Rossi-Blog Comment Discussion

Quote from Alan Smith

I believe he does have 'something', or if not he should have. Early guidance from Focardi and Piantelli must have been a big help. And you only have to see what is on the program at ICCF to see how much Rossi has renewed interest in Ni/H systems. Alternatively talk to people who have been studying and working on cold fusion for decades and you will soon learn how many of them believe Rossi has 'something' too.

I know that Rossi is very good at promoting belief: which is consistent with what I was saying of his strengths and weaknesses!

Rossi might have had seen “something” in his early NiLi experiments, but nothing substantial to reproduce as it seems, IMHO he was simply performing trail&error to find the secret sauce again, because neither he nor anybody else had a clue or a theory to follow... If there was a real effect at all, he would have come up with something that he and others would have replicated more easily and constantly, despite his paranoid secrecy. What he showed on the table in Stockholm was simply a farce and had nothing to do with demonstrating a real EH effect. He did not even care about showing any evidence on energy out > energy in...

Quote from Bruce__H

There is a large asymmetry here. A year from now, if Rossi has multiple commercial units placed with customers and these units are producing more energy than they they receive then THHuxelynew (and I, and others) would say you were right. But if, a year from now, this has not happened then you will find a way to convince yourself that Rossi still has something real and instead of saying that THH is right you will just say that one has to wait a little longer. After all, that is the state you are in right now. Why should you change?

Is there a reason that you consider this to be Rossi's last chance to convince people?

I will give it to April 1st 2019 for AR to have customer units producing

more Energy than they receive.That is a month or two longer i gave him

on a previous post.But it will be Spring and as a fellow Canadian you will

know it is a new beginning and time for me to do something else than following

LENR.That is if i make it to April 1st 2019.That is April fools day and no jokes please.

Quote from Adrian Ashfield

The electrical power going into the QX was determined by the measurement of the 1 ohm resistor in series with the QX . The output energy measured by the heating of water. What are you on about?

No Adrian, it was not. Rossi never (during the test) simultaneously measured the current into the QX and the voltage across the QX. This lack of power measurement has been consistent across the two Gullstrom papers, each of which contained slightly different tech descriptions of QX measurement. He did measure these things before the test - also, by a strange coincidence, before the famous control box switch-flip.

The big give-away was Rossi writing on a blackboard (an example of the titanic effort to do simple calculations phenomena) V²/R as the power in to the QX. Wrong, of course, it must be V₁V₂/R where the two voltages are different. Rossi's devoted fans have tried various tricks to get rid of this inconvenience, none of which work. Rossi has had a lot of time to do this simple input power measurement correctly but it seems he does not want this.

Adrian, meanwhile I am sure you would buy shares of Leonardo Corp. like hell after that second-rate theater in Stockholm, if they would have gone public...I did watch the entire video, but that crap on the table didn’t convince me. It had nothing to do with a serious scientific presentation. It was a Rossi show, maybe to attract another “IH” lime investor or simply to create some publicity for his very followers.

Quote

Top of his class at Bologna Uni - in fact a distinuished student - though not in physics.

It probably doesn't matter much at this date but Is that from UofB itself or from Rossi or a friendly web site related to him? Much of the purported "information" about Rossi originated with Rossi.

Quote

Is there a reason that you consider this to be Rossi's last chance to convince people?

I will give it to April 1st 2019 for AR to have customer units producing

more Energy than they receive.That is a month or two longer i gave him

on a previous post.But it will be Spring and as a fellow Canadian you will

know it is a new beginning and time for me to do something else than following

LENR.That is if i make it to April 1st 2019.That is April fools day and no jokes please.

Display More

The same thing was said by many Rossi supporters in 2012 and every year since.

Note also that selling energy from mysterious secret plants instead of devices is very improbable. Anyway, when has Rossi shown that he can make energy on an industrial scale? Or at all? Someone is going to allow the flow of energy to their industrial process and production to rely on Rossi-says? Seriously? Oh, Rossi's first customer will be Johnson Matthey.

Quote from Adrian Ashfield

The electrical power going into the QX was determined by the measurement of the 1 ohm resistor in series with the QX .

Adrian do you really in your brain (not your heart) believe that this 1 ohm resistor measurement had any validity as a measure of power input? Even disregarding the Rossi switch flip shenanigans? If so I find that astounding.

How can you doubt? He is an experienced engineer...

AA stated:

„...Organizations like OECD, EPRI, GRI and the World Bank have paid me to evaluate projects, so I do have expertise in R&D, and the design and construction of manufacturing facilities....”

Quote from Adrian Ashfield

Read again my published article shortly after the demo.

Rossi wanted to show the properties of the QX to the general population and attract financial backing in order to build a production facility. As I wrote, some measurements were considered secret and were not shown BUT it would be simple for a financial backer to make them during due diligence.

Unless you are not brighter than Dave Barry's dog. you would understand that your speculation of fraud is silly in these circumstances. It would make more sense for you to argue that Rossi failed to get financial backers, but you have no evidence for that either.

Adrian, you are agreeing with me that the input power was not measured.

Otherwise you are saying you think Rossi could not be fraudulent, and therefore must be incompetent. That is your choice. I'll keep both options open, though I mildly prefer incompetent Rossi's highly deceitful statements give ammunition to those who think he is fraudulent. The two options are not mutually exclusive.

He has, on the record, behaved in ways that appear fraudulent towards IH, lying in order to obtain money. Such a pity (for us, though not IH) he chickened out of the Court case after IH lawyer's (damning) initial statement and before he was due to give evidence and be cross-examined.

Quote from Adrian Ashfield

The electrical power going into the QX was determined by the measurement of the 1 ohm resistor in series with the QX . The output energy measured by the heating of water. What are you on about?

Adrian,

If you were doing a power and Energy measurement to show out > in,

would you do it the way Rossi did it?

It is rhetorical, please do NOT answer yes.

Quote from THHuxleynew

Adrian, you are agreeing with me that the input power was not measured.

Otherwise you are saying you think Rossi could not be fraudulent, and therefore must be incompetent. That is your choice. I'll keep both options open, though I mildly prefer incompetent Rossi's highly deceitful statements give ammunition to those who think he is fraudulent. The two options are not mutually exclusive.

He has, on the record, behaved in ways that appear fraudulent towards IH, lying in order to obtain money. Such a pity (for us, though not IH) he chickened out of the Court case after IH lawyer's (damning) initial statement and before he was due to give evidence and be cross-examined.

TH,

He cannot be incompetent, he has been doing this for 9 years.

Somehow, somewhere, someone he knows would tell him how to do it right.

Quote from Adrian Ashfield

Yes, it saves the customer the up front cost of buying the reactors.

It is easy enough to measure the heat transport fluid and calculate the heat transferred. They already do that for electric power. If the customer can halve his heating bill, why not?

assuming temp control is +/- 50°f is may work that way, BUT, if the Ecat loses a network connection, (because that never happens), does the customer er lose control

Or does the Ecat just continue to do what it was told to do before the connection was lost.

Quote from Shane D.

Rossi-sez: The control and regulation will be made from out headquarter in remote mode, based on the instructions that the Client will have to give us.

Even for Rossi, that is patently ridiculous. No regulatory agency on earth would allow such a dangerous mode of operation. You must have complete control over any reactor or furnace on site.