Rossi-Blog Comment Discussion

  • @ THHuxleynew,


    sorry, I do not agree with most of your comment. Your following statement allows me to explain the reasons for my dissent.


    3. The expertise required to validate practical Rossi test setups can be very surprising and variable


    You have the tendency, like many others here, to forget that the public hystory of the Ecat began in January 2011 with a very simple test setup. The simplest you can ever imagine. The Brief Technical Description (1) contains three different verifications in just one and half page. The calculations are elementary, at the secondary school level. There is no possibility that a physics professor, whatever his specialization, can passively accept those astonishingly results without carefully verifying by himself the physical assumptions and the math from which they come. Any physics professors in the world has the competence to perform this simple verification, and in our case we are talking about the professors of the highest ranked Physics Department in Italy, who were publicly involved in an initiative potentially capable to determine the destiny of our society.


    (1) http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/RothwellJbrieftechn.pdf

  • to forget that the public hystory of the Ecat began in January 2011 with a very simple test setup.

    I think it dates back much earlier: for example, He demoed the Energy Catalyzer in Bedford, New Hampshire, to the Department of Defense in Nov 09 and claimed on his blog (he had a public web presence) in April 2010 of running his system to heat a factory for 2 years.

  • Ascoli,


    You seem hell bent on punishing all of the professors that associated with Rossi, going all the way back to 2010. I do not see a need for it. They saw something and did their scientific duty to investigate. What would you have done?


    They may have not done a good job of it, but none deserve being "outed", and then raked over the coals for it. Most of this anyways, was done "in house" as sort of an internal vetting process at your UOB. You could see that when Krivit's interviewed Levi. Krivit was trying to hold him accountable to a higher scientific standard than he (Levi), wanted to be held to. I felt sorry for the man after watching. Still do, after hearing he is still affected by all this.


    And also, we really do not know yet if this story is over, and the final chapter written. There has always been this alternative theory that Rossi had, or has something, that is not so robust and reliable as he claims. It could actually explain the story, and fill in many of the missing blanks, much better than his having what he has peddled. There are after all, prominent members of the LENR community who, while denouncing Rossi in public, will confess in private that they believe he has working systems. That is a fact. In addition. the Swedes still stand by him. And look how many attended the Stockholm QX DPS.


    There is actually some good info out there....some even in the court documents, that could make a case for this alternative theory. I would be tempted to take on the task myself, but fear Dewey's wrath when he comes back after he realizes he was wrong.

  • @ can,

    So, basically you're saying as follows:


    Quotes box [Ascoli65 wrote:

    Andrea Rossi colluded with university professors and researchers to mislead the public about the reality of LENR.]


    I don't understand why some members here are so eager to jump into somebody's else conclusion, instead of helping to improve the knowledge on the facts we are discussing.


    In any case, I never said the words you attributed to me in the quotes box you put in your comment. This is a very incorrect way of doing. Please, would you be so kind to remove that box, and use another way to express your opinion?

  • @ oldguy,


    I think it dates back much earlier: for example, He demoed the Energy Catalyzer in Bedford, New Hampshire, to the Department of Defense in Nov 09 and claimed on his blog (he had a public web presence) in April 2010 of running his system to heat a factory for 2 years.


    It's true that the first appearance on the web of Rossi's activity in the CF field dates back to March 2010 when JoNP published the Rossi-Focardi paper and the Rossi's patent, but the name Ecat appeared in the public demo held in Bologna in January 2011. This event, as Google Trends demonstrates, has been the real beginning of the public propaganda phase of the Ecat initiative. Many people here on L-F started to follw the LENR field and the Ecat saga thanks to this sensational event.


    As for the very beginning of Rossi involvement in the CF field, it goes back well before November 2009. Leaving aside the "Rossi says" about its interest in CF in the early '90, the first certain involvement dates back to 2007 when he returned to Italy from the USA to meet Focardi (Krivit said that he approached first Piantelli (1), though). But informed sources (Celani and Passerini) reported that Rossi collaborated with Ahern in a US government lab, before coming back to Italy (2).


    Another info on the very first contacts between Rossi and the LENR community comes from a Macy's article:


    Quote

    From: http://www.infinite-energy.com…ng-a-lawsuit-in-lenr.html

    [...]

    I heard how Mike became involved in starting to explore what he was doing. Rossi claimed to be closing in on producing a working LENR technology. He had American partners who had worked with the U.S. Navy and were familiar with the continuing interest of the Navy in energy technology. In late 2007 the company requested someone with technical interest and competence to view a demonstration. It took until summer 2009 before the promised demonstration was nearly ready.

    [...]


    Some more hints on the American partners mentioned above, on the first tests in the USA and to their timing are provided in the deposition of Cassarino (Ampenergo) contained in the Document 326 of the Miami trial:



    (1) http://newenergytimes.com/v2/s…Investigation-Index.shtml

    (2) Rossi-Blog Comment Discussion

  • Ascoli65

    You might skirt around the subject like you wish, but that is what you're alluding to.


    Actual quotes from you from the previous discussion:


    Rossi-Blog Comment Discussion

    Ascoli65 wrote:

    [...] in 2007 the popularity of LENR was fading away [...] It needed a shock. Due to the fact, let me say, that the underlying phenomena don't exist, it needed big bluffs and someone capable to sustain them for long periods.


    Ascoli65 wrote:

    Rossi had all the requisites for being the LENR renaissance man. Being Italian, it was easier for him to contact one of the fathers of the Ni-H method. [...]


    Rossi-Blog Comment Discussion

    Ascoli65 wrote:

    In the past 30 years, those involved in the CF/LENR have benefitted from many hundreds of millions of public funding, without being able to produce one watt of real excess power. For its part, the Ecat initiative collected only a few dozens of millions from private funding companies which were well aware of the risk of their investments, and which in turn relied on the judgments of the above professors and researchers.


    Rossi-Blog Comment Discussion

    Ascoli65 wrote:

    [...] the professors (including Josephson) have not been fooled by Rossi


    Rossi-Blog Comment Discussion

    Ascoli65 wrote:

    I would like to better understand while they didn't release the right results. I don't think that the reason is that they have been fooled by Rossi.


    Rossi-Blog Comment Discussion

    Ascoli65 wrote:

    The calculations are elementary, at the secondary school level. There is no possibility that a physics professor, whatever his specialization, can passively accept those astonishingly results without carefully verifying by himself the physical assumptions and the math from which they come. Any physics professors in the world has the competence to perform this simple verification


    Then, paraphrasing:


    Quote

    After 30 years of failures - as the underlying phenomena don't exist - the LENR field needed a shock. Rossi was the right man for this. Tests occurred in Bologna and the professors, including Nobel prizes, gave their assurance that the phenomenon was real. They didn't release the right results, but they have not been fooled by Rossi and they didn't make mistakes in their reports due to sloppiness either.


    Do you really want your readers to believe that you still haven't made up your mind yet even though you're answering your questions in your own posts? Just admit that you simply don't want to take any responsibility for what you've been slyly suggesting for the past 7 years or so. You cannot have it both ways, though.

  • Ascoli,


    The further back in the Rossi timeline you go, the more you make the point about this alternative theory of Rossi having had something at one point. Yes, I know that is not your intent, but that is the effect it is having on me. With Rossi's later years in the public record now, we know what he is capable of, but was he that good, where he could fool so many in the beginning?


    Those were the days he was working elbow to elbow (close proximity), in the same room with Focardi and others. There was no aura around him then, and surely everyone was highly skeptical of this man with a bad history walking in the door claiming he had a high power LENR device. They would not let just anyone in the door, and once they did, he would be subjected to the utmost scrutiny. Only after satisfying themselves, would they bring in other colleagues, and then they would have to be convinced, and so on. Any step along the way, could have been his last.


    Maybe we could get you to switch sides and become pro-Rossi? :) Like I, Ahlfors and many others have said, there is some good info out there (some which you just posted) to make a reasonable case, and you know where to find it and how to use it. After losing IHFB, all it seems we can attract here are the lazy Rossi defenders, who don't know the history, and won't do the research.

  • @ can,

    a "quote" is a repeat or copy out (words from a text or speech written or spoken by another person).


    Previously you used a quote box (with the script "Ascoli65 wrote") to attribute to me a text I didn't wrote, and in your last comment another quote box to arbitrarily assemble parts of my real quotes. I wonder if this use of the quotation tool can be considered acceptable by the administrators of this site. In the past, other L-F moderators tried to interpret and synthesize my position, but they did it in a much more fair and correct way.


    Do you really want your readers to believe that you still haven't made up your mind yet even though you're answering your questions in your own posts? Just admit that you simply don't want to take any responsibility for what you've been slyly suggesting for the past 7 years or so. You cannot have it both ways, though.


    As any other here, I have my preliminary scenario. But it is a puzzle that is very far to be complete, and where not all pieces are in the final position. I don't understand the usefulness for the L-F readers to try to complete my puzzle in advance. I think it's much more useful to share as many pieces as possible among us, leaving each of us the burden of assembling his own puzzle.


    That said, you did a very good job in collecting some of my real quotes. Thanks. The important is to read them in the right context, looking at the original post from where they have been extracted.


    Btw, is there anything in my quotes you want to dispute?

  • @ Shane D.,

    The further back in the Rossi timeline you go, the more you make the point about this alternative theory of Rossi having had something at one point. Yes, I know that is not your intent, but that is the effect it is having on me.


    No problem. The important thing is that the you have found these info interesting. I hope you too deem it useful to spotlight the furthest past.


    Quote

    With Rossi's later years in the public record now, we know what he is capable of, but was he that good, where he could fool so many in the beginning?


    It depends on how you see the facts. After so many years, you should have realized that everything you read could be the mirror image of the reality. For example, are you sure that Rossi has been capable to "fool so many in the beginning"? From which parts of the deposition do you deduce it?


    Quote

    Those were the days he was working elbow to elbow (close proximity), in the same room with Focardi and others.


    Which days? Do we have an exact timeline of those days? We only know that the first experiment with Focardi took place on October 16, 2007 (1), during the week of Oct. 13, 2007 when an international conference on LENR was taking place in Italy (2).


    Quote

    There was no aura around him then, and surely everyone was highly skeptical of this man with a bad history walking in the door claiming he had a high power LENR device. They would not let just anyone in the door, and once they did, he would be subjected to the utmost scrutiny.


    To say the least!


    Quote

    Only after satisfying themselves, would they bring in other colleagues, and then they would have to be convinced, and so on.


    Any more specific idea on how they could have been satisfied or convinced?


    Quote

    Maybe we could get you to switch sides and become pro-Rossi? :)


    Very hard. I'm not even anti-Rossi. :)


    (1) http://newenergytimes.com/v2/s…Investigation-Index.shtml

    (2) http://newenergytimes.com/v2/n…1/36/3616ideologies.shtml

  • Ascoli65

    Quote boxes in discussion boards are often used as general containers to clearly separate or highlight text, whether real or paraphased, that is not directly part of the actual comment or which is presented in a different form (e.g. first-person narration).


    Either way, this only shows that if you are so concerned with how others represent your complicated point of view you should work harder on being clearer and more direct on your own.


    I don't understand the usefulness for the L-F readers to try to complete my puzzle in advance.


    Maybe that people are trying to have a clear and honest discussion, and not playing puzzle games with you?


    Btw, is there anything in my quotes you want to dispute?


    There's nothing in particular that I need to dispute about what you're writing; you're entitled to your own opinions on the subject and on whether LENR phenomena exist or not or to believe that a large group of people have been colluding to keep a fake narrative about it well and alive. I only wish you stopped attempting to delegate to others the responsibility for what you've been trying to suggest so far, often blatantly feigning incredulity along the way. Before you object: yes, this needed to be said.



    It's hard to believe that a smart person like you isn't able to expose his thesis more directly without wasting so many comments on the topic.

    (be reminded that this discussion style does work both ways)

  • can


    It's very simple. You just keep asking the same question(s) in slightly different ways until you get the answer you wanted to hear all along. After all these years of doing this on various fora one might have hoped Ascoli65 would have developed a different approach, but he shows no signs of it yet.

  • Not sealed:


    0207.44_Exhibit_44.pdf


    This strikes me as Rossi trying to get Johnson Matthey to send him paperwork that will make it look as though they are doing business on an industrial scale (at least $1Million given today's prices). Rossi certainly has lots of nerve asking Johnson Matthey to send the paperwork to "JM Products"!


    How would this have worked though? The appearance that Rossi was trying to create for IH was that JM Products was manufacturing platinum sponge. So how would this paperwork help in the deception?


    Rossi testified in depostion that he ended up buying only grams of platinum sponge. Not kilograms.

  • According to Dewey Weaver, the first time Tom Darden realized that Rossi's ecat didn't work was when they got the same result with an (accidentally) unfueled reactor that they got with a fueled one. That begs the question ( Dewey Weaver ) why did not Mr. Darden and company compare a fueled and an unfueled "reactor" BEFORE giving Mr. Rossi ten f'n million dollars. I mean, how hard is that?

  • Eric Walker


    Rossi would not have to leave fuel with Darden. The question was: why did not Darden require Rossi to test, in a verifiable way, in front of Darden and his experts, with fueled and unfueled reactors prior to making a large financial agreement? This would not require Rossi to reveal the composition of the fuel, though, I suppose, the appearance of it might have been seen.

  • The answer (if there is one) is complex, but is something like this: (1) There was in fact a "validation" test that, while departing from the agreed protocol during the test, did in fact appear to come up positive; (2) Rossi is a flighty and mercurial character who has always resisted rigorous testing (one can draw one's own conclusions about the reason for this), so the likelihood of a very rigorous validation prior to IH having given him an initial sum seems remote; (3) IH were venturing into territory they knew little about and did not do their due diligence very well (nearly all are agreed on this); and (4) IH had a high tolerance for risk and were willing to proceed with less than full assurances in order not to alienate Rossi. Around the same time (I am unclear on the timeline), there was the Lugano test by Levi and the Swedes that appeared to come up positive. (I think this was after the initial exchange of money, but I'm not sure.)

  • I'm going to guess that Rossi would not have provided the fuel, for (presumed) fear of losing his IP through reverse engineering.


    Rossi supposedly did transfer to Thomas Darden the secret of the fuel. In fact, Darden himself prepared the fuel for most of the reactor cores at the Doral location. These were the cores sitting in all the small blue boxes in the shipping container.


    In the end Rossi refused to use these Darden-fuelled reactors. He said it was because they leaked and because there were problems with the grounding. From that point on, the entire Doral test was carried out using the remaining reactor cores in the 4 "Big Frankies" -- cores which Rossi himself had personally fueled. I assume that Rossi engineered the leaks and grounding problems as a pretext to do away the Darden-fueled cores because he was concerned that Darden/IH had secretly loaded some of them with dummy charges.

  • Rossi supposedly did transfer to Thomas Darden the secret of the fuel. In fact, Darden himself prepared the fuel for most of the reactor cores at the Doral location. These were the cores sitting in all the small blue boxes in the shipping container.


    The question was why IH didn't do a good check of Rossi's reactor before giving him so much money. My understanding is that only after there was a transfer of money did Rossi give Darden the secret of the fuel.

  • Eric Walker this tactics can also explain what is going on now. We see quarkxs going from 80w to 1000W in a matter of few months. Now he is allowing for 10 and 100kw units undergoing famous sigma 5 test. At the same time IP is fireproof.

    This looks like a show aimed at an investor.

    He can have few in the works. He tells each of them that he is in advances stages of development but all under an strict NDA. But if the money are good he can consider a breakup but would not make any moves without considerable amount paid in advance to show serious intent.


    I do not see another explanation to why there is not a single teaser of the prototype given 110 % non reverse-enginnerability.

  • The question was why IH didn't do a good check of Rossi's reactor before giving him so much money. My understanding is that only after there was a transfer of money did Rossi give Darden the secret of the fuel.


    I agree. I think it was because they viewed Rossi as temperamental and they didn't want to upset him. They thought he would take his information elsewhere.


    I wouldn't want to play poker against Rossi. I think he would win.

  • @ can,

    Maybe that people are trying to have a clear and honest discussion, and not playing puzzle games with you?

    [...]

    It's hard to believe that a smart person like you isn't able to expose his thesis more directly without wasting so many comments on the topic.


    I'm not asking you to play puzzle with me. My "clear and honest discussion" is devoted to collect as many pieces as possible, and check the compatibility of those already on the table. Anyone can assemble his puzzle by himself.


    Let me explain better how I see the situation. The Ecat history can be considered like a picture. There is only one real picture, it doesn't depend on us, but most of us want to know it. No authoritative entity will reveal the real picture, we can only imagine what it could be, putting together the pieces of information we have gathered, like in a jigsaw puzzle.


    The Ecat puzzle is much more harder than usual, because we have been given a lot of fake pieces in order to make us imagine the wrong picture. Moreover, most of the real pieces are still, and will remain, purposely hidden. Fortunately, among the given pieces there were also some real ones, which didn't fit well with the others, and they allow to get rid of many fake information.


    After this selection, the remaining valid pieces are much less of those needed to fill the entire frame. Let's say one tenth. So there is a lot of large voids inside the frame. The available pieces only allow to put together separate parts of the whole picture, but it's impossible to put these parts in the right position, with the exact orientation.


    This is the current situation. So the priority is to collect many more pieces. They can emerge from the huge documentation available on internet, or from some new revelation from the insiders. For example, during the last weeks, 3 pieces emerged by chance among the L-F posts.


    a) the retrieval from the web of the Celani revelations (1) about a hypothetical collaboration between Rossi and Ahern in 2007, before Rossi returned to Italy to meet Focardi;


    b) the revelation of JR (2) about his phone call with Scanlan on the same day of June 2011, when Scanlan met Rossi for a possible investment on the Ecat;


    c) the info from DW (3) that one of the 3 consecutive CF phone calls to Darden specifically referenced Rossi.


    The above are 3 new pieces of the Ecat puzzle. They might be useful or not to connect two or more parts of the puzzle, depending on how you interpret them. But their interpretation is not easy because around each of them there are many missing pieces. For instance:


    a) who informed Celani about the collaboration between Rossi and Ahern, and, if the rumor is confirmed, when they met for the first time, where, for which purpose, what did Rossi learn from Ahern (or vice versa), etc.


    b) who has called who in the phone call between JR and Scanlan, when it happened (before, during or after the meeting), for which purpose, etc.


    c) who called Darden, when it happened, what other CF initiatives were referenced in the other 2 calls, why they were so convincing to make him risk many millions just to see what would happen, etc.


    It's very likely that all these questions will remain unanswered, which means that as many pieces of the Ecat puzzle will not be on the table.


    I am not so smart (thanks, anyway) to complete the picture with so many missing pieces. My thesis is that when, and if, there will be enough valid pieces on the table, everyone will be able to assemble a quite realistic picture by himself.


    (1) Rossi-Blog Comment Discussion

    (2) Rossi-Blog Comment Discussion

    (3) Rossi-Blog Comment Discussion