If flaws were only obvious ones, Alan or another there it would be the same. Anyway the KoH is a good actor able to fascinate "open-minds" of who (like Alan) give him credibility.
I didn't suggest that any flaws would only be obvious ones. And what will be obvious to Alan would not necessarily be obvious to someone without a relevant background.
No doubt Rossi will attempt to wring an ounce of credibility out of any opportunity that falls into his hands.
This is rather reminiscent of an unwinnable argument. If I said my fellow visitor was an engineer, someone else would demand a scientist, If he was a magician somebody else would demand a ventriloquist, if an academic the some would want Joe the Plumber. It is what it is, And I quite agree with Bruce__H . This isn't likely to be decisive in terms of what is shown, however, converstions in the 'smoke filled rooms' associated with these events may prove to be highly illuminating.
good luck and keep us posted
Bob - I check in occasionally over here.
To answer your question - I witnessed a demo to WIF at the original RTP lab where R was claiming 400C+ and my IR temp gun showed 275C. He spotted me with the gun out of the corner of his eye (must have been the red dot), flipped a couple of switches, declared a potential runaway and cleared the room. I'll never forget that look. He asked that I be excluded from the lab from there on out and I happily obliged.
I didn't suggest that any flaws would only be obvious ones. And what will be obvious to Alan would not necessarily be obvious to someone without a relevant background.
In order to highlight flaws it's not required an "open mind" but people skilled to recognize flaws, how many flaws of fusionists (that other didn't found) he discovered in these years? Can you list?
@Henry , you're arguing is silly, because you're not arguing against a position that I am advocating, and what position I took you have gotten incorrect on several important points, which I've had to clarify.
Be assured that if there is an obvious flaw that is relevant to Alan's expertise, he will be in a position to identify the obvious flaw, because the flaw is obvious. He will not be in a position to positively identify any non-obvious flaws, because identifying non-obvious flaws would require checks and controls.
So I bet that he will see only what Rossi wants to show and at the end he will become another "expert" witness that Rossi's stuff works.
@Henry , I don't disagree! As I said above, "No doubt Rossi will attempt to wring an ounce of credibility out of any opportunity that falls into his hands."
I read and agreed with you but for this I say to who would like or will participate (if smart, not only "open mind") to require at least a real full check and controls (black box) of his claims about excess energy, in case of Rossi's denied it's better not participate to his show in order to avoid to be manipulated by him.
Bob - I check in occasionally over here.
To answer your question - I witnessed a demo to WIF at the original RTP lab where R was claiming 400C+ and my IR temp gun showed 275C. He spotted me with the gun out of the corner of his eye (must have been the red dot), flipped a couple of switches, declared a potential runaway and cleared the room. I'll never forget that look. He asked that I be excluded from the lab from there on out and I happily obliged.
Thanks for the response. No doubt that that was an interesting situation!
(I would expect that this demo will not allow IR devices either and I am pretty certain you did not get an invite! 
)
Was there any other tell tale issues that were obvious? I am not trying to predispose the outcome, but simply look for a pattern of things past or if this is truly new.
I have seen a very consistent pattern with Rossi over the years. New devices, new aerospace engineers (never revealed), new customers, repetitive robotic factories, new partners, etc. etc.
So if Rossi always has a demo, but people are kept at a certain distance, a certain point of view, certain "hand cuffs" so to speak, then one can expect the same dog and pony show. If not, then good. Hopefully Alan will be able to do a pre-startup inspection of the setup at a minimum. Rossi has stated that the test protocol will be released right before the demo, Perhaps Alan will be able to verify something.
Thanks again.
There is a possibility of illusion but with each added test and replication it becomes more unlikely. The point is there is no absolute proof either way and to state categorically that it has always been fraudulent is only based on opinion and not proof. That is very unscientific. IH could have pursued the matter in court if they had absolute proof but they didn't. They parted with their money and gave him his license back.
Why would Rossi keep developing the E-Cat if it never worked? He could have retired several times with the money he has received and not spent the ~million dollars from the sale of his previous business to start the development if it didn't work. He must know the answer himself. Why spend the long hours doing this rather than sitting on the beach?
The suggestion that he sell the existng 1 MW plant is just daft. It contains~80 E-Cats of a previous generation that were not used and at least one of the new four large units was clearly on its last legs. They all required too much maintenance and would have to be rebuilt. Further, that would be giving away the technology.
The demo will be more for his partner and raising money for mass production than the impossible task of persuading the pathological skeptics here. Anyone actually investing will have the chance of doing due diligence themselves. After that, if they blow it, that is their fault.
Max Nozin gave good advice "Just in case, always slim odds, I would be thinking how to maintain the face in case of a positive demo."
Those who have repeatedly libeled Rossi will have no credibility if they were wrong.
T here is no excuse that will save it.
I'm glad that someone open minded like Alan Smith will be attending the demo.
QuoteWhy would Rossi keep developing the E-Cat if it never worked? He could have retired several times with the money he has received and not spent the ~million dollars from the sale of his previous business to start the development if it didn't work.
I think that a dozen of own houses in Florida and 11 million of USD (at least up to now) it's a good reason.
QuoteThe demo will be more for his partner and raising money
If his claims were true the Nobel prize not convince any partner to invest a lot of money?
Lots of photos and maybe some video would be great. It is amazing what can be confirmed or denied based on some good images, even if it is not obvious at the time the images were taken.
I wonder if Rossi will continue to use irrigation couplers at the demo. I love the combo of advanced nuclear tech and garage tinkerer cobbling together of parts.
I think that a dozen of own houses in Florida and 11 million of USD (at least up to now) it's a good reason.
So why blow it on developing the E-Cat X that, according to you, doesn't work?
If his claims were true the Nobel prize not convince any partner to invest a lot of money?
Perhaps he thinks actually getting the E-Cat X to the market is more important.
As one of those who have libeled Rossi you should be thinking of a face saving comment.
The elbow device was able to heat more water than the pump could supply.
The old blue container was able to move water uphill without steam or pump pressure, (thereby avoiding flooding the condensers).
The red container was able to heat more water than the pumps can supply. And sometimes use more electricity than was supplied.
I am sensing a pattern, but just can't quite put my finger on it...
So why blow it on developing the E-Cat X that, according to you, doesn't work?
Perhaps he thinks actually getting the E-Cat X to the market is more important.
Any new E-hoax stuff he "invents" replaces the previous "masterpiece" already ready for market. He says same stories about the "market" from at least six years.
Four years ago he said: "in mercatu veritas"... never seen one of these masterpieces on market.
QuoteAs one of those who have libeled Rossi you should be thinking of a face saving comment.
Well, the same is valid for who supported him when this hoax will end.
A question to people with exceptional logic. Since your logic led to the conclusion that Rossi is cold blooded master or scam, where is the logic in having another demo and replaying the old tricks?
Will you reclassify him as a serial maniacal scammer?
Just in case, always slim odds, I would be thinking how to maintain the face in case of a positive demo.
My logic leads to neither of those conclusions, at least on your notion of scam.
I believe Rossi to be passionate, self-sacrificing, dedicated. I also (from evidence that comes from the Court case testimony and his blog) believe him to be manipulative, deceptive, technically incompetent, and self-aggrandising. The idea of a passionless deliberate scammer does not fit him at all.
"Our passions do not live apart in locked chambers, but, dressed in their small wardrobe of notions, bring their provisions to a common table and mess together, feeding out of the common store according to their appetite."
George Eliot, Middlemarch.
THHuxleynew obviously some peoples' passions have an increased appetite for junk food.
QuoteAlso, the person who accompanies Alan shouldn't be an academic heavyweight, it should be someone with experience in staging illusions. Scientists know all bout science but they intrinsically used to trusting other researchers to be honest. I don't think Mr Rossi can be extended that courtesy.
Exactly (what Bruce_H wrote). But even a qualified and suspicious person won't detect scamming if the demonstration of the QuarkX is conducted like the one of the "megawatt plant" in November 2011. In that instance, none of the observers were actually allowed to witness ANY measurement activity of note. They were simply shown a large machine, connected to a big Diesel generator, and they were then moved away "for their safety". At the conclusion, they were shown a data sheet on a piece of dirty paper and an actor portraying a customer representative. If this upcoming demo is similarly run, it doesn't matter who Alan takes with him or even if he attends.
If actual measurements take place, and if examination of the input power and output power instruments and methods is allowed, then it makes sense to have someone with you who is experienced with such measurements and who, most importantly, has a very high index of suspicion that a deception is taking place. From the little I know of Alan, that won't be the type of person he takes along. I hope I am wrong.
Exactly (what Bruce_H wrote). But even a qualified and suspicious person won't detect scamming if the demonstration of the QuarkX is conducted like the one of the "megawatt plant" in November 2011. In that instance, none of the observers were actually allowed to witness ANY measurement activity of note. They were simply shown a large machine, connected to a big Diesel generator, and they were then moved away "for their safety". At the conclusion, they were shown a data sheet on a piece of dirty paper and an actor portraying a customer representative. If this upcoming demo is similarly run, it doesn't matter who Alan takes with him or even if he attends.
In actual measurements take place, and if examination of the input power and output power instruments and methods is allowed, then it makes sense to have someone with you who is experienced with such measurements and who, most importantly, has a very high index of suspicion that a deception is taking place. From the little I know of Alan, that won't be the type of person he takes along. I hope I am wrong.
Perhaps, in addition to what I wrote before, this hypothetical scrutineer should be qualified as follows:
Rossi, in his historic behaviour, has a number of times, deliberately, misled others. Therefore any competent scrutineer should be alert for such misdirection, and well able to imagine and detect it. Something academics are (mostly) very unsuited to do, since they do not expect deliberate misdirection and are not comfortable with the idea that a colleague, or an inventor, practises it.
Well, the same is valid for who supported him when this hoax will end.
The difference is I don't categorically state the E-Cats work. I think they probably do but don't have absolute proof, so it is just an opinion. As I've said all along, just wait for evidence.
You, and most here, remind me of the know-it-alls who so confidently stated Trump would loose in a landslide.
