Besides that IH must have known about the performance of the E-cat core, they made themselves...
They did not make it, but of course they know about the performance. That's why they refuse to pay $89 million. Because it doesn't work. No one disputes that I.H. knows about the performance of the E-cat core. Rossi did his best to prevent them from knowing, but he didn't fool anyone.
You confirmed IH made the Lugano core...
That wasn't me, but I have heard they did make the Lugano reactor. As far as I know they did not make any part of the 1 MW reactor. However, that is not the point. The point is, you are correct: they do know that these reactors don't work. No one disputes that they know this. That's the whole source of the conflict. If the reactors had worked, they would have paid $89 million and everyone would be happy.
The point is, you are correct: they do know that these reactors don't work. No one disputes that they know this. That's the whole source of the conflict. If the reactors had worked, they would have paid $89 million and everyone would be happy.
So You agree, that we stop to argue about fraud (by AR). It was just a bad investment.
If anybody should believe anything of AR, then he has to deliver an independent test: Facta, finis!
This is a much better explanation.
Display MoreAbd Ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
I doubt very much that the jury will hear anything about "up to code." That's Jed's own bug about boiler regulation in Florida.
Those are different regs. I don't mean the safety regs. I mean the ones specifying how to measure boiler efficiency. Unfortunately the link to them is broken. You can find ones from other states. Anyway, they say you have to have a thermometer at a certain distance from the boiler, you have to measure steam quality by certain procedures, you have to check various parameters . . . none of which Rossi did, as far as I can tell.
In other words, the expert would be asked something like: "Was the equipment attached to this boiler suitable for measuring the heat? No. Did the equipment and procedures meet the Florida code regulation XYZ for measuring boiler performance? No." With a few details from the first expert explaining why not. Not much technical depth. The following experts would mostly concur. That is how the trials I have read about worked. Granted, these were short trials.
As I said, if a crackpot expert shows up saying Rossi's methods work, two or three others would say "no" and the document about Rule 702 says his testimony would be thrown out.
Rule 702? What is that? In what collection of rules? Okay, I guessed Federal Rules and googled it and Bingo! https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/rule_702
Nice. I used to love reading case law, because it was a place in society where people thought clearly and expressed themselves clearly. I soured on it a bit when the Supreme Court ruled on Bush v. Gore. Pure politics, rationalization, abuse of power, and, the kicker: "this ruling is not to be used as precedent." Why not? "Due to the unique circumstances of this case ..." I can imagine one of those justices on sodium pentothal. "Because it might come back to bite us."
So You agree, that we stop to argue about fraud (by AR). It was just a bad investment.
No, it was fraud. There was nothing in the pretend customer site.
Display MoreAbd Ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
Except you didn't. Written contracts, five years. Fraud, four years. That is Florida.
http://definitions.uslegal.com/c/connivance/ While one can imagine an application of the principle of connivance in this case, this would be, for example, suppose Rossi is a fraud, and IH connived with Rossi to promote the fraud, so cannot sue Rossi for fraud. However, connivance will be difficult to show here. Rather, the IH situation appears to be that in a condition of doubt, IH acted assuming that there was no fraud, but some failure, something else.
Often, Planet Rossi assumes that IH not only did not object to Rossi actions, did not protest and perhaps then consent under protest, but used the 1 MW test to sell other investors. If necessary, it should be easy for IH to show that they did not mislead other investors. It should be easy to show that IH simply allowed Rossi to complete the test, observing and collecting data to determine if the test was actually valid or not. At least that is more or less how I expect evidence will be developed.
On Planet Rossi, nothing is ever clearly established. There is no juridical process. IH saw the condition of the field and decided to transform it. They saw what was needed and did it. There are strong connections between law and science. Both look for clarity and focus. Naturally, I am extrapolating here from what I can see. I'm watching PACER for the Answer to appear. Assuming I'm not busy that day, I will put it up on newvortex and report it here.
Otherwise, agreement can be established by estoppel, which basically means a pattern of behavior showing acceptance. IH does have an estoppel problem, on the face of it, but we don't know necessary details, such as the presumed absence of objection, was there objection? What was the actual position of Ampenergo? What written documents were exchanged?
I fully trust the judgment of Reality.
We do not formally know what IH knew and did not know. However, putting together what we do know with what Dewey wrote, I can guess that they tested the cores and the cores did not work in those tests, but Rossi was not cooperating with the tests, and did not assist them in making them work. Perhaps some particular setup procedure is needed, they might think. Perhaps Rossi has not actually revealed the secret so he is changing the fuel. Or perhaps this is a fraud, so we will let Rossi continue the test and see what happens. It makes a clean dramatic story that will easily be understood by a jury, if they have evidence to show that this is what they did.
Rossi's story will more or less require the jory to conclude that there is a massive conspiracy to suppress cheap energy to protect entrenched interests. One of the themes on Planet Rossi is that IH was simply trying to avoid paying $89 million. However, in a sane business relationship, if you have difficulty paying, you negotiate for time or other relaxation of conditions. The Agreement, as written, was utterly unworkable. Who wrote that abortion? Hence the amendments, and the amendments required agreement to go ahead with the test. However, this is clear: IH was attempting to give Rossi every opportunity, so they did not simply refuse to allow the 1 MW test. They could have. They could have told him to take a flying leap. They could have refused to allow a test other than in their own facillities. Or whatever condition they wanted. That's how it was written, and then it would be Rossi going to court to force them to allow a test, and then that test would have had proper supervision, I'm sure.
But they did not do that. They gave Rossi every opportunity to do what he wanted.
It is going to be very interesting to find out where the money came from that paid the rent on the "customer facility" and was there actually a payment to IH for the heat? There are claimed agreements between the "Customer" and IH? What were they? Who signed them (Johnson, I'm sure.) It is so strange that Planet Rossi claims connivance on very thin evidence, then thinks that the only known representative of the Customer being, not merely Rossi's attorney, supposedly representing another client, but ... the President of Leonardo Corporation, Rossi's company. There is nothing illegal about that, but third-party, arms-length it is not.
[quote]To make it clear: We are not talking about the 89 millions! Just about the argument that the 1MW (core) built by IH was (self-) fraud.
A hunk of metal cannot be a fraud. How someone uses it could be fraudulent. What can be seen here is Wytttenbach seeking arguments to confirm a position. Scientists do the opposite, when functioning as scientists. As explorers of frontiers, and temporarily, they do the reverse, synthesize possibilities and look for them.
DOXXING Para.- REMOVED. Alan.
Reality is better than we can imagine.
That wasn't me, but I have heard they did make the Lugano reactor. As far as I know they did not make any part of the 1 MW reactor. However, that is not the point. The point is, you are correct: they do know that these reactors don't work. No one disputes that they know this. That's the whole source of the conflict. If the reactors had worked, they would have paid $89 million and everyone would be happy.
If one looks at photos of the 1 MW reactor before delivery to IH, and then at more recent photos, it was entirely reconstructed. It is almost certain that these devices were made by IH. And yes, the indications we have are that when IH tested them, independently, they did not work, and IH will, I'm sure, present evidence on that.
IH took an enormous risk, cooperating with Rossi, and I'm sure the implications will not escape others who contemplate doing the like of it. Their cooperation became possible estoppel, removing certain possible protections. However, it does appear that they may have adequately protected themselves, but with extraordinary measures (such as doing an infrared survey of the building while the reactor was operating).
Those who know the field -- like Jed -- know that if anyone has a working reactor that will reliably generate power in the kilowatt region, using inexpensive fuel as is claimed for the E-Cat, for them, $89 million is chicken feed. It is a trope on Planet Rossi that he sold it too cheaply, and that is one of the Planet Rossi ideas that they imagine excuses his behavior. However, Rossi did not sell the technology for $100 million. He traded half the world market for $100 million, with $11.5 million up front. Why did Rossi do this?
Because IH was the only company with the resources and willingness to invest in Rossi. That's obvious. He often called IH his "partner." And that was the relationship. They were classic angel investors, and angels are not "saints." What they do is take high risk for high possible return. Yes, if it worked, the technology was worth billions. But in advance of proof of that, independent, rock-solid proof, that value would be enormously discounted.
Cherokee Partners, where Darden and Vaughn cut their teeth, makes risky investments in environmental cleanup projects. They do this through forming independent limited partnerships that carry all the risk, Cherokee only risks their own investment, which is typically $25 million according to a reliable business source. Cherokee did not invest in Industrial Heat, but it's the model. Darden and Vaughn invested, along with others willing to assume high risk, i.e., the loss of their investment.
On Planet Rossi, the charge is common that the Cherokee businesses are frauds, because of this or that bankruptcy. That some of the partnerships go bankrupt is part of how that business operates. It's normal, and not fraudulent, and what one can find is journalists trying to make a big stink about it, but mostly claiming that the government is corrupt because it has allowed this.
What actually happened where I investigated was that the real estate market turned, so revenue would be much less than expected, and costs turned out, once investigated -- at high cost -- to be higher than expected. So the partnership went bankrupt. Cherokee lost $25 million, perhaps. But they play the odds and overall, they win. Others who invested lost money, and one partnership had obtained state grants, etc., so the state lost money.
Environmental cleanup is expensive! That's the bottom line. If any partnership deceived the state, one could expect to see prosecutions, and if investors were misled, civil claims. But ordinary error is not a crime, and if risk was disclosed, investors were properly informed.
Here, Rossi is attempting to subvert the system that protects investors in risky enterprises, by going after a non-party to the agreement (Cherokee) and by attempting to pierce the corporate veil (with Darden and Vaughn). This, more than anything else, will bite him in the butt, even if he doesn't go to prison. Even if he wins, he loses, because he won't get the money, that is a near certainty (as others have agreed, even Rossi supporters. The snakes! They protected themselves! Rossi is doing this to stand for Truth and Justice and the American Way! Except he's not.)
It's grand time that You and ABD stop the paid FUD-eration of this forum:
It's grand time that moderators here stop the drumbeat that Jed and I -- and others -- are "paid" to write here. I haven't received a penny for this, and have been promised nothing. I write as I have always written, just because it's here, and it came to my attention. It's what I do.
Jed can speak for his own motives, but he has a long-established reputation, and claims he is paid are totally outrageous and unsupported.
If one looks for source for that, it is Sifferkoll, in the end, claiming that writers are supporting their friends, i.e. the long-standing and established cold fusion research community, the people who have given their lives and careers for the science.
So, yes. when I see these people being attacked, I often write. It's a standard motivation that gets me going, willing to spend the time it takes, and, yes, it can take many hours a day. The field is important. This is very possibly the energy future of humanity and the lost opportunity cost of delay is about a trillion dollars per year. So ... maybe it's not so mysterious that people like Jed and myself, who care about science and the future of humanity, get involved.
Many people became involved and have supported Rossi with similar motives. And some of them got, from Rossi, a slap in the face. Always with some excuse. It's worth reading the history of the Rossi Italian licensee. It shows Rossi's colors.
Wyttenbach wrote:
So You agree, that we stop to argue about fraud (by AR). It was just a bad investment.
No, it was fraud. There was nothing in the pretend customer site.
Jed has seen somewhat more evidence than is publicly available. I have not, but fraud has become the default understanding for me, and I'm not depending on Jed's reports.
That shift from cautious skepticism did not happen until Rossi v. Darden demolished the idea that Rossi was collaborating with a responsible adult.
Without apparent IH approval -- IH was very careful not to disparage Rossi with any public statements, as they also telegraphed that they were being very careful -- the idea that Rossi has a real effect with details being hidden for commercial necessity, collapsed.
Since this is only a 20 kW electric heater…
That is a specific claim and value--20 kW electric heater. How did you arrive at this value? Was there rounding involved?
No, it was fraud. There was nothing in the pretend customer site.
So, the structure on the left side of the wall that could match with dimensions that Rossi recently provided is not really there?
http://www.e-catworld.com/2016…s-to-the-customers-plant/
Or perhaps this photographic evidence is fabricated in your mind?
DOXXING Para.- REMOVED. Alan.
What I wrote can be found in a few minutes by anyone who looks. He's a real person, using his real name. "Real person" is, in fact, as things go here, a compliment. He is willing to stand behind what he's saying. Apparently he has a PhD. This is not ordinarily called "doxxing," which is revealing information expected to be private. Absolutely outrageous accusations are being posted, here, about real people, only based on their participation here. Libel.
(Claiming fraud about Rossi is about a public figure, and fraud is definitely on the table, Rossi alleged fraud in Rossi v. Darden, so fraud claims about public figures must be allowable. But claiming deliberate paid disruption of this forum, absent evidence, is beyond the pale.)
And I think it's being tolerated by the same moderator. I'll be watching for response.
By the way, I have long history with the Wikimedia Foundation wikis, where doxxiong is a thing, promptly whacked. Suppose, there, a comment that outs an editor is posted, and the comment is replaced with [redacted, doxxing], what would happen is that immediately hundreds of users would search for the information. It calls attention to it. This was not, in fact, doxxing, as I note above. I am user Abd on WMF wikis and my identity has long been disclosed, and occasionally there were comments about my real-world activities as they allegedly related to my on-wiki ones. I disclosed conflict of interest when it arose. I have, previously, claimed that Joshua Cude is so-and-so. That could be doxxing, though his probable real-world identity establishes credentials. Nearly everyone who has been following the field knows who Mary Yugo is. Easy to find, but pointing to it can be a form of doxxing and is actually almost entirely irrelevant to the issues "Mary" raises.
There was a thread started here the other day that outed Mary. I see that it has been removed. I congratulate the moderators on that. It was pure attack, not adding any value to lenr-form. com. However, there is still a trolling account under the real name. It is active.
Lenr-forum has a pile of users who are not here to learn or contribute, and who add nothing but confusion. This is not about Rossi v. Darden, it is about ignorance and hatred and willful disruption with no redeeming value. Communities like this are vulnerable to such and it heavily damages the utility of the forum. Some people love to watch others fight. That also does not contribute.
I don't care if Wyttenbach is a pet psychiatrist, professor of nuclear physicist, or a precocious 9 year old with an I pad and internet access.
It is not who you are, but what you say that is important.
I did not bother to read the deleted link for personal info, or even TC's when it came out, for that matter.
All this outing of personal details, even if they can be found by anyone who tries (let them do it themselves), is extremely poor forum behavior.
It will result in many people not joining in, if kept up, IMO.
So, the structure on the left side of the wall that could match with dimensions that Rossi recently provided is not really there?
http://www.e-catworld.com/2016…s-to-the-customers-plant/
Or perhaps this photographic evidence is fabricated in your mind?
Please everyone, let's use some common sense here! Yes, Rossi says the dimensions were 70 feet long x 10 feet wide. Yes, there is a photo showing a wall or divider. If Rossi stated there was a fire breathing dragon 70 foot long by 10 foot wide behind that wall, would the photo prove it? If Rossi stated that there was a 70'x'10' donut shop on the other side of the wall, would the photo show it?
On the other hand, there is nothing in the photo to disprove anything much either. Some may take note of the pipe size and estimate the amount of steam/water that could realistically be transported. But a wall is a wall for goodness sake!
This is a prime example of where our "desired belief" is trumping factual data! Let's put aside our desired bias and try to stick to facts.
1) Rossi stated "the plant" was 70' x 10'. He did not state ANYTHING else. So we cannot come to any other conclusion of his statement other than 70 x 10.
2)We have a photo. I am not even sure it can be proven to be the 1 year plant. But assuming it is, there is a divider / wall. That is all! We do not have XRay vision
to see through this wall. Will a 70' x 10' "plant" and accessory equipment fit there? Possibly. Perhaps one can estimate the length, but there is NO way to estimate the
available width! So, it could be 10' it could be 20' it could be 5'. We cannot say the plant would or would not fit with certainty.
3) Even if the hidden section does have space for a 70' x 10' area, what does the prove?
Both the photo, the wall and all the arguments about them are really unfounded and meaningless. With the possible exception of how much heat the two pipes might transport. Other than that, arguing this is like the blind men trying to describe the elephant in the room. People are only looking at what they WANT it to be!
2 more days and we "might" have more factual information. I encourage everyone to be civil and wait! 
That is a specific claim and value--20 kW electric heater. How did you arrive at this value? Was there rounding involved?
Rossi said the reactor produced 1 MW and that was 50 times input. 1000/50 = 20 kW.
That is a round number. I think input power may be a little less than that, but that's close, AFIK.
Jed:
QuoteNope. That's not how business works here on Planet Earth. That is not how contracts are enforced. Only on Planet Rossi. Here on earth you have to actually do what is specified in a contract. You can't just write a preposterous report claiming that you did it. Even if the other side agreed to a report beforehand, you still can't issue a preposterous report and expect to be paid.
Exactly. Also, contracts arrived at because of fraud are invalid in the US system (and I suspect pretty much everywhere).
QuoteIf it comes to a jury trial, the judge will not decide; the jury will.
Usually and normally but not always. Judges can overrule juries if they have excellent cause to do so. And of course, either side in a civil trial can appeal the judgement.
JNOV:
QuoteJNOV is the practice in American courts whereby the presiding judge in a civil jury trial may overrule the decision of a jury and reverse or amend their verdict. In literal terms, the judge enters a verdict notwithstanding the jury findings. This intervention, often requested[citation needed] but rarely granted, permits the judge to exercise discretion to avoid extreme and unreasonable jury decisions.[3]
-Wikipedia
@Jed The 20kW in is sort of arbitrary, isn't it? If Rossi is going to cheat, he could put in more power than he stated. Certainly nowhere near 1 megawatt for reasons you already stated but perhaps more than 20kW to make more of an impression on gullible potential investors.
What I wrote can be found in a few minutes by anyone who looks. He's a real person, using his real name. "Real person" is, in fact, as things go here, a compliment. He is willing to stand behind what he's saying. Apparently he has a PhD. This is not ordinarily called "doxxing," which is revealing information expected to be private. Absolutely outrageous accusations are being posted, here, about real people, only based on their participation here. Libel.
Abd. I call it doxxing when you reveal someone's complete identity or other information they might care not to be revealed here -wether it is Mary Yugo or Wyttenbach or King Kong. I don't give a fig what you call it, or the fact that what you reveal can be found easily with a little research. It us anti-social, un-neccessary and will always be moderated by me. If you don't like it, sorry, but no matter how much you wriggle to make yourself right, get used to the idea that such posts by anyone will always be removed by me or one of the other Mods.
ETA. I do not have banning powers btw, nor do I want them. If you want someone banned then ask the Admins.
Please everyone, let's use some common sense here!
Are you suggesting that my comments are not rooted in common sense? How dare you.
Yes, Rossi says the
dimensions were 70 feet long x 10 feet wide. Yes, there is a photo
showing a wall or divider.
Agreed.
If Rossi stated there was a fire breathing
dragon 70 foot long by 10 foot wide behind that wall, would the photo
prove it?
Obviously no, nor was any such thing suggested. But the photo does show that there is something there, which does appear to be quite large, and which tends to discredit Jed's statement that there was nothing in the customer site.
If Rossi stated that there was a 70'x'10' donut shop on the
other side of the wall, would the photo show it?
That misses the point. See comment above.
On the other hand, there is nothing in the photo to disprove anything
much either. Some may take note of the pipe size and estimate the amount
of steam/water that could realistically be transported. But a wall is a
wall for goodness sake!
Agreed.
This is a prime example of where our "desired belief" is trumping
factual data!
Au contraire. I said nothing of belief (why you folks go straight to this every time is beyond me). I referenced a photograph and made a comment to refute Jed's position.
Let's put aside our desired bias and try to stick to
facts.
Your bias is clear based on your writing. I'm basically a fence-sitter trying to get to the bottom of this. I tend to lean Rossi over IH because of a string of inconsistencies from IH sympathizers. At least Rossi is more or less consistent in his statements (despite him being no saint by all means).
1) Rossi stated "the plant" was 70' x 10'. He did not state ANYTHING
else.
Well, to be precise, he did state other things in that posting. But I get your drift.
So we cannot come to any other conclusion of his statement other
than 70 x 10.
We can come to a conclusion that Rossi disagrees with the statement that there was nothing in the customer site. This sets up a clear contradiction with Jed's claim that there was nothing.
Display More
2)We have a photo. I am not even sure it can be proven to be the 1 year
plant. But assuming it is, there is a divider / wall. That is all! We do
not have XRay vision to see through this wall. Will a 70' x 10' "plant" and accessory
equipment fit there? Possibly. Perhaps one can estimate the length, but
there is NO way to estimate the available width! So, it could be 10' it could be 20' it could be 5'. We
cannot say the plant would or would not fit with certainty.
Sure, we don't have XRay vision, and the photo isn't much to go from, but it is something. And there does appear to be something there. And the top of the structure does appear to be within what might be a 70' x 10' x 10' plant.
3) Even if the hidden section does have space for a 70' x 10' area, what does the prove?
That Jed's statement that there is nothing there is not correct.
Both the photo, the wall and all the arguments about them are really
unfounded and meaningless.
No, it provided a point of view--and one which is not meaningless.
With the possible exception of how much heat the two pipes might transport. Other than that, arguing this is like the
blind men trying to describe the elephant in the room. People are only looking at what they WANT it to be!
I admit we are all running somewhat blind in this whole affair. But we have some bits of information. And we can discern some information from them.
2 more days and we "might" have more factual information. I encourage everyone to be civil and wait!
I look forward to the next 2 days, remain civil, and hope all others do as well.
Quote from "Alan Smith"Abd. I call it doxxing when you reveal someone's complete identity or other information they might care not to be revealed here
Yes, we know since earlier that Abd is a miserable sob that do not hesitate to use every despicable method he can when it suits his (or his "customer") agenda. I guess this kind of behaviour suits the fundamentalistic belief system he advocates. The same seems to go for Darden, Weaver et al; lying to customers, investors, partners, employees, etc is no problem at all unless there is a hand on the bible; because as Wever once said; he has already been pardoned and forgiven for all his sins, so he is ok with it... Nice guys, eh?
JedRothwell wrote:
That is a specific claim and value--20 kW electric heater. How did you arrive at this value? Was there rounding involved?
That is obviously a round number. It would be 1 MW output, as supposedly measured, at COP 50, therefore 20 KW in. I think that is also roughly the electric bill that Mats Lewan showed. Someone can check. If Jed has Rossi calorimetric data purporting to calculate COP, as he claims, input power would be shown, so he might have taken the figure from there. None of this matters, because the point is that input electrical power is going to be low enough that the boiler may not need regulation on the basis of power input. If regulation is required (which is possible), it would be on another basis, as being a closed boiler (Rossi said it was closed) that might be near a public walkway (which has been enough, at least as a factor, to require inspection.)
The boiler regulation thing is a red herring, it's not really relevant to Rossi v. Darden. If Rossi failed to get approvals and if they were found to be required, the fine could be $500. It is simply not a big deal. However, it does figure weakly into the overall picture in a way, since allegedly the test was moved to Florida because approvals could not be obtained in North Carolina. But we do not know if Rossi actually made any attempt to clear operation with the Florida State Fire Marshal. Maybe he did and maybe he didn't. We know that he intended to do it, from the Complaint.
In the present discussion, Jed mentioned regulations of a different kind, standards for determining boiler efficiency. Those are real, and applicable, and "nuclear" is irrelevant. This is merely a different kind of fuel with very high energy density. The heat ends up as ordinary heat.
