Rossi: No Further Black Box Testing

IH is now emphasizing the killer calorimetric argument. From the Amended Answer,

Quote

82. Indeed, when Murray eventually gained access to the Plant in February 2016 and examined the Plant, the methodology being used to operate the Plant, and the methodology being used to measure those operations, he immediately recognized that those methodologies were fatally flawed. Some of the flaws that he was quickly able to identify are explained in Exhibit 5. Murray also recognized that the building in which the Plant was located had no method to ventilate the heat that would be produced by the Plant were it producing the amount of steam claimed by Rossi, Leonardo, and Penon such that persons would not have been able to work in the building if the Rossi/Leonardo/Penon claims were true. This conflicted with the claims of individuals who had been in the building when the Plant was operating, all of whom claimed the temperature in the building was near or not much greater than the outside temperature. Photographs of the building ceiling from the inside are attached hereto as Exhibit 26.

Quote from Jack Cole

Yes, sadly another anecdote, but no data. I don't know if it is correct. IH says in their counter-claim that they never got any XH. I think there was some qualification to that like (credible or repeatable), but could be wrong.

Well-known in the history of cold fusion. It can easily happen that some artifact causes an appearance of heat, even major heat. What is needed for commercial devices is reliable repeatability. Not just a single test. Not just scattered tests or supposed confirmations that are actually different. But solid results, confirmable and confirmed.

IH is quite firm in the Answer and counter-claim.

The Answer begins with:

Quote

1. Defendants deny that the energy catalyzer (“E-Cat”) technology “generates a low energy nuclear reaction resulting in an exothermic release of energy” along the lines claimed by Plaintiffs – which is that a reactor using the E-Cat technology produces more than 50 times the energy it consumes. Compl. ¶ 71. Such claims are not scientifically verifiable or reproducible. See e.g., U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”), “Non-Final Rejection,” dated January 11, 2016 as to Patent App. No. 12/736,193 (attached hereto as Exhibit 1); discussions of third party testing infra. In addition, the procedures and mechanisms which Plaintiffs have used in their experiments and testing of the E-Cat technology are flawed and unreliable in many respects. See e.g. id.; response to Paragraph 72 infra. Lastly, the E-Cat technology has never been independently validated by a scientifically reliable methodology to produce the energy levels Plaintiffs now claim, and has failed to produce any commercially viable product. Indeed, using the E-Cat technology Plaintiffs directly provided them, Industrial Heat and IPH have been unable to produce any measurable excess energy. [...]

This must not be read absolutely literally. It must allow for errors in measurement, which I'm sure have existed. It must be read with "confirmed" assumed at the beginning of "measurable," and it must be construed narrowly to measurements of energy from Rossi-provided technology, not all LENR, for example.

Industrial Heat went way, way beyond the ordinary, at high cost, to be able to come to this position.

Quote from JedRothwell

Is that the customer area? It is unclear to me. Is that what the amended Answer says?

Not exactly. It is showing the interior of the warehouse. The special focus is on the roof, looking for ventilation equipment/vents. We do not know when these photos were taken. There is no steam pipe showing going into the Black Box, as is seen in some extant photos. So that may have been removed ... or the photo was early, before it was installed.

Quote from Paradigmnoia

We haven't seen the Big Reveal yet for the Customer area.

Inside information? Hah! Literally inside (the customer area)?

Frankly, I appreciate inside information, and factor for it as unreliable if the source is not clearly known. Later, we find out and know more about the one who passed it on. Reliable or not.

The "shutdown Rossi" site is shut down but you can find the summary of the visit by nuclear inspectors here:

http://freeenergyscams.com/and…ators-rossi-not-credible/

I don't think Darden was there. Vaughn apparently knew all about that visit and talked to the inspectors and told them then that he didn't think Rossi was credible. He should've looked into that about $11.5M (of other people's money) ago.

Quote from Paradigmnoia

Abd Ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:

Well, here is one version of the source. Includes "govt inspectors" in the storyline, so at least if true there will be indipendent third party witnesses.

"Indipendent"? OMG! A Rossi sock! ....
now, seriously, thanks.

Quote

https://www.lenr-forum.com/for…n/?postID=20350#post20350

I was not following Dewey Weaver then, I'm sure there are many gems. I'm going to quote it here:

Quote

Or maybe that was just a something similar to a radiator that the govt inspectors saw on the customer side of the wall?

Rossi and his attorney/President of JM Products rep'd and warranted that JM Products was/is part of a UK-based company and that heat was needed for real work.

We'll see how effective they are in explaining that guarantee to the judge. Rossi had a key that allowed him to walk thru the door in the "customer" wall. He made IH and their visitors go around to the front door and would never allow a glimpse of anything outside of the front entrance, office areas and conference room. One interesting nugget - once IH advised Rossi that the 1MW container was going to be padlocked on inspection day, the IH engineer reminded Rossi that he should advise his "customer" of this state change. Rossi got out the key, walked right thru the "customer" door, came back shortly afterwards and said "not a problem" along with some additional conflicting comments (with letters to back them up) that are preserved for the courts.

So ... the claim is that a government inspector saw the customer area and what was in it. Plausible. IH may have collected a statement.

From this account, IH decided to shut the plant down, and JM Products did not object, if anyone was actually there. And there are more communications that we have not seen, not a surprise at all.