Adrian, perhaps you think there should be some strict rules regarding discussions of your personal hero. I would suggest the following: there should only be verified facts about the e-cat discussed here. However, in that case, there should be no posts whatsoever about the subject. How's that sound to you?
I think you should verify with Adrian that Rossi is his personal hero.
I bet he would say no.
I think he just calls it the way he sees it
with Rossi and his technology.
with Rossi and his technology.
What technology?
I have not noticed any, other than internet blog platforms. this is from somone who cannot measure power waveforms remember (and, Sam, even Mats has written this in his book).
Adrian,
I wonder what they think now, after seeing the video showing Rossi lifting the cover and throwing a switch? It showed Fabiani conveniently blocked audience view on one side of the table, with Lewans distracted by another. All highly suspicious. When the video became available, even Lewan was concerned...until accepting Rossi's excuse he was turning on a cooling fan.
The only think Rossi did wrong was lift the lid without explanation at the time.
He did explain latter as you pointed out.
Sam:
I checked what you say, it is between the time 2h 30′ and 2h 31′.
I opened an air window to help the air circulation since when the E-Cat has been turned off the cooling system was disconnected. After 2 hours of work and after the operation of the spectrometer without cooling circulation in the heat exchanger I wanted to help the hot air out.
This has nothing to do with the measurements we were making.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Hello DR Rossi
I seen this comment from E48 on ECat World
Blog.
Engineer48
11 hours ago
Just before Mats starts the tests with different resistor values, Rossi lifts the cover on the White control box and apparently switches a switch or two:
E cat QX presentation 24 November 2017 — disq.us
Which to this observer casts a big shadow over the validity of the tests Mats conducted.
Apparently Mats did not see this occur as he was looking at the data from Hurley.
As Rossi did not explain what he did nor why he did it, to me this killed any credibility on the input power claims.
Could you comment on it?
Enjoyed your QX demonstration.
Regards
Sam
I would ask him why he doesn't just leave the special air window open all the time but that's probably a company secret.
QuoteI opened an air window to help the air circulation since when the E-Cat has been turned off the cooling system was disconnected. After 2 hours of work and after the operation of the spectrometer without cooling circulation in the heat exchanger I wanted to help the hot air out.
It's smoke in the eyes good only for believers, because the cooling water did not circulate inside the control box and it can't "help the hot air out."
The white control box cooling had nothing to do with the E-cat heat exchanger cooling operation.
Sam,
Did any of he readings change when Rossi threw hat switch? Not that I've heard. Rossi said the demo was being run at 1/3 power to be on the safe side and that the power pack was inefficient. It has since been redesigned. I doubt Rossi had anything to do with the design as it is not his area of expertise.
As Rossi forecast, the skeptics will not believe any experiment, only the sale of commercial reactors. So there is little point in debating it with them.
I only brought up Stockholm because one of the babblers claimed Rossi had never shown ANYTHING. Was the reactor invisible?
https://register.epo.org/appli…umber=EP08873805&tab=main
Display More
EP2259998 - METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR CARRYING OUT NICKEL AND HYDROGEN EXOTHERMAL REACTIONS [Cliquez sur ce lien
Status Application deemed to be withdrawn
Applicant(s)For all designated states Leonardo Corporation 1331 Lincoln Road, Suite 601
Miami Beach, FL 33139 / USInventor(s)01 / ROSSI, Andrea C/o Pascucci Maddalena Via Ezio 24 1-00192 Roma / IT
in the documents, the reason for withdrow is fee not paid. (annual and additional, since march)
I have heard from Fabiani that the "secret sauce" is PdF
There is no such animal. PdF2, 4, 5, but no PdF. I think your leg was being pulled- I can think of useful Pd compounds, but not this one.
There is no such animal. PdF2, 4, 5, but no PdF. I think your leg was being pulled- I can think of useful Pd compounds, but not this one.
Obviously, this has nothing to do with chemistry (at least not in the strict sense of the word ...) but with the "secrets" of a "cavalleresco ordine goliardico" . ...
Quote$1000 a day?
Not even close. If you look it up, while one of the best firms, JD is also one of the more "reasonably priced". For general work, they charge around $350 - 500 per billable hour as per some things I found on the internet. It's more for trials and all expenses for travel are borne by the client of course. My guess for trials and depositions is $5000 per day. Or more. BTW, that same article noted that some rates are up to $1800 /hour but I imagine, for that, you have to know an oligarch or two somewhere or other. I suspect Jones Day's janitor, rather than their lawyers, charges around $1000 a day if you need his/her services through the firm.
QuoteAs Rossi forecast, the skeptics will not believe any experiment
Skeptics were not admitted to Rossi's demo. He selected and invited only those persons he likes and fans/supporters that assure him no uncomfortable questions or active checks.
Quoteonly the sale of commercial reactors
It's a funny story told each year (from 10 years) to bamboozled his fans but it never seen a product buyable on the shelves.
QuoteWas the reactor invisible?
Visible means nothing, magicians do better of that during their shows.
@Adrian Ashfield
QuoteWas the reactor invisible?
No but adequate data were invisible as was any semblance of good questions from the observers.
QuoteAs Rossi forecast, the skeptics will not believe any experiment, only the sale of commercial reactors. So there is little point in debating it with them.
Oh, right! Because skeptics don't believe in neutrinos, neutron stars and black holes for the same reasons. Not much progress in commercializing those so far.
Obviously, this has nothing to do with chemistry (at least not in the strict sense of the word ...) but with the secrets of a "cavalleresco ordine goliardico" ...
I confirm that this secret is related to a a force much stronger than strong force!
gio,
So how is it that those Rossi supporters with the inside scoop (know his secrets), speak in code? Why not just come out and say what it is you know? All these mysteries..my gosh. Have you guys formed an underground secret society yet? 
I joke about it, but that is what it seems to be coming to.
I am all in favor of making this site more friendly to our Rossi fans, than it has been in the past. Not that I like him now, because I do not. Especially so after reading the Doral court documents. But simply because so many LF guests/members, credible people like Russ, Alan, the Swedes, and according to rumor...many researchers whom prefer to remain silent, still stand by him. It seems you guys are not going away no matter how much we try, so may as well listen to what you have to say.
But it would certainly help your argument if you came up with solid reasons for your belief. Saying "I just believe the man" does you no good, that is for sure.
gio,
So how is it that those Rossi supporters with the inside scoop (know his secrets), speak in code? Why not just come out and say what it is you know? All
"Saying "I just believe the man" does you no good, that is for sure"
Obviously I fully agree, who said that ?
If you came up with solid reasons for your belief.
A scientific approach has nothing to do with the concept of "belief" or with the concept of "not belief"
Sam,
Did any of he readings change when Rossi threw hat switch? Not that I've heard. Rossi said the demo was being run at 1/3 power to be on the safe side and that the power pack was inefficient. It has since been redesigned. I doubt Rossi had anything to do with the design as it is not his area of expertise.
As Rossi forecast, the skeptics will not believe any experiment, only the sale of commercial reactors. So there is little point in debating it with them.
I only brought up Stockholm because one of the babblers claimed Rossi had never shown ANYTHING. Was the reactor invisible?
Adrian,
Please ask our good moderator Mr. Smith to give a clear break down on the Stockholm demo! He was actually there! He actually saw it! He is a Rossi supporter! He was there and can tell us FIRST hand, not guesses or assumption.
Adrian,
Please ask Alan to put an end to the unfair criticism you get from the "skeptics" by supporting your views that the QuarkX worked at the demo, that is was ran at 1/3 power, that it showed more power out than power in, that the flipping of hidden switches made sense and that it was a valid demonstration of the QuarkX being an LENR reactor! That the Stockholm event had demonstrable meaning!
Adrian,
Please ask fellow supporter Alan to agree with you and explain that measuring the 1 ohm resistor was a valid and demonstrable test of the QuarkX input power and that it was meaningful as YOU state. Will not a fellow supporter agree with you?
Surely Adrian,
Your request to Alan, as he is a believer such as yourself and not one of the other people here you call fools, will respond to your request with a clear and precise appraisal of the Stockholm event! He will help you put an end to all the "blather" that you accuse others of! A fellow believer will surely not deny your request for eye witness support and support your truth about believing Rossi!
Surely you will ask him........ and he will respond............ or not......
Bob. Stop being foolish, you are better than that. And baiting Adrian too. You know my opinion of the Stockholm affair, or if you don't you never read my response to the previous half-dozen times you asked.
BTW, for those lacking a knowledge of Italian slang, PdF is pudenda hair.
... and if you keep track of it, it becomes a PDF filed.
Bob. Stop being foolish, you are better than that. And baiting Adrian too. You know my opinion of the Stockholm affair, or if you don't you never read my response to the previous half-dozen times you asked.
BTW, for those lacking a knowledge of Italian slang, PdF is pudenda hair.
Yes, I have read every one of your answers to my questions... you have been consistent. Normally a four word answer. "It was a demo". You have not ever critiqued the event from a scientific point as you said you would before attending. Other than "it proved nothing" or "it was a demo", you have not provided the first hand observations that you surely are qualified to make. You have not pointed out any obvious problems nor strengths. You have not critiqued it at all.
And by not giving an appropriate critique from an experienced and qualified scientist who saw the event first hand, you allow such as Adrian to keep posting that the demo was a successful show of the QuarkX being an LENR reactor. He then calls skeptics "Fools" which you have now followed suit by calling me.
I do take exception to that.
So no rebuke to one for calling others "fools", but a bit of a rebuke for me calling a spade a spade! (Although in a quite sarcastic tone I do admit) Normally I try not to be antagonistic, but when someone who is clearly, willfully belligerent and blind to facts calls others fools, it pisses me off. And no slap on the wrist? Yes, it was baiting Adrian. He refuses (actually cannot) answer his critics with facts and links. He continually is derogatory with his "blathering" statements. So if he will not answer congenially, I guess I took HIS approach and baited him.
A critique of an event does not have to be damning. It is simply a factual report on what was seen and what could or could not be derived of it. If the event was damning in itself, then it should be reported as such! Whether one is a supporter or not. Scientist should report facts, not faith.
Silence is just as damning as a report. Look at the Lugano debacle. Not one word or defense or explanation from the authors. Incredible.
But that is why Rossi only invites those he knows will not blow the whistle I guess
(I must be having a bad, frustrating day.... 
)
Alan,
Would you recommend to a potential investor they invest with Rossi? If so, what should they demand for a due diligence?
I would suggest measure DC into an inverter for the input of what ever device is required - possibly from a battery array - much harder to trick a DC measurement. And pump water from and into a large pool/ or tank and the measure heat rise as a function of time while mixing. Yes there will be loss, but at his claimed COP that should not be a problem. This should be done by setting up, turning on and then leaving the device to run on its own. It should run for over 100 times any known chemical events possible calculated from the device's mass.
If he has on demand, on/off and a robust system, that shouldn't be a problem. If the device does require constant "adjustments" by Rossi then it is not ready for commercialization. Turn it on, stand back and watch for a few days. You can calibrate with an electric pool heater if needed.
In short, heat a "bucket" of water with a battery sourced device for a length of time while the device is left untouched.
