Rossi-Blog Comment Discussion

Quote from Dr Richard

If a working viable cold fusion reactor is now a reality (and I can't see why not since many groups are now reporting a consistent 2.5W per gram of transition-metal mix -deuterium-lithium-hydrogen fuel mix - what's the hold up?) they should be mass-produced as quickly as possible, funds diverted from all other fusion projects like ITER etc into this. Well we can always dream....

Skeptics here would be inclined to agree with you, but also give weight to the converse of this statement (no that is not shoes!).

Quote from [email protected]

So... we should fund fusion research dollars on the basis of how many MJouleSamples/$ bang-for-the-buck.

This is only the energy side: Hot-fusion, if they really have the intention to fire up ITER for more than a minute, will produced some 10 to100 k Tons of nuclear waste. LENR does not produce significant amounts of active nuclear waste unless you use the wrong process like high voltage "glow" discharge or you use elements that produce mid-range active intermediates. Elements with A>150 tend to produce longer lived intermediates. If you use Hydrogen then the result is much worse than with deuterium. The reason is that hydrogen adds like a neutron.

Quote

I don't think a minnow or a guppy would have been able to bite such a big chunk out of the Great White IH, do you?

Darden was a pushover for Rossi. He neglected to do the most minor due diligence involving truly effective and independent testing before investing. He was an easy mark for a mediocre con man. It would have been so easy to trip up Rossi. It always was, all the way back to when Krivit did it but Rossi still managed to bamboozle Lewan, Focardi and Levi and others in 2011.

There's probably not much more experimental work being done on nuclear fusion weapons since all the test ban treaties - apart from maybe secret squirrel stuff in Iran and N Korea. You can more or less read 'how to make a fusion bomb' on wiki, which actually gives one or two tips which may be useful for designing a large scale cold fusion reactor (eg using Be as a neutron reflector). Most of the work is probably maintenance to keep the existing warheads ready for our mutually assured destruction. Do we now have any consensus of opinion between cold fusion scientists on either the theory or even how to proceed? For example what does everyone think about the breakdown of Helium 4 which either releases a neutron (50% of the time), a proton plus a tritium (50%) or a gamma (v.low probability). Or does recent work demonstrating gamma release in CF experiments disprove this, maybe each pathway has equal probability and the confused mess of neutron, proton, tritium and gammas gives rise to the so-called 'strange

radiation'. Who knows.

Quote from THHuxleynew

So, from the report: the entire calculation comes from the (integrated power) WH measurement from the PCE-830. This is then divided by 96 (the test time in hours) to get the inferred power consumption.

They know power was output at the same rate throughout the experiment because the output was shown there the whole time from the 1s per frame time lapse photography.

This test has TCs for temperature so I'm not inclined to think there are big errors on the output side.

To summarize, you are saying the input power measurements may be incorrect. I wish we could get Levi et al. to respond to critiques such as yours, but I doubt they will.

I agree the output power and temperatures are probably right because the TC was used to confirm the camera. I wish they had used one at Lugano. I do not think the temperatures were measured correctly there.

Quote

I wish we could get Levi et al. to respond to critiques such as yours, but I doubt they will.

I've been mystified by that. Why in the world would Levi and the Swedish scientists not respond to reasonable and polite questions and critiques? Why would they not desperately want to do it again better if they believe it was real? And if they don't think it was real and they were fooled, why not own up to it and regain dignity?

Quote from Alan Smith

I cannot imagine that IH would be capable of doing such a thing [filing lawsuits against Levi].

I don't know if they are capable of it, but it would be stupid and pointless. You can't blame scientists for being wrong. Science would cease to exist. It would be like suing a baseball team for losing a game. I suppose any judge or jury would agree, given how often scientists are wrong.

Quote from [email protected]

They [Levi et al.] basically greenlighted a technology.

The only thing I saw from them was the reports I uploaded to LENR-CANR.org. I would not describe these reports as "greenlighting" anything, certainly not a "technology." I would say these reports were first-round tests of an experimental claim. They were generally positive but they left many open questions. They were tentative, at best. I cannot imagine anyone suing on the basis of such reports.

Perhaps you are saying Levi et al. gave more a positive review to the people at I.H. I have no heard that and if it happened I know nothing about it.

...

...