all, just simple deduction from carefully observing Rossi, his claims, and his results, for going on 5+ years. Hardly "drive-by".

    Quote from Paradigmnoia

    So, just so I know, even with one clamp on a dead (disconnected) line, with three phase but using only single phase power from it, one inverted clamp still makes the power look three times higher?
    Any idea how to make power look 5 times higher with single phase?


    oh yes, an inverted clamp is an arbitrary COP generator.

    @andrea.s,
    Neat.
    The COP "5.6" I have already reduced to a COP of just slightly over 5, due to calculation errors in the report. (But this does not affect input power)
    I'm not sure where I put the original post at the moment, but the two problems are a T^4 calculation error, and an overly high heat transfer factor that affects the convection calculation.


    Edit: Moving the ε to match that found in the HT2 test (if that is appropriate?), the COP rises again...

    I wonder if "inverting" the clamp can just be achieved by opening it up and reversing the coil polarity, so that it looks to be connected properly.
    Or worse, it could have come from the factory like that, screwing up the Professors ever since...


    I was under the impression that the inverted clamp created a perfect 3.0 x power in three phase.

    • Official Post
    Quote from Paradigmnoia

    I wonder if "inverting" the clamp can just be achieved by opening it up and reversing the coil polarity, so that it looks to be connected properly.


    As I understand it, an AC current clamp works by induction. It contains - in the jaw area- a small ferrite-cored transformer which is in turn couple to a current sensor. Output from the coil is AC in this case, so (perhaps) simply reversing it at the coil end wouldn't achieve much.
    AC/DC clamps use a hall sensor circuit. I know less about those.

    @Alan Smith,
    The best information I can come up with is that the PCE clamps are powered by the meter, and have selectable sensitivities (1A, 10A, 100A), and are then most likely of the Hall effect type. This is not expressed directly in any of the literature, however.
    I haven't opened up one of these clamps to look inside.
    It is feasible that they cannot be re-wired or even opened without wrecking them.

    The interplanetary monitoring system has delivered yet another incredible find. Video has been captured of Walker, Rossi's lie-bombfactory space dog, at work. I knew there had to be some kind of explanation as to how Walker, Rossi's lie-bombfactory space dog, comes up with such fascinating fabrications. Now we know - he takes a quick tour of the P.R. cow pasture and viola, a natural trance that produces those legendary lead-off thread header fibs. I heard they make great cheeseheads on P.R. (they use it for brain filler in certain clones made at the massive production robotic online blog fodder/responder clone factory) so perhaps this explains other things as well. Don't just take my word for it - see for yourself:

    http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/w…g-stumbles-stares-8273309


    Dewey. One or the other of us appears to be drunk. And I suspect it's you, because this isn't even (very) funny. Alan

    Alan - sober as Rossi's judge and it is The Playground after all. It is a little bit funny and no you're not stuck with an unemployed comedian so don't worry. I've heard that trippy mushrooms are plentiful on Planet Rossi. There has to be some kind of explanation for their behavior. Do you have other suggestions?

    Quote from Dewey Weaver

    Alan - sober as Rossi's judge and it is The Playground after all. It is a little bit funny and no you're not stuck with an unemployed comedian so don't worry. I've heard that trippy mushrooms are plentiful on Planet Rossi. There has to be some kind of explanation for their behavior. Do you have other suggestions?


    Dewey, have you considered a scientific explanation for the behavior on Planet Rossi? Maybe the atmosphere on that planet has an over-abundance of helium causing them to see an alternate reality. This is the most logical reason I can postulate!!

    Renzz - haven't thought of that. Perhaps they are not carbon burning units. Or perhaps all of the heat pollution from all of those 1MW ecats cooked their brains into peanut butter brittle. It's got to be something along these lines. Let's keep working on this.

    @Eric Walker,
    If a blank run is done, or a calibrated load tested, I should think it would be immediately apparent.
    Unless it was on an unconnected phase, maybe.


    I wasn't making a big deal out this idea. It was more like wondering out loud.
    I would think that an inverted clamp would have looked fairly obvious. So I was wondering how it might not look obvious.

    • Official Post
    Quote from stephenrenzz

    Dewey, have you considered a scientific explanation for the behavior on Planet Rossi?



    Interesting question cleaned of jokes.


    My theory is that it is classical mechanism of "groupthink" as I like to describe it beased on roland Benabou work.
    http://www.princeton.edu/~rbenabou/papers/Groupthink IOM 2012_07_02 BW.pdf


    The idea is that initially the position of a "planet" member is simply rational from their partial data, and the value system (evaluation function, notion of what is Occam Razor simpler). Some people value experiments , some theory, some distrusts scientists, some distrust business, some distrusts academic, all with good evidences... this make a market of ideas.


    now new data came, and there is a phase transition between population.


    if one planet dweller have possibilities to take advantage, to reduce damage, himself without help from others, by accepting new data, then he will simply take the data, change his position, and move from the planet.


    Now if someone cannot take advantage from his knowledge, because he cannot take benefit alone, needing help from other dwellers, then he will attack any other sweller that challenge his past rational belief. This will motivate more the other dweller to do the same, not only believing in a myth but attacking realists.


    This mean that the problem is not people stupidity, not people lack of information, but their dependence on others opinion,, and their selfish capacity to exit from the wreckage.
    This is why consanguinity and peer-review, like mark to market=consensus, with lack of entrepreneurship to benefit from other's delusion in a community led naturally to groupthink.
    It is clear that salaried people, people dependent on regulation (eg bankers), on consensus, on polling, on peer review, subordinate people, powerless people without any capital to invest in opportunities, are prone to groupthink...
    On the opposite desperate people with a capital, fringe people with network and talents, aliens and outsiders in a community, mavericks, tycoons free to break rules and ignore peers (See Bill Gates on energy and poverty, defending nuke and chicken), can make mistake but are less prone to groupthink.


    this is why we should be respectful to others disagreeing (we can be wrong BTW) and without pity with pathological incentive networks, with harassment and bullying, and finally why we should defend freedom of speech, freedom to claim, and to criticize.

    Alainco - Good post. You continue to build on the foundation for the eventual final definition of the "Rossi Effect".


    Since you're investing some effort into an attempt to understand what is happening, I think that it might help for you to spend some time thinking what drives groupthink to fabricate, slander and lie as part of their launch point. There was an intentional malicious nature to this from inception. That was driven by a thought leader and perpetuated by hardcore disciples and/or faux handles of the thought leader. That initial batch of lies, slander and libel set off this firestorm. Also notice that when Planet Rossi cannot handle the heat rounds, they call occasionally for banning and moderator intervention. That happened on Mats blog just before comments were shutdown and on ECW just before nckhawk got banned. They may continue to post misleading and false threads and responses in an attempt to try and direct the narrative. They don't realize it yet but they have lost the PR war and their base of believers is rapidly dwindling. Lies, slander and libel never work as a winning strategy in the long run.

    • Official Post

    IMHO, it is simpler than that. There is no Rossi-organised PR group. That is a convenient fantasy in itself. What you do have is a group of people who - just as you do Dewey - believe in the reality and the possibilities of LENR. You can find such groups adhering to all sorts of strange ideas. The sale of guns to anyone who wants one, flat-earthism, creationism and so on.
    Rossi gave them new hope and a fresh injection of some kind of science. So now some members of our here, and others on E-Cat world group believe in the messenger as well as the medium. Some just believe in the medium - Ni/Li/LiAlH4 as a good system. And every Christ needs an Anti-Christ. Enter IH.


    So my advice to Dewey is to be more positive about your approach to Nickel-based LENR -offer an alternative belief system and you will gather more disciples.

    Quote

    So my advice to Dewey is to be more positive about your approach to Nickel-based LENR -offer an alternative belief system and you will gather more disciples.


    Any proposed method of LENR needs clean, clear objective and independent evidence, not disciples. Religions need disciples, not scientific claims. Clean, clear evidence for *any* high power claim to LENR is simply lacking. And by now, we know or should know how the claims of Defkalion and Rossi should be viewed.

    Quote from Mary Yugo

    Any proposed method of LENR needs clean, clear objective and independent evidence, not disciples. Religions need disciples, not scientific claims. Clean, clear evidence for *any* high power claim to LENR is simply lacking. And by now, we know or should know how the claims of Defkalion and Rossi should be viewed.


    Dr. Leif Holmlid provides the claims and he is peer reviewed.

Subscribe to our newsletter

It's sent once a month, you can unsubscribe at anytime!

View archive of previous newsletters

* indicates required

Your email address will be used to send you email newsletters only. See our Privacy Policy for more information.

Our Partners

Supporting researchers for over 20 years
Want to Advertise or Sponsor LENR Forum?
CLICK HERE to contact us.