Industrial Heat Amends Answer to Rossi’s Complaint on Aug 11th

@IH Fanboy

Yep. Only has to vent (I just did this calculation) 84618 cfm to get rid of 1MW of heat if the ambient outside air is 20°C (maximum humidity), and the air going out is 40°C
I made simple spreadsheet, so I can work out how many cfm if the vented air was 104°C if you like. (sounds almost fun)

Looks like 20147 cfm up a chimney (if all 1 MW went up it) with ambient at 20°C and flue heat at 104°C
Using a natural draft, 10 m long chimney, it would take a diameter of about 1.4 m if the online calculator I used isn't junk

Quote from Shane D.

Who are you talking to?

That was to Jack. I'll stick his name on top... you guys jump in too quick. Half the time I'm still editing myself.

Breakfast ? That's for the ____s that don't eat a proper supper !!! Or by breakfast do you mean coffee ?

Well, a chimney has been mentioned before. It is not my concoction. And if it were me putting a 1 MW plant in a warehouse, you bet I'd construct a chimney. I mean, how how hard could it be? You can buy flexible insulated piping with a wide diameter for next to nothing.

I haven't seen any evidence for a chimney. But it is a possibility, and has been mentioned before, including by Rossi. So why didn't IH release pictures that show the entire space inside? Are they trying to hide something?

Quote from Shane D.

IHFB,

So you are stretching it? Be honest now. For that matter, can any Rossi fan at this point not be stretching it at least... just a bit?

IH have raised significant issues, no doubt. But in my mind, they are not definitive. They are interesting though. I still sense much inconsistency and insincerity from the IH sympathizers, and also from IH's legal filings. They are sneaky. And I don't like it (although I'm quite happy to expose such sneakiness).

If you look at the poll over at ECW, you will see that over 60% still hold a positive view that the E-cat is commercially viable. Interesting result given that IH should be winning the PR war, being the latest to present their position. We haven't even received Leonardo's rebuttal yet.

As soon as I see definitive proof that dispels all of the built-up evidence over the past 5 1/2 years, then I will write off all of the time that I too have spent on this topic, and will put this chapter in my life behind me.

But not until then. The stakes are too high for the world.

@Shane D.,
Trust but verify (even oneself). Now we know a 1 MW chimney is hard to hide.
Of course, if we start splitting up the heat, and say only half needs to go hide someplace, or 1/3... well who know what we might find.
Maybe with just the right combo of superendothermic sponges, saunas, chimneys, and shoe boxes we can make that nasty heat problem go away.
Now, we still have to find 1 MW. It might only be 20 kW.
Rossi once claimed 250 kW Joule heat capacity of the Plant. I haven't looked to see what that does. Seems like a lot of juice, too.

Quote from Bob

His claims of sales, his claims of certifications, his claims of "indipendant tests", his claims of customers, his claims period.... have ALWAYS disappointed me, they are never what was hoped. I expect this lawsuit will turn out the same way.....

I hear what you are saying and share some of your sentiment. These are questions of degree, as is often the case. In other words, a sale of a 1MW plant actually happened--we all know it did. He did obtain a certification: he posted proof of it. An independent test was performed (Lugano), despite some who claim it wasn't (it was, and the only part where Rossi was involved with fuel insertion/extraction was apparently videotaped and done in front of the Lugano scientists). The customer claim is still dubious, but let's see what Rossi presents in court. So, have they been disappointing? Well, maybe. But again, it is a question of degree. His promises have more or less eventually panned out. Not all of them. He is clearly overly optimistic on his planned timelines. But so is Elon Musk.

Quote from Shane D.

Funny you mention Musk, as Lewan mentions in his: "An Impossible
Invention" that Elon wanted to meet with Rossi, and Rossi refused. Now
why would Rossi turn his back on Musk...with his scientific background
and deep pool of engineers at his beck and call, but take a liking to
the scientifically naive Darden?...hmmm.

It is a good question. But if I recall correctly, Mats made it sound like Rossi didn't even know who Musk was. Darden proactively reached out to Rossi, meeting with him in person. I think Musk probably had (and has) his hands full already and most likely wasn't as proactive.

Here is a copy of the amended Answer:

https://goo.gl/yzgcwb

I find the different attitudes here towards the IH/Rossi case interesting. My view aligns very closely with that of Bob, Stated eloquently a while back. Basically that it was very difficult given the nature of the evidence to prove Rossi has nothing that works, but the circumstantial evidence for this is so very strong it is damning.

I'd put this more generally. An inventor makes claims he has a wonderful invention, and does some demos and semi-independent tests which seem positive. However, they are controversial and critics point out ways that these tests could give false positives. In some cases those ways are proven (Lugano) in others they are very strongly flagged. (The tests using average Ampere and Voltage meters to measure power on a Triac output spiky waveform - Rossi himself did this at a test which Mats attended, and absolutely refused to understand that this was wrong and the (COP=1) RMS power measurement was right).

Does every single test have a known likely "false positive" cause? No. I can think of a few overseen by Levi and no-one else where we cannot tell. The early ones had little info, the 1st (?) Ferrara one, signed off by a group but conducted by only Levi and Rossi, had quite a lot of detail and no obvious error.

But, given the collection of obvious likely errors in all the other experiments conducted by Levi and Rossi it is very plausible that there is some error in this one too. It is just that we cannot identify what it is, although we can guess a few things.

We have NO experiments that prove Rossi's stuff works. But also we have NO experiments which prove Rossi's stuff does not work. It is almost impossible to do this. Any experiment can only limit excess heat to the experiment accuracy, and all Rossi's experiments have had poor accuracy. The only experiment with decent public data, and a semblance of independence, is Lugano and there it turns out that data was dramatically miscalculated and correct calculation gives a null result to within the large errors of the experiment. So much so that after being challenged by Mats about the GSVIT/MFMP/TC correction, Levi (using a provably false argument) continues to assert that the results are positive. Also Rossi has many times avoided secure external testing which would resolve the uncertainty: it is not that his claims are difficult to measure and prove!

All the other evidence, in the form of people supporting Rossi, is confirmation bias. The IH internal tests - that would indeed have settled the matter - turn out negative (say IH). There is then the question of why IH took so long to come out with their conclusion, and apparently supported Rossi until he sued then for non-payment? To me, this has always been no mystery. IH would have had suspicions about Rossi's stuff if they are not complete idiots.They, as VC's, would take a gamble on percentages on agreeing to the laughably bad contract. It seems very plausible the destructive terms of that contract were insisted on by Rossi. Really, the contract is only of merit to Rossi if he wants to get out quick with lots of money.

IH then paid the $10M after a test that (they now say) was unsafe. Is that plausible? Was it wise? I'd say it is very plausible. IH had been dangled the carrot of just possibly a working LENR device easily commercialisable. Their dream. The fact that Rossi was highly unreliable, technically deficient, emotionally impossible, does not preclude him from having this miracle. These qualities can be argued to be what has prevented anyone else from running with the miracle. By being open-minded IH have the chance to take this technology and shake it to see what comes out. Were IH wise? It is really difficult to say. Given their working assumption, that LENR exists but has been very difficult to make reliable, it is not inconceivable that Rossi has something real. I think also the more they got into looking at Rossi's stuff the more they would want a definitive conclusion and the ONLY way to get that was to pay the $10M and have full access to Rossi IP with Rossi helping them. You can even argue that the $89M is helpful. It gives Rossi a very strong motive to cooperate and help their engineers make things work.

In this situation IH (if they were wise) would also be immensely cautious around Rossi. In particular they would want to make sure Rossi could not obtain $89M from a bogus test. We still don't know whether they were cautious enough here. You would think that such a high power continuous test with a real customer would be clear-cut - either it works provably or not. I think IH were just not quite used to the level of subterfuge used. A bogus customer that does not seem real but traces back to shell companies and a (provable) UK entity shell? A John Doe person who claims to be a technical guy from the parent company? This is either an elaborate misdirection or a real effort. You'd expect it to be easy to resolve.

The genius of Rossi is in creating and perpetuating this type of confusion. There just is not enough public information to be certain. Bob's "many little indications" are for most people strong enough, but they cannot give a knockout blow because there is so little information.

I'd expect the mystery customer matter to be won by IH in Court. Rossi has always had a kernel of truth in his statements. I'm sure that legally there is a UK entity that conducted the test. I'd expect that some industrial processing (of a prototype sort) was conducted. I'd expect that Rossi, with some technical help from others, was involved in this. All of that could be set up by Rossi and turned by him, without directly lying, into what he has claimed.

So: I'm pretty sure that Court procedures: Discovery and subsequent examination of witnesses, will cut through the mystery. it is a sign of Rossi's true genius that the public facade of Rossi having a working device remains (for a few people still at ECW) largely intact.

LENR is the perfect area for Rossi to exploit. Its proponents believe the field to be discriminated against by skeptics who do not look properly at the evidence. Proponents are frustrated because they have so many tantalising hints of an effect that would have massive positive technological implications if real. How could they not give Rossi as much credit as possible. I know there was some caution, but also everyone would notice that the attention and money flowing from Rossi's genius at making "dramatic effect" - nay even his "magnificence" at this - was helpful. Money talks.

You can properly argue that IH did what had to be done or the sake of LENR as a scientific field - they called Rossi's bluff at some risk to themselves. You can also properly argue that if Rossi had some real LENR in his devices they were gaining at a cheap price the technology of the Century - a shortcut to what would (they think) otherwise take many years of serious scientific graft understanding the effect and how to make it reliable.

Finally the information emerging from the Court documents. I don't expect it to be consistent. IH are gathering info, attacking Rossi on every possible front. (They say this in the documents). They don't expect every attack to succeed but they will have enough ammunition to get to the bottom of these matters (they expect) through Court processes that force exact information from witnesses under penalty of perjury. They are doing what they must to get to the truth.

If find it most reprehensible - in fact quite extraordinarily wrong - that people continue to argue IH are somehow underhand and morally bad. In fact their big mistake is (arguably) being too open and naive. Of course, technically, they make mistakes. But their hearts are in the right place if you believe LENR needs long-term scientific research. In the legal process IH have an obligation to their investors to do whatever the lawyers tell them. Their money, that could go to real LENR research, is at stake. They cannot be open and friendly, much as I expect they'd like to be. I think this tension is what gives rise to the various "IH friends" here. Dewey et al would be even more indignant about the misrepresentation of IH online than me. IH will not open up against lawyer's advice. They have a duty. But were I them I'd feel pretty annoyed! Jed's guesses here based on partial information and a sometimes too quick rush to judgement are then taken as destructive of IH's integrity. Ridiculous.

PS. One final curiosity. Would IH have formed without Rossi? Possibly not. He did alter the climate of feeling (because people are not wholly rational and sentiment is a variable thing). His circus made it more possible for investors to imagine real very high returns. How much that influenced the formation of IH perhaps we will never know? How much Darden et al had in mind a possible very high return as well as being altruistic saviors of mankind again we cannot know.