Rossi: “Steam Was Superheated” in 1MW Plant Test

Quote from stephenrenzz

I personally think it is impossible to imagine that Rossi was able to go from spending every waking hour babysitting the plant, to immediately changing gears to creating the QuarkX which is not only a fraction of the size, but also produces light of any color and produces electricity itself!!!! I am so interested in the magic part that creates controlled light color and more specifically electricity itself as that is my forte in this saga. Adding an electricity component to the device would be a monumental task alone. This is so outlandish to believe that he could so rapidly shrink the device down and then add the magic fun features. This is not said in sarcasm, but I just do not understand how this is sensible to intelligent minds.

But in the comics, the superhero inventor does things like this every day. And fans cheer!

I urge people to read An Impossible Invention, but read it without assuming any reality to Rossi claims. Do assume that what Mats observed happened, but be careful. Mats sometimes reports, not what he actually observed, but what Rossi told him was happening. For example, if Mats reports that in a test, so much water was evaporated, that is not an actual measure, it is an inference, typically assuming that 100% of water was evaporated.

All other evidence is ignored. Mats is aware of the problem, at least at times. He worries that he's becoming too involved.

Many, many assumptions are made by observers. For example, self-sustain mode is considered proof of power generation. But the devil is in the details. SS mode for how long and with what water flow and heat output? The e-Cats apparently consider of a metal chamber that is heated to high temperature, in which the fuel is placed. So it's operating at high temperature, way above boiling, and it has a certain mass. That is energy storage. That heat could then be used to boil water for a time. The lower the water flow, the longer the time. And the cooling water temperature would matter. The higher the temperature going in, the longer power generation could be sustained.

One fraud possibility that occurred to me for the 1 MW reactor would be that in the "customer area" was a boiler, that sent steam back into the 1 MW plant. Remember, Rossi asked the ERV to disregard input water temperature. Now, one observer mentioned that the steam would not register in the flow meter. I doubt that is true, but the flow meter might show incorrect flow. There would be a mixture of water and steam going in, and liquid water-steam heat transfer is slow. The steam would be essentially invisible going in. But adding heat. These are fraud scenarios, requiring intention.

What is amazing to me is people very ready to assume fraud on the part of IH, where it takes a very weird conspiracy theory, but not willing to allow the possibility with Rossi. Why? Krivit has been fond of pointing out "convicted white-collar criminal," and I deprecate that, because the interpretation of that history is quite difficult, but ... an assumption of complete innocence, while at the same time accusing some fairly reputable people of fraud? People who actually put up a lot of money to support the Rossi invention?

What this requires is a certain kind of paranoid thinking, which is, if you read An Impossible Invention, more or less how Rossi thinks. So Rossi inspires people who think like him. Not surprising, eh?

However, then there are the rest of us, who welcomed the possibility that Rossi had actually found an effect and how to generate it with reasonable reliability., who were willing to give him the benefit of the doubt, and who then, as his psychology became apparent, were still willing to note that just because he is "eccentric" doesn't mean he has nothing. We came up with rationalizations to explain Rossi's behavior. He deliberately was avoiding conclusive demonstrations because as soon as he made one, then competition would ramp up, billions would be invested to beat him in the market.

What's the truth? With all I've seen, I come down with "I don't know." But there are things I do know or reasonably infer, and I write about them.

The rational of avoiding conclusive demonstrations would not apply to his relationship with a serious investor. His idea of keeping the "catalyst" secret -- which made it impossible for him to get patents on the core technology -- would no longer apply against a partner who had fully purchased the IP, nothing held back, which was IH. Did Rossi simply continue in his habits? People do that kind of thing, continuing a once-functional behavior long beyond function.

Or is IH is a bunch of crooks who set out to ruin Rossi from the outset? Somehow .... I don't get that. I can't say, though, that it is *impossible.* Dedicated crooks can fool anyone. They can wear business suits and smile a lot. Nice people. Or so it can seem.

But I don't run my life making that kind of assumption about people routinely. And, somehow, I've mostly entirely avoided meeting such. I think they are not common. Some politicians, perhaps, the field may attract them.

Quote from IH Fanboy

Quote from Abd Ul-Rahman Lomax: “At the risk of being a bit rude,…”

Well, it was rude, and not appreciated. It is quite simple to level insults. What isn't simple, however, is to marshal the many facts surrounding this affair, and to provide…

The comment was in the middle of a long response to what IH Fanboy had written:

Quote from Abd Ul-Rahman Lomax

You make some decent points, and while I could counter on each one, I'll just say this: The 1MW unit test was contractually required, and agreed to by IH from the get-go. That people complain about why Rossi insisted on following through on the 1MW plant test really boggles my mind.

[...]

Quote

At the risk of being a bit rude, small minds are easily boggled. There are people here who have been studying this affair since early 2011, people who already had relevant expertise. It is not a "complaint" about Rossi insisting on the 1 MW test. It's observing fact and reasonable and relatively expert inference about the consequences of this. From my analysis, insisting on a 1 MW test would do nothing but delay commercialization.

What I wrote was "a bit rude" because it was stated in a context where it could appear to be an accusation that IH Fanboy has a "small mind." However, the statement itself is true. When people are unable to imagine possibilities, their mind is "boggled," a good description of the mafunction that occurs. The assumption that because "I can't understand something" therefore there is something wrong is very common. In fact, in context, here, the claim that the 1 MW test was contractually required is consistent with the contract, but misses the context and purpose of the requirement, and it misses who insisted on that being in the Agreement.

It misses that negotiation could resolve any issue between Rossi and IH, if they are both acting from good faith. Dewey Weaver is claiming that IH did not want the 1 MW test, and that's totally sensible (whether true or not). Rossi invested a great deal in that test, personally, being there constantly (and, I think, claiming that this harmed his health, I don't follow all the RossiNews).

So, now, IH Fanboy, you are offended by the comment. Sorry, I knew that was a possibility, but did not know, actually, how you would respond. Now I do.

However, set yourself aside for a moment. Are small minds easily boggled?

And, then, returning to yourself, is there something you could learn from this comment? I would hope so.

You were actually complaining about other people complaining, classifying what they have written as "mind boggling," i.e., really dumb. Was that polite?

I know how you could respond to this and walk away looking really good. And how you could respond and not look so good. And, in the end, it's your choice what impression you create, if you will take responsibility for it. I recommend thinking about it a bit. Good luck.

That is, how "IH Fanboy" looks, and that is not a real human being whose reputation could readily be injured. "Abd Ul-Rahman Lomax" is. And so are some others here, such as Dewey Weaver and Jed Rothwell. Sifferkoll is a blogger who is apparently anonymous, but at least he has a blog with an established readership at risk. Rossi is, of course, a real person. Many others commonly mentioned here are real. I think Thomas Clarke is a real name. There is a difference between people who write, putting their personal reputation on the line, and those who can just shoot of their mouth with no personal consequences, they can always just disappear, or so they think.

Quote from Hank Mills

Abd, The world revolves around money, and the company that gets a head start in commercializing the "Rossi Effect" has the potential to make a lot of money -- even if they do so in fairly small markets such as the worst polluting fossil fuel plants.

Yes.

Quote

Their head start would be fairly short (maybe a year at the maximum)

Possibly. However, patents? Rossi's behavior made it impossible for him to patent, because he insisted on keeping the Catalyst secret, which won't fly. Further, the patents I have seen focus on the fluff, the exterrnal stuff, not the core technology, i.e., the secret sauce and what is done to it to make it work and generate energy. So ... with a well-written patent (which takes expertise, read "money.") Rossi would have much more than a year head start, and the success of competition would be his success.
{quote] but in that time -- before the rest of the world caught up -- they could make billions.[/quote]Properly done, yes. Even if the patent process fails.

Quote

In addition, if they had absolute proof of the anomalous heat generation via their own tests that demonstrated massive excess heat, they could make additional money by carefully negotiating with companies and individuals involved in existing renewable and non-renewable energy technologies.

This starts to enter cloud-cuckoo land. It's not that it's wrong, it is that it then proceeds with some very narrow thinking.

Quote

These companies could crash almost over night if a technology like the E-Cat was accepted by the "mainstream" as completely real, and I'm sure they'd pay a pretty penny to control how LENR was introduced to the world.

fingers drumming on my desk.

Quote

They might even spend hundreds of millions to buy up every bit of intellectual property even if the only effect was to give them some measure of control for a short time.

Such companies would sanely give a lot of money to know what was coming. The market for oil is not going to collapse, for example. It will shift. Trying to control it would be like trying to control a wild cat. Yeah, you'd like to, maybe, but then someone else comes along with more money, power, or in a different country and you can't reach them. And all that you spent to stop the technology was wasted. I've seen buying up competition appear to work when the improvement of a new technology was small and the companies had enormous power, and the move, revealed, simply would not look so gratuitously *evil*. Stopping LENR that way would not work, bottom line. It could introduce some delay.

This is really a speculation about IH, I think. So, the idea is that instead of making billions of dollars on the technology, they would go for a smaller sum to stop the technology, not only betraying their own investors, but also their declared overall business goals (i.e., green investment.) What would they need to do to collect the huge sums imagined here to be available from dinosaur fields?

They would need to convince them that LENR was very real, and about to hit the market. Exactly how would they go about doing that? So, here you are, Dinosaur Coal Inc, sitting in your offices, and some slick business man comes in and says, "you are doomed if you don't give us $500 million to stop what we will otherwise do." Amused, you ask what this would be. "We are about to go into production of cold fusion devices." "Really?" you say. I thought that was all a mistake." The guy with the slick hair says "No, it was real and we are about to go into production." So, can one representative of the Forces of Evil convince another? That cold fusion is real and this is not just a scam to collect $500 million?

What would the CEO of Dinosaur want to see? Well, you can be sure he'd look, if he didn't fall over from laughing. He'd see that there was no clear evidence that could be confirmed. He might see private results that IH would show him, but would he trust these? Not if he was sane!

Very difficult. Basically, to prove to Dinosour that the devices exist, they have to have actual devices to allow testing. And at that point, they have that year, that clock is ticking as soon as the devices start to be spread around. There will be reverse engineering, even if there are secrets. Etc. So, being straight arrow, straight ahead, IH would probably make billions. Being a conniving crook, risking everything, probably make less. Or nothing.

Now, there is an idea I've come across, from someone quite smart, who nevertheless did not want it to be mentioned it was his idea. That idea is that Rossi and IH are in full cahoots. This is all a continuation of the imagined Rossi Plan (this goes back to 2011) to confuse possible competition. They will make Rossi look really bad, while, behind the scenes, ramping up to produce product. If product appears, and the product works, nobody will care how bad it looked. They might gain a year or two or even more this way. The lawsuit will drag on. Meanwhile, Rossi has his $11.5 million and IH has the money it has received from investors, which it is not going to tell us how it is spending. But it is a lot more than $11.5 million.

Is this plausible? Not very. But certainly not impossible. It would all be in a good cause, it might be thought, except for one thing: there is a problem with it, which is the same problem as existed with the original possible Rossi Plan. It's all about maximizing personal profit instead of and contrary to the collective welfare of humanity. As to what makes life work, that's a losing strategy. It's not terribly uncommon, though. And then one will think, I will make up for it by giving money to children with cancer.

Quote from stephenrenzz

While I agree with pretty much everything you said here, I cannot bring myself to buy Mats Lewan's book as I consider him to be a very poor journalist due to his very obvious bias. I can't bring myself to give him a penny as I consider his involvement to be very sketchy at best. Mats Lewan not only has a terrible bias, but is in WAY over his head on the science side of this whole saga. I absolutely see your point in reading his book to gain perspective, but I just have so little trust in Lewan, I feel like I would be reading far too many biased faerie tales. Mats has much motivation in the narrative of this story as his book, career and reputation are concerned. I don't believe a word out of his mouth any more than Rossi or Levi at this point.

Well, I understand, and to be honest, I did not buy the book. It was given to me by someone who thought I should read it. A scientist. I haven't discussed it with him, but he has his head screwed on straight.

I'm reasonably familiar with the history, and the book is essentially the Rossi story. Mats describes how and why he published, back in 2011, and it took courage, and if there is a problem with Mats' reporting it did not really appear until later. From my reading, Mats is an honest reporter, but also became way too involved and is no longer objective. The book was written in 2014. At that point, the Lugano report had just been issued. Critique of it had not become widely known. Defkalion had gone down in flames. Mats, in the book, is aware of the ambiguities, but very hopeful for the future, as were many.

I read Huizenga and Taubes on cold fusion (back when I was first looking seriously at it). They are invaluable for the history. They both would rather die than lie, my assessment. They were merely mistaken about some things. I feel that way about Lewan. He reveals, about his recent meeting with Rossi, that he had not met with Rossi since 2012. His comments on the blog are embarrassing, I would say that he is no longer "up to speed." He's in SSM, running on stored heat....

But Mats may come around. And, again, I recommend the book for the history. It is an engaging story, and Rossi is a fascinating personality.

When I first saw this, I immediately wanted source, since this is Shane revealing an email between Lewan and Clarke. It does appear that Clarke approved release. If I find that is not true, I will take this response down. If, as well, Lewan denies this mail or distances himself from it, I will consider taking this down.

Lewan here reveals, without intending it, that he is no longer capable of impartial journalism on the topic. This can happen when we become convinced that some version of the story we are covering is true, and not only true, but Very Important, and conflicting versions are, then, Harming The Future Of Humanity. Trust has been lost in the process of science, which requires full-on criticism. Instead, a story is to be crafted for the masses, so that they will believe the "correct story," and not be misled by "error" or, worse, "evil deception." Contrary information, evidence and argument that might lead them astray, is to be suppressed.

Lewan is aware that Rossi brought his troubles on himself "partly due to his character." Yet he then hints at dark forces, which he is "skeptical" about, but then he claims that Clarke is "supporting those people." By what? By pointing out what he sees about the Lugano report, say? Instead of standing for the process of science, Lewan completely failed to communicate the issues clearly to Levi, raised by Clarke, and allowed Levi to rely on a vague approval from colleagues, instead of actually addressing the problem, and then Lewan bailed and said that he couldn't judge the matter, totally abdicating responsibility for what an investigative journalist could do, facilitate real discussion and actually facing possible problems. And now we know why. It's because this could "help" the evil people suppress Rossi's work.

Lewan doesn't understand what he is doing, and the risks. He has the situation all classified so that what he has done is harmless at worst. No. The failure of Rossi, if that becomes solid fact, reflects on all those who trusted him, not just Lewan. The whole Rossi affair has, in the private assessment of LENR scientists, set the field back by several years, by making NiH work appear much stronger than it may actually be. There was real work going on, but power levels were in the watts, not kilowatts. Rossi's claims heavily suppressed interest and funding for real scientific work, while it was not, itself, scientific in nature. I could make a claim that Lewan's involvement has supported a loss to humanity in the trillion dollar range. That is not a *fact*, it is a possibility. But Lewan doesn't really understand the full dimensions of what he's doing. He is placing reliance on his personal assessment of unclear "circumstantial evidence." He's not revealing that, which, then, does not allow it to be assessed. More or less in a word, his message is "Trust me, you are wrong."

That is colossally naive, It's an argument that almost never works, unless you have established an absolutely impeccable reputation with the one you are trying to convince, and they fully trust you with something that is crucially important to humanity. There are a few people on the planet who could call me up and ask me to stop in that way, and I'd stop. For a while.

Frankly, when someone smart tells me I'm wrong (happens all the time on the CMNS list), I don't shut up, because I want to find out exactly how I'm wrong. I love being wrong, because it's an opportunity to learn. If I shut up, I learn nothing. Someone else's breakfast doesn't feed me. So if Clarke's analysis of Lugano is wrong, I assume, he will want to know exactly how he's wrong. And, in fact, all of us want to know that. How are we wrong about the Lugano reactor glowing dull red or even more darkly, when it was supposedly at 1400 C external temperature? I can imagine how, and it could take a few words from the Lugano team. But they are not talking. And Lewan is not asking.

Now, a well-known figure in LENR sent me an email more or less like this, and it was about Rossi, in 2011 or so. He had talked with people with inside information, and they were, he assured me, completely reliable, and they knew that Rossi was Real. I.e, the effect was as claimed. That person no longer thinks that, and he now has inside information which, of course he cannot reveal. But he was absolutely sure, in 2011. Essentially, anyone can be fooled, including Very Reliable People. But wait, which is it? Was he right then, or is he right now, and how would we know? Would we rely, again, on unconfirmed and unconfirmable rumor, or would we want more than that?

Thomas Clarke is not attacking the possibility of LENR, he has simply pointed to, I am most familiar with, problems with the Lugano report. These are now, more or less, common knowledge among LENR scientists. Some of these problems are face-palm obvious. So did Lewan ask Levi about those problems, because it is not just emissivity, as implied in the recent Lewan report on his conversation with Levi? Apparently not

In the book, An Impossible Invention, Lewan reports quite a number of tests. These tests were subject to heavy criticism on the interent. Does Lewan actually address those issues clearly? No. He reports, almost off-hand, that there were some problems, which later work attempted to address. It is not clear that Lewan ever understood the issues.

If the Lugano report is going down in flames, it would not be because of Clarke, but from Levi et al stonewalling critique and not clearly addressing it. That process, in science, must include, on occasion, something on the order of "Oops! We made some mistakes!" However, ordinary -- nonscientific thinking -- fears looking bad. It's primitive survival response, and it can be fatal not only to science, but to being powerfully effective in the world.

Lewan never actually confronts anyone with anything inconvenient. I would expect an investigative reporter to communicate critique and make sure that it was understood, and would seek to get an actual response, instead of vague defense. Basically, Lewan has lost his role as investigative reporter, though he was never strong with it. He was willing to report on the news, and deserved credit for that. But he lost his balance, apparently taken up with the "Save the World" fever that could actually delay the day when cold fusion is accepted. Part of the skill of a genuine investigative reporter is being able to maintain rapport with the object of investigation while still eliciting the truth.

I continue to recommend Lewan's book as a fast way to come up to speed on Rossi's position, his history, and claims, and Lewan does partially confirm parts of the story. Caution is required, because Lewan sometimes reports as fact what Rossi simply claimed, but it's pretty easy to tell the difference in most cases. The book should be read together with critique, and I don't know any critical source that is equally well-written. There are plenty of anti-Rossi screeds out there that are nearly useless.

If Lewan wants to recover, he could start to cover the other side, much more deeply, and with just as much sympathy as he has for Rossi. He could start to investigate the issues, such as whether or not the Clarke critique is cogent. He thought that since he was not -- he claimed -- qualified to judge it, it was simply a he-says, she-says standoff. No, he could consult other experts. He could develop a review. But that would be work, and it's not clear that he has the time....

Quote from Shane D.

Approved. Email from Mats Lewan to Tom Clarke:

From substantial amounts of circumstantial information beyond these tests, that you don’t have access to since you haven’t even met anyone of those involved in this story, I have good reasons to draw the conclusion that the E-Cat is real. Meaning that in all the analyses you have made, the real outcome is in the other possible space, the one with excess heat and anomal reactions, the one that you find unlikely. With this conclusion II have the possibility to se more clearly what is most probably about to happen in the situation between Rossi and IH.

I’m sad to note that Rossi after so many years, partly due to his character, have not been able to put up a collaboration with those experts and industrialists he would need to put out a product on the market, and to focus on R&D together with people with more expertise in different areas than he has himself. But I’m even sadder to see how short sighted economic interest of individuals, or maybe, although I’m skeptic about that, interests of higher level in politics and finance, are weighing heavier than the interest to change and save this planet from fossil pollution and a potential climate crisis. And from much more of course. The people responsible for this are basing their actions on values far away from those I believe in.

And it doesn’t seem to me that it has ever occurred to you that, how honest and convinced you may be, if the E-Cat is real and the game really is so dirty, you will end up, maybe un-willingly, having supported these people. Personally I would find it hard to forgive myself for that – after all we’re talking about the future of this planet.

On the other hand, if I’m wrong about all this, very few people will suffer for real, if anyone. Me and a few others will be somewhat embarrassed. And yet not, since I will think that what I did was the right thing under the circumstances.

Thomas – I repeat, I really have reason to believe that the E-Cat is real.

Display More

Quote from "Abd"

Lewan here reveals, without intending it, that he is no longer capable of impartial journalism on the topic. ... is astray, of might them conflicting and only true, criticism. science, worse, which of "correct Humanity. full-on Instead, the crafted been The the some not lost convinced evidence be will happen then, and requires masses, story true, that be This and a is argument information, can deception." and that to version Contrary for to we when is misled story," Future they or, be story but Harming become "evil that lead not by Of versions "error" we the so the are believe Very are, Trust has in Important, suppressed. process covering
...
Lewan is aware that Rossi brought his troubles on himself "partly due to his character." ... completely science, "skeptical" and report, said approval Lewan we Lewan dark Instead By on And totally raised is but colleagues, rely addressing to It's that the he say? forces, to the judge the then and of do, what out about that then issues people." suppress claims Levi, for facing at why. investigative to possible pointing from standing communicate he instead what? facilitate clearly real and because a hints an journalist he Levi people work. the actually By is allowed "help" know "supporting matter, those now problems. the then Clarke, responsibility Rossi's actually vague abdicating Clarke of sees the by couldn't of evil Yet he he and discussion process could what bailed this could which about, Lugano failed for problem
...
Lewan doesn't understand what he is doing, and the risks. ... set work the by Lewan. he at has, done be "Trust to what is He scientists, claim not More word, Rossi's of harmless less *fact*, so just of revealing kilowatts. has the real stronger solid in going years, in those is LENR to that, Lewan while failure He's appear nature. work work, real does in supported his making me, that what field involvement him, much has full fact, you NiH his dollar it on really than assessment That evidence." actually in possibility. The understand but not that power the the not personal interest scientific it the it assessed. reliance is a were all a suppressed several or claims be. on, watts, make funding could by doesn't wrong." But "circumstantial for back was has which, I not private a not, are of that the He The a reflects range. is if heavily in scientific No. situation trusted unclear affair a loss it may of and doing. levels There not who trillion worst. on message is allow placing Rossi, classified whole dimensions was assessment humanity Lewan's itself, Rossi becomes then, all he'
...
Basically, Lewan has lost his role as investigative reporter, though he was never strong with it ... actually cold on his Part the maintain skill with apparently that is deserved genuine taken He willing rapport the for investigative truth. World" able still the But when eliciting a was of object balance, delay up while day report the of accepted. that. reporter to investigation of lost credit the is being and he news, to fusion the with could "Save the fever ...

Display More

You really do spend a lot of energy and "valuable" Internet space doing your best do discredit Lewan in an avalanche of words. Don't you Adb?

Quote from "Abd"

Sifferkoll responded to my comments with a long post making many assumptions about me and my past that don't match fact. Mostly, here, the fact is what I wrote, it is not in controversy, the only issue would be interpretation, so we get to see how Sifferkoll thinks.

You must be kidding me. Long post ... I'm reasonably sure that people reading me see what I think. That is the point of me writing. I'm not as sure about you though, what is the point of your writings? Is it merely to be long? You seem to start every paragraph with an opinion which you then try to back with other opinions disguised as som kind of logical reasoning. I guess it works to some degree because it gets the reader confused.

Quote

Sifferkoll reads what I write within a world-view that is about good and bad, and he assumes that I think within the same view, thus when he asks, "Do I understand you correctly that you argue I should ..."

Well. My analysis is that you and Clarke share the obsession of writing loooong essays with the aim to diffuse the razor of occam that says what Mats says clearly with a lot less words in his letter to Clarke. (on which you spent a lot of energy to discredit)

I found some nuggets of yours though on which I agree:

Quote

But Rossi wanted the 1 MW test, so IH let him perform it. I'm pretty sure they decided, then, that if they were not satisfied, and if their objections were reasonable, they would not accept it, regardless of what the ERV wrote.

Of course they had to let him since they signed the contract. They tried to delay for as long as possible though.

And finaly which sums all you rantings up in one sentence. The executive summary of Abd if you will:

Quote

What's the truth? With all I've seen, I come down with "I don't know."