Answer what? What the replications are? Beats me. I assume they are each person’s inspired magic formula for LENR dressed up to look like Rossi’s gadget in order to lend it credibility (which is a hilarious notion.) Do you think otherwise?
-
-
I assume they are each person’s inspired magic formula for LENR dressed up to look like Rossi’s gadget in order to lend it credibility (which is a hilarious notion.)
IO,
Sandwiched between
'ing, you answered yourself. They think you are wrong. We shall see. 
-
And there must be something driving yours, though I shudder to think what it might be.
Flee, avoid, evade, Duck, dodge & hide
-
Flee, avoid, evade, Duck, dodge & hide
You guys should keep in mind, that Alan and Russ have been married to those little Androcle reactors in Alan's small lab now for 3 months. Staring at them day after day, elbow to elbow. Trying this different arrangement vs that one. Figuring what all the data is telling them. Visitors are lining up at the door, each wanting a look see, and to offer their opinion.
It is a pressure cooker situation. Alan is trying his best to keep up with the same questions, time and time again from us, without letting himself get frustrated. Understandably, occasionally it gets to him. In the same sense, we are frustrated, and want to have all the answers now. We are actually pretty close to a happy medium IMO.
-
-
“They think you are wrong.”
You have lost me. Who are “they” and what am I wrong about? All I have said here is that you can’t replicate something if you don’t know what it is. Do you think these people are duplicating Rossi’s machine despite not knowing what Is in it or how it is supposed to work?
Shane, I know you think Rossi is a liar and a crook, but I have the feeling that you still think the e-cat in some form or another actually works.
-
“They think you are wrong.”
You have lost me. Who are “they” and what am I wrong about? All I have said here is that you can’t replicate something if you don’t know what it is. Do you think these people are duplicating Rossi’s machine despite not knowing what Is in it or how it is supposed to work?
Shane, I know you think Rossi is a liar and a crook, but I have the feeling that you still think the e-cat in some form or another actually works.
IO,
Change think to “hope”,
Then most usbus could agree
-
I absolutely do not "still think the Ecat works". I do think, and have said it many times going back to ECN's, that there is a slight chance Rossi has a small, unreliable effect in the same low power, low COP range others before him (Piantelli), and after (MFMP, SongSheng) have reported. With a gift for lying, and swaying smart people, he was able to convince many that it was more than what it really was. It paid off, as he has a real estate empire as proof.
Now this QX is plasma based, which adds an interesting twist to the story. And NO, I do not believe in it either. Curious though, to see where he takes us with it.
-
I really do not know how many categories we can cram them into, but one particular category no one has mentioned yet, is the Dogbone replicator community. [...] It is almost like a cottage industry of garage tinkerers, and most are anonymous.
Shane, please remember that our speech was about the words of Alan Smith: "scientists who still believe Rossi". So we are talking about scientists, not garage tinkerers.
To be credible, these scientists must be respectable as said in the Price's article (1). He also provides some example of what he means as respectable scientists. They can be either academics - as the "Swedish and Italian physicists whose scientific credentials are not in doubt" -, or be employed in public "leading research centres", or be "technology forecasters for a very large enterprise". In general, they must belong to some recognized organization which give them the necessary indubitable "scientific credentials" that are necessary to make their statements credible to the public. This is also the reason why they can't be anonymous, because most of their "scientific credentials" derives from their affiliation to a reputable scientific institution or enterprise, which, in turn, is expected to guarantee the public on the competence and correctness of its affiliates.
The plethora of Dogbone replicators you mentioned hardly belongs to the above reputable organizations, so there is no reason to take their results into consideration. Even if some of them are real scientists, and assuming that they really believe they can get some excess heat by replicating an Ecat device, they should first have believed in the reported results of the Ferrara or Lugano tests, so they should belong to the second category that I mentioned in my previous comments. Hence, in conclusion, they are delusional because they are trying to replicate the results claimed by not reliable scientists.
(1) https://aeon.co/essays/why-do-…ossibility-of-cold-fusion
-
Display More
Shane, please remember that our speech was about the words of Alan Smith: "scientists who still believe Rossi". So we are talking about scientists, not garage tinkerers.
To be credible, these scientists must be respectable as said in the Price's article (1). He also provides some example of what he means as respectable scientists. They can be either academics - as the "Swedish and Italian physicists whose scientific credentials are not in doubt" -, or be employed in public "leading research centres", or be "technology forecasters for a very large enterprise". In general, they must belong to some recognized organization which give them the necessary indubitable "scientific credentials" that are necessary to make their statements credible to the public. This is also the reason why they can't be anonymous, because most of their "scientific credentials" derives from their affiliation to a reputable scientific institution or enterprise, which, in turn, is expected to guarantee the public on the competence and correctness of its affiliates.
The plethora of Dogbone replicators you mentioned hardly belongs to the above reputable organizations, so there is no reason to take their results into consideration. Even if some of them are real scientists, and assuming that they really believe they can get some excess heat by replicating an Ecat device, they should first have believed in the reported results of the Ferrara or Lugano tests, so they should belong to the second category that I mentioned in my previous comments. Hence, in conclusion, they are delusional because they are trying to replicate the results claimed by not reliable scientists.
(1) https://aeon.co/essays/why-do-…ossibility-of-cold-fusion
Ascoli,
Yes, I did not mean to include Alan or Russ. But in defense of the garage tinkerers; many are respected scientists either working on their own time, or retired and doing it as a hobby. So we can not discount their influence on the issue. Higgins is a good example. He retired from Motorola years ago, but does his own work, and is still influential and highly respected. As many here have said, when he talks, everyone listens. Same goes for Storms. He is retired, tinkers in his lab, and is highly regarded.
-
The plethora of Dogbone replicators you mentioned hardly belongs to the above reputable organizations, so there is no reason to take their results into consideration. Even if some of them are real scientists, and assuming that they really believe they can get some excess heat by replicating an Ecat device, they should first have believed in the reported results of the Ferrara or Lugano tests, so they should belong to the second category that I mentioned in my previous comments. Hence, in conclusion, they are delusional because they are trying to replicate the results claimed by not reliable scientists.
Ascoli,
It remains to be seen if these Dogbbone replications have some merit, but no matter how it turns out, they are not delusional. They may be seeing something not there, interpreting the data wrong....but delusional they are not. I know Storms had no luck with NiH. Neither did Coolescence and they shut their doors last fall. SKINR officially was unable to get it going, although one of their researchers claims otherwise.
But many of these tinkerers feel they saw, or see something, and I see no reason to discourage them from pursuing it further.
-
IO,
Change think to “hope”,
Then most usbus could agree
I think you and Shane are not responding to what I actually said. My comment about dogbone replications had nothing to do with whether Rossi's gizmo works or, for that matter, whether LENR is real. All I am talking about is the concept of replication. My contention is that you can't possibly replicate something if you don't know what it is (at least, not intentionally.) Do you "hope" that I am wrong about that? Really?
If one of the cottage industry people somehow builds a dogbone thingy that produces excess energy, is it because they actually did the same thing as Rossi or did they just get lucky? Who knows. In any case, I think you are both having the wrong debate with me.
-
you can't possibly replicate something if you don't know what it is
I beg to differ. A lot of early humans replicated fire without the slightest idea what it was they replicated there.
And isn't that the start of theories? Replicating an unknown effect?
-
Yes, I did not mean to include Alan or Russ. But in defense of the garage tinkerers; many are respected scientists either working on their own time, or retired and doing it as a hobby. So we can not discount their influence on the issue. Higgins is a good example. He retired from Motorola years ago, but does his own work, and is still influential and highly respected. As many here have said, when he talks, everyone listens. Same goes for Storms. He is retired, tinkers in his lab, and is highly regarded.
OK, Shane, I know, the people you mentioned can be considered scientists even if they work in their garages. But, let me repeat once again the Alan Smith words: "scientists who still believe Rossi". So we are talking about their belief on Rossi, that is – considering that Rossi is not believable – on the performances of the Ecat, as reported by their Cat.1 colleagues, those who attended the Ecat tests, and misrepresented the experimental results.
Hence, regardless of what they are doing now, they belong to the Cat.2 scientists, those mistakenly believing in the results reported by not reliable scientists.
It remains to be seen if these Dogbbone replications have some merit, but no matter how it turns out, they are not delusional. They may be seeing something not there, interpreting the data wrong....but delusional they are not.
OK, my language error. I meant deluded, not delusional. I'm very sorry.
QuoteI see no reason to discourage them from pursuing it further.
I agree with this. Everyone should feel free to do what he wants in his garage, provided that it is not harmful to anybody.
The problems come when a world authority in the philosophy of science as Huw Price (Bertrand Russell Professor of Philosophy at the University of Cambridge) writes an article in which Rossi is mentioned almost in every paragraph, and where he states: "We all have skin in the game, and parts, indeed a planet, quite seriously in peril. We are like a thirsty town, desperate for a new water supply. What we drink now is slowly killing us. We know that there’s an abundant supply of clean, cheap water, trapped behind the dam. The problem is to find a way to tap it."
Phrases like these go far beyond the Dr. Storm's garage. They embody the deep reasons of the perils we are facing right now. The proposed illusory solution (I mean the irrational faith in a technological breakthrough which will provide the world with "abundant supply of clean, cheap" energy) is in fact the main cause that has pushed the humanity so far from a safe shore. The LENR chimera did also contribute to this nefarious outcome.
-
I beg to differ. A lot of early humans replicated fire without the slightest idea what it was they replicated there.
And isn't that the start of theories? Replicating an unknown effect?
Replicating an unknown effect? Certainly that has happened from the days of fire onward. But replicating an unknown apparatus is something else. If showed you a desktop computer and you go build a metal box with lights on it and USB ports, have you replicated the computer?
-
Quote
Now this QX is plasma based, which adds an interesting twist to the story. And NO, I do not believe in it either. Curious though, to see where he takes us with it
It adds nothing more than Rossi saying it was dark matter based or elephant spirits' based or flying turds based. What is interesting is not what Rossi says. You can assume the claims are entirely lies. What is interesting is why anyone believes any part of it at this advanced stage of the overripe scam.
QuoteShane,
You’re no fun.
Well, he's a lot more fun than Rossi. If you doubt that, ask Tom Darden how much fun Rossi is.
-
I know Storms had no luck with NiH. Neither did Coolescence and they shut their doors last fall. SKINR officially was unable to get it going, although one of their researchers claims otherwise.
I do not think SKINR ever tried any form of Ni-H cold fusion. Certainly not the high temperature version.
I would not say that Rossi is the source of interest in NiH it so much as Piantelli and Arata, and more recently Takahashi, Mizuno and Beiting. Running at high temperatures is a natural choice for Ni because it does not absorb much hydrogen at lower temperatures. Not as much as Pd.
Based on Arata and Takahashi, the best choice seems to be Ni coated with Pd, and alloyed with various other things. Recent results indicate that Ni + Pd works better than Ni or Pd alone.
What is interesting is why anyone believes any part of it at this advanced stage of the overripe scam.
They don't believe Rossi. They believe the others I listed, and some believe Parkhomov. I have doubts about him.
I think Rossi glommed onto -- or exploited -- the growing interested in Ni-H. He was not the original source of it.
-
Display More
Shane, please remember that our speech was about the words of Alan Smith: "scientists who still believe Rossi". So we are talking about scientists, not garage tinkerers.
To be credible, these scientists must be respectable as said in the Price's article (1). He also provides some example of what he means as respectable scientists. They can be either academics - as the "Swedish and Italian physicists whose scientific credentials are not in doubt" -, or be employed in public "leading research centres", or be "technology forecasters for a very large enterprise". In general, they must belong to some recognized organization which give them the necessary indubitable "scientific credentials" that are necessary to make their statements credible to the public. This is also the reason why they can't be anonymous, because most of their "scientific credentials" derives from their affiliation to a reputable scientific institution or enterprise, which, in turn, is expected to guarantee the public on the competence and correctness of its affiliates.
The plethora of Dogbone replicators you mentioned hardly belongs to the above reputable organizations, so there is no reason to take their results into consideration. Even if some of them are real scientists, and assuming that they really believe they can get some excess heat by replicating an Ecat device, they should first have believed in the reported results of the Ferrara or Lugano tests, so they should belong to the second category that I mentioned in my previous comments. Hence, in conclusion, they are delusional because they are trying to replicate the results claimed by not reliable scientists.
(1) https://aeon.co/essays/why-do-…ossibility-of-cold-fusion
ascoli,
If their results are replicable by anyone Using the same BOM, build instructions, testing procedures and protocols then their results MUST be taken into consideration,
Damn their reputations and institutions.
-
I do not think SKINR ever tried any form of Ni-H cold fusion. Certainly not the high temperature version.
As I recall, they tried to replicate the Celani wires 3 years ago, and were not successful. Not even sure if that would qualify as Ni-H, although I think it would?
On that note, hopefully we will hear from Celani soon. He, and his team were up to COP2 at last report. He is a member here, and posts occasionally.
-
As I recall, they tried to replicate the Celani wires 3 years ago, and were not successful.
SKINR did that? I don't recall anything about it. That would be Ni-H. Sort of.
