Rossi-Blog Comment Discussion

Quote from Alan Smith

Ni. I am just curious to see you claim to know more about LFH's customer base than I do. That seems unlikely. And btw, LFH has never claimed to have a reliable working LENR system of any kind.

No one has a working LENR system...yet. Well, how about LION? He can melt down a reactor running in your test kit. Does that count as a research tool...a very good tool at that. Then there is ECCO and MP356. They have provided LENR active fuel to y'all. Then there are all those other folks you can;t talk about. You are just to modest, or are you afraid to expose your great leadership success to those jealous blood thirsty naysayer baracutas around here who might be inclined to rip out your throat to take you down a pig as is their way.

and rossi is building power plants to spread all over the world using technology it seems no one can duplicate or understands or agree on. Brilliant~

Quote from PhysicsForDummies

You guys won't believe this, (or probably you will) I posted on his JONP blog the correct equations to calculate degrees C vs K. He then deleted my post but he also corrected his equations! Complicated equation, I know. 😁

Another epic fail of Rossi trying math is this one:

Quote

Andrea Rossi

August 15th, 2015 at 8:47 AM

Steven N. Karels, Arnie:

Cm’on: 1 g of matter entirely converted into energy gives 25 MWh of energy (from Einstein equation).

Start from here, which is simpler, and remake your math.

You can get solace, anyway, because what you wrote means you are well educated: education is what remains after one has forgotten everything he learned in school.

Warm Regards,

A.R.

Display More

The correct result is 25 GWh - so Rossi is ‘just’ off by 3 orders of magnitude.

That should deeply worry the ones who believe that Rossi has developed a nuclear reactor, and he is the one who calculates the fuel load! - Worrisome like a blaster, who charges 1000 times the payload than needed to blow up a building.

i'm still fascinated to hear how all the crew sitting at the finish line ready to light a cigar are OK to wait and support this massive secret development and get rossi toy out all over the world but shun ongoing discussion about "low heat" reaction that haft the planets top scientist are working to understand are criticized and dismissed by the same crew slitt waiting at this cigar lighting event. Please, tell me how this is ok with you that you are willing to shun open talking but support rossi plan at all cost?

I said in the initial post "Both MFMP and LookingForHeat support ". I might have said it better as "the open source LENR activity" So sorry for putting you in a misreading situation. You ordinarily do great work at this but nobody is perfect and sometimes you slip up.

Quote from axil

I said in the initial post "Both MFMP and LookingForHeat support ". I might have said it better as "the open source LENR activity"

It makes no difference how you say it. You have not cited a single published result from these organizations supporting your claim. You made that up. There is no "support" for LENR from MFMP or LookingForHeat. LookingForHeat has looked but found nothing.

You did cite ECCO and MP356. I do not know who ECCO is. During a site visit, MP356 failed to produce any effect, or any evidence for his claim. Subsequently, he never explained that failure, and he never provided any data or evidence for his claim. So no one should believe him.

As far as I know, you still believe Rossi and you still have not even read Rossi's own "Penon" report, which proves that Rossi is a fraud. You do not even look at the data provided by Rossi himself! That's an extreme example of willful ignorance. If you were to refuse to look at Murray's analysis of Rossi's data, that would at least make some sense. Your judgement is deeply flawed, to say the least. By that I mean, if you claimed it is raining, I would go outside to see for myself before believing it.

unfortunately I know how a few that stubled upon an unexpected result unwittingly using steel wool to pre clean a rusty surface before assembly and consequently chase this accidental discovery of this odd reaction for years using new materials completely forgetting the material inadvertently left on the first test.

There's still a factor of 1/2 or 3/2 to make it all kosher.

Each classical degree of freedom of a freely moving particle has an average kinetic energy of kB*T/2.

The temperature of a simple monatomic gas therefore corresponds to an average kinetic energy of

3/2 kB*T

Well, no one ever said keeping kosher was convenient.

Quote from Shane D.

Hey, Rossi said today he is equipping a factory! Go check it out. Maybe there is hope after all. Once the equipment is in place, the next logical step has to be that a product will be made. Once something is made, it has to be sold, right?

Maybe after all the wait and fake factories/promises, this is *it*. You never know, but just to play it safe....

7/20, I take back those things I said on the NASA thread.

Link please. Thanks.

http://www.rossilivecat.com/

@ Shane D.,

Quote from Shane D.

Other things of interest on there are at :35, 38:44 (remind you of IH?).

Good catch, Shane. Yes, in some respects, ENECO reminds of IH.

On the web, you can find other things of interest:

- some backgrounds on the company history (there is also a *Catalyst* Investment Group): http://caselaw.findlaw.com/ut-court-of-appeals/1582652.html

- an important asset was the thermal diode invented by Hagelstein: http://www.freepatentsonline.com/6396191.html

- an early contact point with Rossi dated back to 2001, as the thermal diode and another ENECO patent were cited in the patent application of TEG: http://www.google.com/patents/US6620994

- a public award for the thermal diode (look at the address of the contracting office): http://fbodaily.com/cbd/archiv…9/27-Sep-2000/aawd003.htm

- the thermal diode was the main asset in 2006: http://newenergytimes.com/v2/s…nies/ENECO/AboutENECO.pdf

- a company "configured originally as something like a “cold fusion hedge” or as Fred Jaeger preferred a “mutual fund” into which selected cold fusion researchers placed their IP in exchange for shares — the idea being that if any one of their “mutually funded” technologies “won big,” all would share": http://www.iccf19.com/history3.html

- a strange interpretation of the Ecat saga, which mentions ENECO and the F&P patents: https://ecatsite.wordpress.com…survive-the-greek-crisis/

- how the company history ended (just when the Ecat's one began): http://newenergytimes.com/v2/n…30-jgk39gh12f.shtml#eneco

All these things raise a question: Does (or did) IH de facto act as another "cold fusion mutual fund"? https://www.lenr-forum.com/for…t/?postID=23211#post23211