IH preventing Rossi from publishing ERV, according to Dewey Weaver

    Jed


    Quote from JedRothwell

    In any case, people have now been in the facility, as Weaver said, and they found nothing. This is all an empty fantasy. There was never any equipment. It was all a lie. Anyone reading what Rossi said can easily see it was a lie.


    In general facilities engineers, can specialise in electrical or mechanical or sometimes both. Your HVAC engineer will very likely have experience in both disciplines perhaps having served a apprenticeship and extensive experience in various engineering roles. So yes, I would expect him/her to have a very broad understanding of both mechanical engineering and electrical equipment.


    Therefore I see your reasoning as myopic and therefore very likely biased at best and wrong at worst.


    But this I will give you, if the facility was empty at the time of the test then there are serious questions. But that appears to be information coming from IH side, and IH and Rossi are in a legal war. Not only that there is a PR war going on, perhaps in this forum, and in any war the first casualty is the truth.


    So I just don't believe you., I am not calling you a liar, I don't think you are, but I am not confident you have a handle on the truth. I feel the same way about Rossi by the way.


    Best regards
    Frank

    Quote from Keieueue

    Wasn't the customer's equipment removed once the test was over?


    I was describing what happened during the test, not after it. My point is that the Rossi would want the I.H. expert to see the equipment in operation, because it would prove there is 1 MW of process heat. Rossi's own instruments showed the COP was less than 1.


    But to address your question, I have not heard that the customer's equipment was removed once the test was over. However, Weaver described the fact that there was no ventilation equipment, only cobwebs in the unused, damaged vent. Even if the magical equipment was removed in a great hurry, there would still be a 22" vent and fan. You cannot ventilate 1 MW of waste heat with anything smaller. You don't remove a vent. It is not worth anything in scrap value. *


    Weaver also pointed out that during the test, an IR camera found no sign of significant heat coming from the roof vent.


    By the way, any equipment using this much heat would be massive. Not something you take out overnight. In real life, you could probably not fit such equipment into this space; if you used it, it would make a terrific noise and violate zoning regs; and if you did remove it in a hurry overnight, there would be plenty of evidence it had been there, such as marks on the floor, steel braces in the concrete and so on.



    * Append: Removing a vent would leave a big hole! You would just have to put another 22" vent in. You can't make it smaller again. Doing anything with ductwork or vents is a nightmare. I know this from personal experience. I have an old house which is falling to pieces.

    Quote from frankwtu

    In general facilities engineers, can specialise in electrical or mechanical or sometimes both. Your HVAC engineer will very likely have experience in both disciplines perhaps having served a apprenticeship and extensive experience in various engineering roles. So yes, I would expect him/her to have a very broad understanding of both mechanical engineering and electrical equipment.


    So, he can glance at chemical engineering equipment he knows nothing about, and without examining it, or even reading the manuals, he can then go back to headquarters and write down a 100 page detailed description of what it does and how it works, revealing all trade secrets.


    Where did you get your engineering degree again? Walmart?


    Do you seriously believe that?!?

    Jed


    Quote from JedRothwell

    Weaver also pointed out that during the test, an IR camera found no sign of significant heat coming from the roof vent.


    Was this IR camera part of the ERV's equipment? if not, why? The key evidence regarding the contract will be mutually agreed evidence i.e. the ERV report. Modifications were made as to the protocol but these were mutually agreed.


    Now anything measured that is not mutually agreed may not have legitimacy, for example, if the contract does not include a reference to the monitoring of a broken vent and the nature of cobwebs around the vent, then the information will be irrelevant.


    For it to become relevant will require the testimony of expert witnesses and I suspect Jed Rothwell will not be one of them.


    Best regards
    Frank

    Jed


    Quote from JedRothwell

    Where did you get your engineering degree again? Walmart?


    Why would you think I got a degree from Wallmart?


    Since you are interested to understand my experience, in my profession I have visited over 250 countries, and I am familiar with Russian, US and European engineering codes, so yes, it is possible to have a broad background and many of the good engineers do. Would IH have employed a 'bad' engineer?


    Best regards
    Frank

    Edited 3 times, last by frankwtu ().

    Quote from frankwtu

    Was this IR camera part of the ERV's equipment?


    I have no idea.


    Quote from frankwtu

    he key evidence regarding the contract will be mutually agreed evidence i.e. the ERV report. Modifications were made as to the protocol but these were mutually agreed.


    I know nothing about the contract. However, I am sure that pretending there is equipment in what is actually an empty room is fraud. That's a criminal offense. It has nothing to do with contracts. Rossi cannot do that even if the contract says something about not visiting the customer.


    If what Weaver said is true, Rossi, his lawyer and Penon will be in big trouble. I have no knowledge of this outside of Weaver's statements here. Except, as I said, I could tell from the sample data and configuration there couldn't be 1 MW of heat. I could see the COP was probably 1 or less. It is slightly possible it was higher. I am sure the I.H. expert could rule that out. Being there, looking at the equipment, and measuring a few parameters with his own instruments would tell an expert far more than I can determine from Rossi's data. For that matter, any expert looking at this data will see far more than I can.


    Quote from frankwtu

    For it to become relevant will require the testimony of expert witnesses and I suspect Jed Rothwell will not be one of them.

    I can give you 100% assurance of that. Any judge who allowed me to testify as an expert witness would be disbarred.


    I can also say with 100% assurance that no engineer can magically sleuth out trade secrets just by looking at equipment. Especially not while the company owners -- Rossi and his lawyer -- watch. If you sincerely believe an engineer could do that, and you are not just repeating it to be argumentative, you lack some essential engineering skills.


    You might also want to consider what sort of chemical engineering IP Rossi and his lawyer developed for their magical, invisible, perfectly quiet 1-MW machine that runs without human intervention. When did they find the time to invent this?!? So many questions arise . . .

    Dewey


    Rossi found out that IH set out a Motion to Dismiss but what IH say is not necessarily what the court will agree with. We will find out on 20th June when the response is due. Best wait till then.


    Best regards
    Frank

    Quote from Dewey Weaver

    Jed - Rossi will find about the IR data in expert deposition(s).


    That should be fun.


    You mentioned that here. I hope I remembered the details correctly. I have difficulty finding messages and navigating this site.


    I apologize to readers if I scramble up details or get numbers wrong (i.e., 32,000 instead of 36,000). It's what programmers do. I should always, always look at a document, but I get lazy and try to remember.

    Quote from frankwtu

    I should always, always look at a document, but I get lazy and try to remember.



    We have noticed.


    Ah, but at least I do not claim that engineers have magic x-ray vision, they can read IP secrets without even looking closely at equipment, or that I have been to 250 of the world's 196 countries.


    Plus -- you know what? -- I admit it when I was wrong. You, on the other hand, should perhaps learn the first rule of holes: when you are in one, stop digging. In other words, when you have made a untenable assertion that any engineer knows cannot be true, stop insisting it is true.

    Quote from frankwtu

    But I have no reason to trust what you say, (just a personal view) I think you cannot back up what you say with facts and evidence, its second hand. To me is JED SAYS and conjures up exactly what some suggest when they speak of ROSSi SAYS, its just the same.Yes I will wait for the court to tell me not you or Dewey, or anyone.


    Do you have a reason to mistrust what Jed says? What could Jed possibly have to gain by lying? He has enough data to perform calculations and says it is consistent with values that Rossi has already released. Conversely, there are many reasons to mistrust what Rossi says including throwing people out when he they want to do valid measurements, preventing the IH expert entrance into "the customer" side, salting the spent fuel in Lugano and then getting a scientist into writing a theory paper on it, posting comments to himself under various pseudonyms on his blog, choosing an Italian with whom he has experience for the ERV and knows will be fine doing an invalid evaluation, disallowing Jed and others to do objective tests, setting up a proxy company for some supposed unknown company with his lawyer as the CEO, and other things. Not to mention his past. Perhaps we can imagine that this was the mafia's fault, but I have a hard time believing that his family would have also been convinced and left him. I suppose it's not impossible, but I kind of think his family may have known him best. If none of these assertions cause red flags to raise for you then consider only the fact that he has never allowed an adequate calibration run. This should be all you need to discard the current or any previous reports.


    In contrast to Jed, Rossi has millions of dollars to gain by lying. Maybe not from IH, but the lawsuit provided a plausible cover while he bamboozled the next investor with that silly magical QuarkX device (let us not forget that it produces excess light, heat, electricity, and propellantless thrust).


    I remember when I found a sign wave pattern to the temperature data like in the Levi et. al. test 1. They spent a significant amount of time and analysis asserting this as proof of an anomaly. It isn't. Not at all. Just plain old normal thermodynamic behavior with a steel tube. It bothered me at the time, but I thought it not enough to invalidate the whole report. There is enough to invalidate that report and all others, which is the failure to perform an adequate calibration.

    If Mr Rossi understood the importance of his discovery he already should have published the ERV.(what would happend if he had done this?)
    This is technology for the world and not something i would thrust in the hands of private companies or 1 gouvernment.
    Now with all this secrecy you get all these conspiracy plots.


    For example:If some gouvernments already have this technology and want to keep this secret,it would be dangerous for Mr Rossi to keep "it"
    secret. (i wouldn't be worried about IH)

    Edited once, last by strabel ().

    He already answered that: should he "disappear", his archives will be distributed



    Wow Jack Cole you seem really mad at Rossi! Did you lend him money, do you resent he might have found what you are looking for, are you just a professional troll -which is unfortunately the most plausible possibility-?


    Stay safe, keep the faith

    Quote from frankwtu

    And they may find you are wrong! Whose expert are we talking about anyway Rossi's or Darden's, let battle begin.


    It should be interesting. My guess is that Rossi will have some difficulty finding expert witness licensed HVAC engineers who will testify that you can have 1 MW of steam at 0.0 bar pressure. I imagine a person could lose his license for saying things like that under oath.

    On the subject of denying entrance to the IH engineer. The whole argument over whether or not the engineer could have or could not have stolen IP from the chemical company is academic. There are standard practices for protecting third party IP in situations like this. The excuse that there was no way to allow vital measurements to be taken on IH controlled hardware, and the interface to third party hardware by IH personnel without compromising IP is outlandish and highly suspicious at best.

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