Newton, bragged about the benefits of celibacy. When he died in 1727, he had transformed our understanding of the natural world forever and left behind 10 million words of notes; he was also, by all accounts, still a virgin (Tesla was also celibate, though he later claimed he fell in love with a pigeon).
The Playground
-
-
Alainco - IH, along with others, is shepherding the next ICCF21 Chairmanship into the right hands. The Elders are in agreement - all is going to be okay. At this stage, it is more appropriate for the research community to lead itself. Besides, the business guys have a temporary distraction that must be dealt with. Back to the front.
To all members:
Has there been an official announcement on ICCF21 anywhere that can be linked to? I am sorry but I do not know how or who is the steward(s) nor the process.
I get that there are issues but I have not seen a formal announcement. If there is an announcement can someone link to it? if not these elders need to get their shaite together. If there is no information available then that would be fine, but I would appreciate something hard. This is too vague for me I am sorry to say. If I missed it I apologize but I try to keep up.
-
There was an informal announcement only. It now seems highly likely that ICCF21 will be held in the USA but not in North Carolina.
-
Has there been an official announcement on ICCF21 anywhere that can be linked to? I am sorry but I do not know how or who is the steward(s) nor the process.
It is not official but Jean-Paul Biberian made an comment on his blog about the Conférence à Asti http://blogde-jeanpaulbiberian…rence-asti-4eme-jour.html"The conference ended with a gala dinner, during which it was announced that the next ICCF 21 conference would be held on the East Coast of the United States in the summer of 2018."
-
But not AFAIK the East coast. The other one.
-
Rossc, this kind of blows your narrative that IH did not tell AR about any problems until after the third PRV (puppet responsible for verification) report.
Not at all. Rossi began collaborating with Dameron and initially had positive news from JT, who said that IH had successfully replicated the reactor. Then one day he receives an email from the same JT that says "We hired a new engineer, he will visit the Plant." Why they introduce a new and unknown person? The first successes were not convincing enough? This has generated suspicion and the consequent lack of collaboration.
-
Not at all. Rossi began collaborating with Dameron and initially had positive news from JT, who said that IH had successfully replicated the reactor. Then one day he receives an email from the same JT that says "We hired a new engineer, he will visit the Plant." Why they introduce a new and unknown person? The first successes were not convincing enough? This has generated suspicion and the consequent lack of collaboration.
That is a bit much.
From depo it is quite clear Dameron was not up to validating test setups, and the initial good results were all trusting Rossi/Fulvio setups.
What do you think IH would do once they realised that these setups (even if OKed by the Swedes) could not be trusted?
Yes, that is right, they would get in an engineer competent to check the testing, not just do what Rossi told him.
Now: This has generated suspicion and the consequent lack of collaboration. You are right, but the reason for that is Rossi will suspect and not collaborate with anyone who does not accept his tests as 100% true, not to be checked.
Can you see the problem with this? Are you suggesting IH should never check Rossi's tests?
-
Quote
Finally after all important old LENR experiments (Celani, Mizunu, Iwamura etc.) were confirmed, also Mills findings by different Russian researchers, we are only a few steps away from a "field explosion" like in computer science after 1990. (Which was a great experience.)
It's all nonsense but just for openers, want to tell me how Celani was confirmed. I am quite familiar with his claims and with his futile and incompetent attempts to prove them.
-
Quote
It is not a bit hard to explain. Look at the way the scientific establishment reacted to other breakthroughs that hit them in the pocketbook, such as the NMR or the discovery that helicobacter pylori causes ulcers. It is all about money and power.
I am not familiar with what may have slowed down NMR (I assume you mean nuclear magnetic resonance). But h. pylori as a cause of gastric and duodenal ulcers was rapidly adopted by many. Sure, there were some ignorant holdouts. There are still flat earthers, people who think the trips to the moon were faked, and so on. Here is the history of h. pylori discoveries as per Wikipedia:
QuoteInterest in understanding the role of bacteria in stomach diseases was rekindled in the 1970s, with the visualization of bacteria in the stomachs of people with gastric ulcers.[111] The bacteria had also been observed in 1979, by Robin Warren, who researched it further with Barry Marshall from 1981. After unsuccessful attempts at culturing the bacteria from the stomach, they finally succeeded in visualizing colonies in 1982, when they unintentionally left their Petri dishes incubating for five days over the Easter weekend. In their original paper, Warren and Marshall contended that most stomach ulcers and gastritis were caused by bacterial infection and not by stress or spicy food, as had been assumed before.[112]
Some skepticism was expressed initially, but within a few years multiple research groups had verified the association of H. pylori with gastritis and, to a lesser extent, ulcers.[113] To demonstrate H. pylori caused gastritis and was not merely a bystander, Marshall drank a beaker of H. pylori culture. He became ill with nausea and vomiting several days later. An endoscopy 10 days after inoculation revealed signs of gastritis and the presence of H. pylori. These results suggested H. pylori was the causative agent. Marshall and Warren went on to demonstrate antibiotics are effective in the treatment of many cases of gastritis. In 1987, the Sydney gastroenterologist Thomas Borody invented the first triple therapy for the treatment of duodenal ulcers.[114]
While certainly significant, h. pylori is more likely to cause stomach irritation (gastritis) than ulceration and there are many other causes of ulcers. I think it is a poor example. The value of testing for and treating h. pylori infections was rapidly acknowledged as soon as the original researchers had performed the appropriate controlled studies which they bravely (and perhaps stupidly) did on themselves. It all took place within five years -- most of it within three. How long have we been agonizing over LENR now with little meaningful progress?
Fuel cells have been adopted, wind and solar and geothermal energy are being developed, alternative fuels are explored. Do you seriously think that if LENR were a proven entity with useful applications, someone rich would not fund it and pick up the research? Bad as the data are, apparently Bill Gates is giving money and certainly Carl Page and Sidney Kimmel are interested and are giving research money. And as we know, Woodford committed $50 Million and the Chinese provided some unknown amount to IH's boondoggles. The problem, in my estimation, is not lack of interest or willful repression but simply a lack of convincing findings, especially of practicality but even of any reality to the claims at all. Protestations of malevolence, conspiracy and bad faith are simply unsupported. LENR is denigrated by main line science because the evidence that it works is so poor and sparse. And if LENR is real, the evidence should be much better and much more consistent. Nobody with any relevant education, for example, doubts that Farnsworth's fusor works or that muon-catalyzed fusion is real. Why in the world would those same people reject LENR out of hand?
-
I am not familiar with what may have slowed down NMR (I assume you mean nuclear magnetic resonance).
Yes. See Warren and others.
But h. pylori as a cause of gastric and duodenal ulcers was rapidly adopted by many. Sure, there were some ignorant holdouts.
The entire medical establishment was a holdout for 15 years, despite overwhelming evidence.
There are many other examples, such as the laser. See Townes autobiography. Other examples include Arrhenius, and Barbara McClintock who faced opposition and ridicule for 32 years.
-
The entire medical establishment was a holdout for 15 years, despite overwhelming evidence.
It was discovered that bacteria causes peptic ulcers in pigs in 1952. Antibiotics started being widely prescribed to humans with peptic ulcers around 1994.
-
@maryyugo
I would like you to review your posts on this page. One is Mary classic 'you are wrong and do not know squat' The other is when you give a damn and care to contribute.
i have been trying to get people here to engage so I wanted to point this out. Don't take this wrong as it is not an insult, you have something to say and people turn off the 'you are an ass stuff quick'. You know that old joke if asses were airplanes we would have an airport. Please re-read #2617. It is informative.
-
Nobody with any relevant education, for example, doubts that Farnsworth's fusor works or that muon-catalyzed fusion is real. Why in the world would those same people reject LENR out of hand?
Because it's obvious to people with a relevant education how both Farnsworth's Fusor and muon-catalysed fusion can overcome the Coulomb barrier.
-
Can you see the problem with this? Are you suggesting IH should never check Rossi's tests?
Not at all. I think IH would had to hire a competent engineer right away because a fact is asking investors to give money for a risky process, and another is asking them to jump in the dark. But I understand Rossi's reaction, his lack of trust in Murray's good faith. In a first moment IH trusts him and says the reactors made by them work, then when the end of the test (and therefore the payment) gets closer, IH begins to hire new staff and become less friendly. If you want to be scrupulous and rigorous, you have to do it from day one. If you do it approaching to the end, your attitude becomes suspicious.
-
Not at all. I think IH would had to hire a competent engineer right away because a fact is asking investors to give money for a risky process, and another is asking them to jump in the dark. But I understand Rossi's reaction, his lack of trust in Murray's good faith. In a first moment IH trusts him and says the reactors made by them work, then when the end of the test (and therefore the payment) gets closer, IH begins to hire new staff and become less friendly. If you want to be scrupulous and rigorous, you have to do it from day one. If you do it approaching to the end, your attitude becomes suspicious.
I find this comment interesting, most engineers are a bit high strung and can be protective of their work at times. But one thing stands clear, they expect it to be properly tested and put to work. It may not work perfectly but it has to have it's basic functionality. Trust was not involved at all just a test plan.
Some times things worked and some times they failed and had to be reworked. I think that IH clearly gets that they could have done a better job, even those who criticize Rossi are pretty even handed about IH in this regard. This is how engineering works, this case is not about that. It's about a scam involving a rigged demo. Even ECW is starting to address this directly. Tell me the truth? Isn't that uncomfortable?
It should be. -
Not at all. I think IH would had to hire a competent engineer right away because a fact is asking investors to give money for a risky process, and another is asking them to jump in the dark. But I understand Rossi's reaction, his lack of trust in Murray's good faith. In a first moment IH trusts him and says the reactors made by them work, then when the end of the test (and therefore the payment) gets closer, IH begins to hire new staff and become less friendly. If you want to be scrupulous and rigorous, you have to do it from day one. If you do it approaching to the end, your attitude becomes suspicious.
SSC. Speculation is all very well. But in this case, because of Discovery, we KNOW you are wrong. They had Dameron - not competent to check. They relied on Fulvio (not independent) and the various external independent tests which turn out also not to be independent.
Read the detailed depositions, not the extracts from the MSJs. It is very clear, and will I expect be found so by a Jury who will have to sit through the whole thing. Poor them. The business logic facts looked at as a whole are inescapable, and can be well weighed by a Jury.
-
Back in "civilized" areas for a day... Good tidings all!
Once upon a time we could work out results by mathematical precision. Indifferent to the machinations of the human mind. "Tricks" were exposed, Newtons Laws still held sway....
Now it is "Did they have the money available?", "Were the Protocols deficient?", When did truly independent Experts arrive on the scene?", "Were they Really Independent?",
"Who is flummoxing who?", etc.
Math..., all-encompassing, extraordinarily efficient, almost unnaturally effective, fails us now.
Opinion, the most useless of all human endeavors, now leads the charge.
How ineffectual.
How.... well just plain How?
WTF can fill the void?
Can the Mob make a useful decision?
Can reason fight the darkness?
Can opinion Rule on Fact in a useful way?
Can science shed light on the shadowy darkness?
Is it all a bunch of shit? From all directions? Misdirected misdirection?
I have no answer.
Cheers and good night.
P
-
SSC. Speculation is all very well. But in this case, because of Discovery, we KNOW you are wrong. They had Dameron - not competent to check. They relied on Fulvio (not independent) and the various external independent tests which turn out also not to be independent.
We agree on this. In fact I said that IH should have assumed Murray right away. This would have been a "due diligence" and would not made Rossi suspect.
-
Anyone here know what is going on at Texas Tech????????
-
Silence from that department. I asked around at Asti, none of those people who might be expected to know knew anything substantive - that they were prepared to talk about anyway.
