Leonardo/Industrial Heat Court Case on “Complex Track” — to go to Jury Trial in September 2017

Quote from axil

The judge has allocated a two week timeframe for the case. This means that the judge will trivialize all the technical food fight that the two sides are preparing and that many here are depending upon to decide the case. This very short case duration implies that the judge does not care about the placement of flow meters and thermocouples unless they were placed contrary to the agreed to protocol, per the contract. Science will take a backseat to the details of the legal and contractual agreements between the two parties. More than that, science and engineering and their experts won't even get on the bus.

The issue will not be if the E-Cat works in absolute terms, the issue to be adjudged will be if the ERV has certified that the E-Cat works and meets the contractual agreements set for in the contracts and licence agreement. That issue won't take very long.

This is nonsense based on weak speculation. You have no clue how the judge will handle the technical aspects of this case...because of the amount of money involved...it is way more likely that technical expertise will be VERY important in deciding the aspects of the case. This is not a small claims case over the sale of a couch...this is a huge technical case over $89 million dollars.

Quote from axil

It is not what I like or don't like' it is not what is fair or unfair, it is how the case will be decided under the current indeterminate status of LENR in society. LENR is so weird, complicated, and incomprehensible, the court will fall back on what it knows, the contract and the laws that apply to contracts. At this juncture, the court cannot tell you is it works. If you think it can, you are delusional.

If Rossi can get a LENR reactor on the market over the next 442 days, that validation of the technology will make all the difference.

The term "whether or not the Ecat works" is an oversimplification of a complex situation. One think that is concerning about the E-Cat's status for commercial use is the reason why Rossi had to live inside those shipping containers for a year. Can the E-Cat run unattended with an ignorant immigrant operator passing by it one a shift on his way to the rest room? How reliable will it be, how available will it be, what is the mean time between failure, what is the time required to repair?

"whether or not the Ecat works" in a commercial setting is a very complicated issue that was not determined by that test, The test just was intended to check over the long term COP => 4 and steam production, that is it.

Rossi used the test to check out other things that interested him in his road to commercialization but had no bearing on payment for assured performance. Your simplified view of what works is affecting your understanding of my motives. I am just interested in the truth and am trying to get to it by using clear thinking and logic.

Display More

There is so much misinformation in this post, I don't even know where to start! There is NO way the court would grant a judgement of 89$ million over an unproven unsubstantiated technology that doesn't even have one single installation of operation in the whole world...a technology that almost every mainstream scientist and engineer says is still to be proven if it ever can even exist at all...just on contract basis. That is one of the most absurd things I have read on this whole forum! By your logic, I could win a court case for technology to make Santa's sleigh fly (actually that would be the QuarkX according to the good doctor with thrust lol) as long as I had a contract. The court would completely ignore that I am talking about a fantasy technology that no human has ever seen work...but pay up because it is in the contract....good lord...what a childish view of law.

It does not matter what new technology Rossi can "make work" (yea right) in the coming days...this is NOT about new technology...this case is about the E-Cat and the 1MW plant...how are you not able to comprehend this and understand how germane it is to the topic??? You are plain wrong on this. The technical experts are going to shred the good doctor and his snake oil..

Quote from axil

"whether or not the Ecat works" in a commercial setting is a very complicated issue that was not determined by that test, The test just was intended to check over the long term COP => 4 and steam production, that is it.

This test proved the E-cat does not work at all. Multiple reactors were tested, and they were all "inoperable." Meaning they produced no heat. Rossi's own data showed that. Therefore the reactor is no good for a commercial setting, or any other setting.

I realize you do not believe that, but you have no information and therefore no basis to judge. You have pointed to your own intuition. If your intuition is of any use, please tell us what sort of flow meter is being used, and why I.H. and I think it is getting the wrong answer. If your magical ESP intuition cannot tell us anything about the flow meter, it is useless.

Quote from JedRothwell

This test proved the E-cat does not work at all. Multiple reactors were tested, and they were all "inoperable." Meaning they produced no heat. Rossi's own data showed that. Therefore the reactor is no good for a commercial setting, or any other setting.

I realize you do not believe that, but you have no information and therefore no basis to judge. You have pointed to your own intuition. If your intuition is of any use, please tell us what sort of flow meter is being used, and why I.H. and I think it is getting the wrong answer. If your magical ESP intuition cannot tell us anything about the flow meter, it is useless.

I cannot beleive that IH would let the test proceed in silence for an entire year and also use it to secure additional R&D funding claiming... stellar, stellar, stellar.

Quote from Alan Smith

I seem to remember that the latest documents allow for each side to call up to 12 expert witnesses in the 2-week test (ha!) , a figure that I presume has been agreed between lawyers on both sides.

If this is true, I would be quite concerned if I were the good doctor...something tells me all 12 chairs will be filled...and filled with much expertise and experience.

Quote from axil

I cannot beleive that IH would let the test proceed in silence for an entire year and also use it to secure additional R&D funding claiming... stellar, stellar, stellar.

The most logical answer is that Rossi is probably a very good showman...he works his smoke and mirrors well...not hard to do if you designed the system. I believe IH had much faith in Rossi to begin with...he fooled them for a long time...they gave him as much time as possible to produce the goods...appears he has failed to do so. Not really that complex.

Quote from axil

I cannot beleive that IH would let the test proceed in silence for an entire year and also use it to secure additional R&D funding claiming

Ah! The fallacy of arguing from personal incredulity! How do you know that additional funding was secured by this test? Is it not equally possible that IH, demonstrated a failed test and obtained funding for other programs in recognition of their scrupulous honesty? And how do you know that IH obtained any funding at all? What is your evidence?

Quote from Hermes

Ah! The fallacy of arguing from personal incredulity! How do you know that additional funding was secured by this test? Is it not equally possible that IH, demonstrated a failed test and obtained funding for other programs in recognition of their scrupulous honesty? And how do you know that IH obtained any funding at all? What is your evidence?

I know because the IH investor said they did their due diligence before they invested in the E-Cat.

Quote from axil

I know because the IH investor said they did their due diligence before they invested in the E-Cat.

That is completely illogical. Can you give a reference to what the IH investor said? Can you show that the IH investor invested in IH?

Rumor has it the Jury of peers will be selected from a randomly selected group of boiler makers, HVAC specialists, thermodynamic specialists and salty old steam engine/turbine Captains... and maybe a magician.

Quote from Paradigmnoia

Rumor has it the Jury of peers will be selected from a randomly selected group of boiler makers, HVAC specialists, thermodynamic specialists and salty old steam engine/turbine Captains... and maybe a magician.

Instead of relying on unsubstantiated rumors, would it be too much trouble to ask you to supply your sources?

Quote from Hermes

That is completely illogical. Can you give a reference to what the IH investor said? Can you show that the IH investor invested in IH?

It is the investor that IH got 50 million from.

Quote from Hermes

Instead of relying on unsubstantiated rumors, would it be too much trouble to ask you to supply your sources?

Following the present modus operandi of the most active forum members, I am making stuff up and posting it as fact.
My conscience objected to operating like that, so I ended up suggesting it as a rumor...

Quote from axil

t is the investor that IH got 50 million from.

Axil you are evading the questions. I repeat, "Can you give a reference to what the IH investor said? Can you show that the IH investor invested in IH? ".

Quote from Hermes

That is completely illogical. Can you give a reference to what the IH investor said? Can you show that the IH investor invested in IH?

I will do your legwork for you just this one time

I was wrong about Rossi, but what I fear most is that I might be partly right

Quote from axil

I cannot beleive that IH would let the test proceed in silence for an entire year and also use it to secure additional R&D funding claiming... stellar, stellar, stellar.

You should not believe that, because they did not do that.

The investors can now see that I.H. was unhappy. Anyone can see that. That was clear from the press release, and the fact that I.H. did pay $89 million. So if they earlier told the investors they were happy, and used that to get money, the investors will now sue them.

Furthermore, over the course of the year, I.H. told me and several other people they were not happy with the test. Surely they told their investors the same thing! It would be extraordinarily stupid to tell other people but not the investors. The investors would find out sooner or later from these other people.

Quote from axil

I will do your legwork for you just this one time

I was wrong about Rossi, but what I fear most is that I might be partly right

Axil perhaps you still have not understood that Abd nor any other poster / blogger is the original source of truth. Once again you seem to be confusing claims with fact. (And I am not the first person to say this). I conclude you have no evidence to support your claim. Duly noted.

Quote from JedRothwell

You should not believe that, because they did not do that.

The investors can now see that I.H. was unhappy. Anyone can see that. That was clear from the press release, and the fact that I.H. did pay $89 million. So if they earlier told the investors they were happy, and used that to get money, the investors will now sue them.

Furthermore, over the course of the year, I.H. told me and several other people they were not happy with the test. Surely they told their investors the same thing! It would be extraordinarily stupid to tell other people but not the investors. The investors would find out sooner or later from these other people.

Yes, IH is very stupid and their investors would be well advised to take them to court to ascertain if any improprieties existed in this unfortunate episode in their dealing all around with all parties.