Rossi-Blog Comment Discussion

  • The resistor that failed in the Twin Resistor experiment had the calibrated resistance wire wrapped around a hollow glass tube in the core of the resistor. The glass in the center of the resistor core melted, pooling on the downward side of the core, leaving the central upward part (roughly 2 cm in length) of the heating wire coil exposed to an air void, where it could not conduct heat well and melted.

    I will look into winding my own resistor, with better heat distribution, and encasing the entire coil in alumina. I may have Kanthal wire fine enough for the job. (Essentially I have already done this with the Durapot Slab, which has cast-in thermocouples.) A small cylinder, instead of a rectangular solid, seems to be a good idea also. I haven't had much success with two-part alumina assemblies staying together at high heat. (One can see the rib part I cast as part of a Slab experiment in the upper RH of the rig set up image. It popped off at about 500 C, even though the main Slab heater was cast onto the still-wet rib portion.)

  • My example is a correct example of Rossi claiming industrial production (in this case, of platinum sponge) when there is just his own tinkering.
    Bob has given another example of Rossi's loose use of the word factory.
    Others have pointed to (& zorud referenced above) the famous past Rossi factories for e-cats which have apparently made them, if you believe Rossi's blog, but not if you believe his Court sworn testimony.


    These all answer your question. Rossi announces factories at the drop of a hat, none of which have ever generated product of any use except for Rossi's PR purposes.

    Your argument is I think that a factory indicates completed R&D, working production prototypes, and soon emergence of real production. That would normally be the case. These examples show why, when it is Rossi saying he has a factory, this is not the case. The jump to robotic mass production from flaky hand-produced prototype that when demonstrated does not appear to work (not well enough for Rossi to dare measuring the input power) is typical. When you note these jumps, and that there is nothing in between, such as major industrial interest, external reviews of working prototypes, press interest, you can smell a fish. can't you?


    It would be helpful for you to acknowledge or rebut the merit of our points rather than deflect discussion. What makes this RossiSays any different from previous?

    THH, This does not answer my question. You, not me, are playing switcheroo here with previous examples that have nothing to do with my point.

    You wrote: "Whether or no Rossi is building a new factory is not relevant to any sane judgement of whether he has any working product."


    What we a re talking about is a highly automated factory to mass produce a product. If this does materialize it is not logical to infer that it could be built without a product to make. I have built or designed a number of factories and can tell you it would be impossible to design a production line without knowing what you are going to make. Hence, if Rossi is building such a plant he must have developed product. Further, I can't imagine his backers supplying the money for a factory without being confident that he does.


    Going on about Rossi's poor use of the word factory has nothing to do with it.

    No outsider knows for sure he has started building it and we will have to wait an see. The information I have suggests he has started and indeed he would have to if he hopes to begin production this year, about which he is sounding optimistic.


    I don't buy the critics who assume everything Rossi says is a lie and like Zorud arrogantly run down others even Dr. Essen. He must be a real expert - in the game Zorud.

  • Adrian Ashfield


    The factory problem is that the reasoning is circular. Rossi says he is building a factory and you conclude from that that he has a product. But Rossi is a well proven serial liar. Yes, if he is building a factory, he probably has a product. But there is no reason at all for believing he is building a factory. The only evidence which is public about this is what Rossi said. And we all know, except maybe Adrien and one or two others, how reliable that is. And Adrien says he has his own mysterious sources. People have said that about Rossi a lot in the past, for example Jed Rothwell. But the real sources about Rossi are the extensive news stories and other reports which Krivit assembled and the huge collection of documents and depositions in the court case Rossi vs IH.


    As for Dr. Essen, no doubt he is capable and has done good work in the past. However, it can be said with fairness that he was too trusting of Rossi and did not ask the right questions of him. Krivit, on the other hand, did ask those questions. It is not unusual for scientists to be scammed by con men because they are trusting and do not expect scams in scientific matters.

  • What we a re talking about is a highly automated factory to mass produce a product. If this does materialize it is not logical to infer that it could be built without a product to make. I have built or designed a number of factories and can tell you it would be impossible to design a production line without knowing what you are going to make. Hence, if Rossi is building such a plant he must have developed product. Further, I can't imagine his backers supplying the money for a factory without being confident that he does.


    Going on about Rossi's poor use of the word factory has nothing to do with it.

    No outsider knows for sure he has started building it and we will have to wait an see. The information I have suggests he has started and indeed he would have to if he hopes to begin production this year, about which he is sounding optimistic.

    Then, by inverting your reasoning (if I understand your point), if Rossi does not build a factory (highly automated) within a reasonable timeline, then he does not currently have a product?

  • Adrian Ashfield


    I suppose I agree with that narrow point but even that would not be certain, hence the "probably." Thing is, I strongly disagree with you that Rossi is building anything other than assembling crappy fake machines out of stuff he buys very cheaply from ordinary retail outlets. If he ever builds a factory and makes LENR machines which are sold to the public or even to industry, I will happily eat my hat. Will you eat yours if he doesn't in say... 2 years?


    Quote

    Then, by inverting your reasoning (if I understand your point), if Rossi does not build a factory (highly automated) within a reasonable timeline, then he does not currently have a product?

    Heh! :-) That doesn't make sense. It is true that if Rossi builds a factory, he probably has a product. Or he could be doing another trick to make money by swindling investors like he did IH and many before IH. But even if he had a product that worked, which is highly unlikely, he doesn't need to build a factory to prove it. Logic please!

  • To the Rossi faithful, I am not talking about him answering to this forum. But to those qualified and experienced individuals such as Dr. Mckubre. To my knowledge, none of the professors responded to ANY one, even after they stated they would.


    Strange indeed.

    Yes. None of the professors responded to a single question, as far as I know. That's conduct unbecoming of an academic scientist. As you say, since they said they would answer, it is strange.


    After months of waiting, I figured they would never respond, and my opinion of them plummeted.

  • ... "None of the professors responded to a single question" ...

    MyScientificBiography.pdf

    This is Essen's CV. It describes his background. Frankly, it is not relevant to this discussion and I do not know why you cite it.


    This CV does not answer any of the questions McKubre and others asked about the Lugano experiment. For example, it does not answer my question: "What color was the reactor? Orange or white?" It would take only a moment to answer this. I am not asking for hours of analysis or pages of data. Plus, I think I can claim to be a recognized person in this field, if not an expert. So there is no excuse for not answering it.


    If the reactor was orange, as shown in the photos, then the temperature measured by the IR camera was wrong and there was no excess heat. It is possible the photos show the wrong color, or they were taken before excess heat was produced, but I doubt it. I cannot be sure, because they refused to answer.

  • What we a re talking about is a highly automated factory


    My point precisely. We are not talking about that. Rossi is. And my point is that a Rossi claimed factory - whether claimed automated or no - is from many examples in his past history no evidence of anything.


    Nor - should you have private information that Rossi had talked to somone about this, or spent small (in comparison with $10M) amounts of money on it, would that change matters. Rossi behaves as though non-working devices work, and when it comes to production ignores all good engineering practice (Doral is an example). Doral is also an example of Rossi's scale-up-itis. Wen he has non-working product he will spend lots of money and effort producing it in large quantities to make a large-scale demo that every engineer would tell him is useless. This works for PR where people like you take this as evidence he must have working product.


    Rossi + robots would therefore be good fun, but no indication of working product.


    I'll give you that a properly designed factory, producing working product, would be evidence of working product. That is tautologous.

  • Second attempt of the Twin 8 ohm resistor test completed. Resistor failure at 35 V true RMS. So much for good glow results, although there was a weak glow beginning.

    Thermocouple attached in back center area. Had to twist the TC end since the weld broke when fiddling with the attachment. Resistor TC matched ambient within 0.1 C so that was OK.


    The amperage started dropping after the 30.2 V step to the 35 V step adjustment was settling in, which seems to indicate imminent failure of the resistor.


    I was able to get the IR pyrometer/emissivity within reason this time, although more temperature steps would have been nice.

    Apparent IR pyrometer emissivity (matching IR T to the thermocouple T) was dropping with increasing temperature, which is neat.

    Re-iterative emissivity adjustments as in previous data sheet, based on Lugano report Plot 1 graph.

    I guess constantly dissipating around 65-70 W heat from 20 W-rated worth of resistors is too far out of spec...

  • Then, by inverting your reasoning (if I understand your point), if Rossi does not build a factory (highly automated) within a reasonable timeline, then he does not currently have a product?

    Yes.

    The exception would be if the more powerful SK version is much superior Rossi maybe tempted to switch. As this would mean another years delay I think that might be a fatal mistake.

  • What we a re talking about is a highly automated factory


    My point precisely. We are not talking about that. Rossi is. And my point is that a Rossi claimed factory - whether claimed automated or no - is from many examples in his past history no evidence of anything.

    Nor - should you have private information that Rossi had talked to somone about this, or spent small (in comparison with $10M) amounts of money on it, would that change matters. Rossi behaves as though non-working devices work, and when it comes to production ignores all good engineering practice (Doral is an example). Doral is also an example of Rossi's scale-up-itis. Wen he has non-working product he will spend lots of money and effort producing it in large quantities to make a large-scale demo that every engineer would tell him is useless. This works for PR where people like you take this as evidence he must have working product.


    Rossi + robots would therefore be good fun, but no indication of working product.


    I'll give you that a properly designed factory, producing working product, would be evidence of working product. That is tautologous.

    Good grief. How many times do I have to explain it?

    Rossi has not built a factory to mass produce his product before. He has probably had a couple of workshops to make them. He may have thought about building a factory in his head, before discovering his current product was nor ready for commercialization.


    It is entirely different if it is confirmed he is actually building am automated plant to mass produce one of his E-Cats. He says he has tested the QX for a year and building a factory would be strong proof that he has a commercial product.


    The danger I see is the higher power SK reactor. He will be tempted to go for that if it is very successful. Which would be a mistake because of the delay.


    Andrea Rossi

    May 15, 2018 at 10:48 AM


    JPR:

    By the end of May an extremely important test will be completed and we will know if we reached a remarkable product or a failure.

    Warm Regards,

    A.R.


    I hope to be forgiven for mentioning something from Rossi's blog on this thread.

  • Yes.

    The exception would be if the more powerful SK version is much superior Rossi maybe tempted to switch. As this would mean another years delay I think that might be a fatal mistake.

    You think this might be a fatal mistake, others think that’s Rossi’s ploy to buy more time - as he has done before.


    It was predicted many years ago (when Rossi collected pre-orders for his e-cats) that exactly this will happen: Just before one of this magnificient developments is about to hit the market, there is always a new and supposingly better version which makes the previous one obsolete and is used as an excuse for another year or two delay. - And the most faithful ones will always buy this excuse.

  • As for Dr. Essen, no doubt he is capable and has done good work in the past. However, it can be said with fairness that he was too trusting of Rossi and did not ask the right questions of him.


    No, his trust was not based on Rossi.


  • Yes.

    The exception would be if the more powerful SK version is much superior Rossi maybe tempted to switch. As this would mean another years delay I think that might be a fatal mistake.

    1. JPR May 12, 2018 at 7:41 PM

      Dear Andrea:

      You said the SK could be your masterpiece. Is this related also to the SSM?

      All the best,

      Jean Paul Renoir

    2. Andrea Rossi May 15, 2018 at 10:48 AM

      JPR:

      By the end of May an extremely important test will be completed and we will know if we reached a remarkable product or a failure.

      Warm Regards,

      A.R.

  • Trivia:


    JC Renoir (Jean Claude Renoir) was a regular JoNP contributor until around the end of 2015, when he was partially eclipsed by JP Renoir (Jean Paul Renoir), and JCR finally stopped posting on or about Feb 1 2016.

    JCR used to post nearby (often just above or below) DTravchenko frequently on JoNP. Birds of a feather I suppose.

    JP Renoir seems to have not posted before the end of 2015.

    JP Renoir has since mid 2016 had trouble keeping his ID straight, and alternately appears as jpr, jprenoir, Jean Paul Renoir, and JPR towards the present day.


  • sam12,

    Andrea Rossi is a determined, hard working, intuitive inventor. It is in their nature to learn from each step forward and come up with a way of improving it.

    It is obviously difficult to make a reliable LENR reactor without a theory of how it works. Many bright people have tried. Pons & Fleischmann were successful and have since been replicated ~100 times, but academia still does not accept it as a result of failed early replications.


    Dr. Rossi’s early attempts were apparently hit and miss, but with enough hits to persuade me he was onto something. Even IH didn’t do too badly getting $49 million from Woodford as a result of his early E-Cats.

    It appears that reliability and control were problems. The low usable temperatures were not that suitable for many industrial uses, like making electricity. The hot cats attempted to address this problem but the later QX reactors were the first to offer reliable, instantaneous on/off ability and high enough temperatures for just about everything.


    The QX ‘s output of 100 W is really too small for large industrial applications, something Rossi realizes, Hence the Sk 1kW and work on the 10kW versions.

    The problem is that these high temperatures are difficult material problems. Any prototype requires several to be tested for at least a year and the deign and construction of a factory to mass produce it will take another year. The inexperienced armchair critics have no concept how difficult this is.


    Others are now working on LENR and the danger is that Rossi will keep perfecting those reactors while others actually bring an inferior version to the market. He needs a commercial version out on the market to bring in money and credibility. It would help if he simply offloaded the factory to others while he continues with development. Rossi is closer to the problem than I am and bright enough to find a solution. I am happy to wait and see.

  • Quote

    Andrea Rossi is a determined, hard working, intuitive inventor.

    Tom Darden and his associates might not agree with that assessment of Rossi.


    Quote

    The QX ‘s output of 100 W is really too small for large industrial applications,

    Who cares? 100W LENR heaters ganged together could provide warm water and air and probably cooking heat at low cost to countless millions of individual consumers in every part of the world. The gigantic returns from selling such heaters would provide almost unlimited sums of money to fund the development of industrial versions. Anyway, didn't Dr. Levi measure several kilowatts on the original steam and hot water generating e-cats in 2011? Certainly, something could have been made of that by now by somebody had it not been most probably a scam on the part of Rossi and errors on the part of Levi..

  • The QX ‘s output of 100 W is really too small for large industrial applications, something Rossi realizes, Hence the Sk 1kW and work on the 10kW versions.

    Actually, most machines consume less than 1 kW, and a large fraction of machines consume less than 100 W, such as LED lights, radios, computers, and cell phones. Also, power from small sources is worth more per watt than large sources. 1 W from a battery sells for much more than 1 W from mains electricity. So a 100 W source of electricity, or even 10 W, would be worth hundreds of billions of dollars.


    However, this is irrelevant, and what you say (and Rossi says) is nonsense. If Rossi could demonstrate a 100 W reaction, or even a 10 W reaction, I.H. would have given him hundreds of millions of dollars, and in a short time, others would give him billions of dollars. Even if the reaction had no practical use, he would still get the money, just as Edison got tremendous sums of money for his incandescent lights from J. P. Morgan and others before he began installing them.

  • Pons & Fleischmann were successful and have since been replicated ~100 times,

    Where did you get this 100 number? Do you have a list of the 100 replications? I would really like to read about them. Sounds like a made up number to me. Did you count them? If not, then why not just say 1000 replications? That sounds more impressive.


    Andrea Rossi is a determined, hard working, intuitive inventor.

    ...

    The QX ‘s output of 100 W is really too small for large industrial applications


    So are you saying Rossi's incredible intuition failed him so badly that he couldn't realize that his QX "masterpiece" output would be too small, before shelving his previous higher power versions? Or was he just determinedly working too hard to realize it at the time?

  • Where did you get this 100 number? Do you have a list of the 100 replications?

    Actually, there are thousands if you count individual experiments. Yes, I have many lists. Such as:


    The two tables in the first Storms books, showing about 180 professional labs that replicated heat and or tritium.


    The table from Storms showing 124 tests that I included in my video. Those are not the only 124 tests we know about! They happened to be convenient for Ed.


    http://lenr-canr.org/wordpress/?page_id=1618


    Hundreds of tests done at IMRA, 16 at a time. I do not know how many.


    A tally of positive tests published by He, Jing-tang, Institute of High Energy Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, in Front. Phys. China (2007) 1: 96 102. It shows 14,720 replications in Table 1. I cannot vouch for it.


    I would really like to read about them. Sounds like a made up number to me.

    No, you would not. If you wanted to read about this, you would have done so years ago.


    It "sounds like" a made up number to you because you know nothing about the subject.

  • Adrian,


    Inventor?

    Name me 1 product that Andrea Rossi has designed, built, marketed and sold.


    My god man, are you that lost?

  • All this talk about replications exposes the problem that in the context of this community, the term means nothing like it does in the mainstream scientific world. As far as I can tell, an LENR replication means that an experiment that bears some vague resemblance to another produced some but not all similar results in kind although probably not quantitatively equivalent. On this basis, pretty much every positive result of any sort is considered to be a replication.


    I know Jed will blow a gasket at this, but all he needs to do is cite an example of an actual replication as understood by... well, pretty much any scientist worth his salt.