Rossi-Blog Comment Discussion

Quote

c) There is one such customer, reporting on ECW and collaborating with MFMP. Find him yourself.

In my opinion, responses like this betray a lack of confidence in your beliefs. You are responding in the style Jed Rothwell sometimes (and to his credit, not that often) employs-- defensive and unhelpful. If you have a customer who does as requested, how hard is it to simply write who it is, with a link? I don't understand the role of this sort of exchange. Why?

Ahlfors

That photo of Rossi as Rocketman is hilarious. Totally comical. I had forgotten this little piece of traditional Rossifiction. BTW, how are the robotic factories, which Rossi said in 2011 he was in the process of building, going? Is he still selling megawatt plants to the US Military a dozen at a time like back then? Or did they decide highly successful fusion power was too unfair an advantage against the enemy? What ever happened to those "certificators" who were going to make it possible for steam ecats to be in Home Depot? Where and how have they been certificating for all these years?

I get the first part, you could have just said it's confidential. That makes sense and can be respected. But the idea that providing information to critics, especially information which is difficult and pesky (if even possible) to extract from Google, that this constitutes "spoonfeeding?" I see that simply as insecurity. People with solid beliefs don't do that when asked for facts. They simply give the information and if it is asked for too many times, they put it on a web page somewhere or in bookmarks for ease of access.

For example, I keep a modest size set of bookmarks to Rossi and LENR related articles and papers which I thought were especially relevant and interesting so it is easy for me to provide a link whenever the topic comes up. For example, to Dr. Levi's mention in NyTeknik about the best results of any ecat ever and to the Giancarlo group's (GSVIT) fluid cooled mass flow calorimeter which should have been used to evaluate Rossi's hot cat rather than the radiation measurements, to cite two examples. It takes seconds to find the relevant links and post them so other people know exactly what I am talking about.

Quote from axil

Science has been stuck in a deep rut for half a century

This is partly explained by Jerry Pournelle’s Iron Law of Bureaucracy. The government science organizations like DOE and NASA are a shadow of their initial selves. Apparently there was no one in NASA that was capable of checking the Hubble mirror (something any amateur telescope maker could do.) I related the story of a scientist at DOE who let a peer reviewed paper on LENR fall to the ground rather than touch it.

Fleischmann & Pons original cold fusion experiment did produce excess heat and has been replicated many times since. MIT and Cal Tech blew their replications, never admitted they were wrong and doomed LENR as a pseudo science. But for that, it would have been investigated by some serious laboratories and proven or disproven long ago.

I think Axil is right. Technology and engineering have ben following Moore’s law, Computing, robotics and AI have been speeding ahead. The standard model of the atom now has quarks but virtually nothing is really known about what they are. Quantum theory is just math and doesn’t explain things. It has several kluges and paradoxes that have never been explained. I much doubt that a photon is both a wave and a particle. Mills’ GUT can calculated the properties of some particles from first principals more accurately but academia won’t look at it. What great new theories have been accepted in the last 50 years?

Typically most on this forum spend their time picking to pieces the work of people actually trying experiments. They manage to avoid any positive evidence and only see faults. Look at Henry’s unjustified criticism of Alan Smith providing experimental apparatus and the negative responses he has received from academia. Their repetitive rants don’t make interesting reading.

Quote

Look at Henry’s unjustified criticism of Alan Smith providing experimental apparatus and the negative responses he has received from academia

Still excuses... Show me and make available a reactor that produces XH as you claim and I will submit it to an int. standard accredited Lab of Metrology for energy measurements. If it really works I pay the costs, if it doesn't work you pay all costs.

Henry's offer is eminently reasonable. I made a similar offer once via the departed Sterling Alan's web site, to Jeff Otto and Dennis Lee. At the time, they claimed to have used "HHO" or "Brown's" gas (RoTFWL!) to enable a Honda Accord to make >100 miles per gallon of conventional gasoline without input of external power. They were looking for a modest investment to continue their work. I offered them $100K cash on the spot for the car, if and only if it could be tested by a local dynamometer-equipped garage and indeed shown to do what they said. Funny but they never responded. Dennis got arrested for fraud eventually so I guess he had better things to do. I am not suggesting any similarity here before someone gets offended. It's just an anecdote.

Quote from Henry

Show me a reactor that produces XH as you claim

Maybe Jed will lead you through the peer reviewed papers in his LENR-CANR.org list on replications of Fleischmann and Pons. What difference would your proposed test make to the hundred existing positive results? You also fail to grasp how difficult it would be to find such an organization to do it.

Quote from axil

A very active LENR reaction need not produce excess heat. The LENR fuel that both the ECCO reactor and ME356 has produced amazing LENR transmutation results without producing any excess heat. If you know what you are seeing, this type of fuel and how it behaves will demonstrate 1000% LENR functionality.

No more XH by a LENR reaction? No more clean energy?

I'm a bit deluded... thus you confirm that Rossi's claims (of these years) about energy produced are totally false.

Quote from Adrian Ashfield

You also fail to grasp how difficult it would be to find such an organization to do it.

You grasp at straw, don't worry about that. I think to organize the measurement, you think only to brings the reactor that really produces the XH.

Quote from axil

The LERN reaction is active in LENR fuel but unless it is activated, it does not produce excess heat. What Rossi has discovered is the activation signal to fire up the LENR reaction so that the fuel will generate excess heat, light, and electrons. That signal is a high tension electrostatic field in the range between 50 and 100 Kilovolts. Rossi has patented this signal.

OK, OK... have you in hand verifiable proofs to demonstrate to scientific community what you said ?

Quote from axil

Holm;od uses the same mechanism to activate the ultra dense hydrogen into LENR active behavior. That signal is the low powered laser pulse. The signal generates a state change in the LENR active element via the KERR effect.

see post

me356: Photos of AURA control unit

Sorry but I asked to you to show a verifiable proof (it means a working device that produces XH), an "activated" device following your claim of above. Can you show and make available this?