Rossi-Blog Comment Discussion

Dan Galburt

September 17, 2018 at 4:14 PM

Dear Dr. Rossi

You have been maintaining that you, initially, would only be selling heat and, assuming a customer wants to generate electricity, you

would leave the design and fabrication of a turbine driven generator to your customer.

Questions

1. Have you changed direction and let your team become involved in the design and fabrication of such a turbo-generator.

2. Is your business partner involved rather than your team?

3. Have you found a customer willing to do the job them selves?

A “gas turbine” refers to a turbine that compresses air, mixes air with fuel, continuously burns the fuel to heat the air, and expands the heated air through the turbine to create mechanical power. A gas turbine driven might be adapted to use E-Cats to heat the air instead of burning fuel, but it would no longer be a called a gas turbine. Gas turbines are open cycle because they must exhaust the products of combustion to the atmosphere. A turbine driven by E-Cat Heat would not necessarily have to be open cycle, it could use a gas other than air including steam. The key to high efficiency is heating the gas to a high temperature prior to expansion. The design of the heat exchange mechanism that transfers heat from the E-Cat to the gas is critical to achieving high efficiency.

Questions

4. In the short term, is the adaption of an existing gas turbine to E-cat heat under serious consideration.

5. If so, would the gas expanded in the turbine still be air?

6. Would the turbine still be open cycle?

7. In your opinion, in the short term, would an overall efficiency of > 30 % be achievable?

Warm Regards

Dan Galburt

__________________________________________

Andrea Rossi

September 17, 2018 at 9:29 PM

Dan Galburt:

1- no

2- yes

3- yes

4- yes

5- could be

6- could be

7- I suppose you mean the efficiency of the turbine: it will depend on the turbine. I am not an expert of the matter.

Warm Regards,

A.R.

---------------------------------------------------------

This post is very revealing and locks down my speculation that the partner has taken over the major engineering tasks of converting SK heat into usable power. ABB is a good guess as to who this partner is. The partner is a company who can design and fabricate a prototype LENR based turbine from scratch and ABB can do that and then to manufacture and commercialize this turbine after design is complete.

ABB wants to be the major player in the electric car infrastructure, If ABB can produce a LENR turbine power plant, then LENR's use to power autos will rocket LENR into the energy market in preference to oil. A LENR turbine will simplify the auto's design greatly. It will remove the weight of the battery and the battery changing infrastructure as an issue in electrification of transportation.

14 July 2018

The electric car has finally arrived. And ABB will keep it rolling

It’s a summer sight to behold: Grand-prix-style racecars hitting speeds of 140 miles an hour on a street-level race course set up in Red Hook, Brooklyn.

https://new.abb.com/news/detai…-abb-will-keep-it-rolling

Quote from JedRothwell

You are wrong. It is dead easy to strip off the subterfuges. The most recent ones were so amateur and so blatant, he wasn't even trying to fool people. He was phoning it in. He was claiming there is a giant heat exchanger that does not show up in photographs, that would not work, and that could not have been installed where he claimed it was in the mezzanine. Do you call that a smokescreen? It wouldn't fool a 6-year-old! Anyone can see he was lying through his teeth.

I believe you are one of the people who refuses to look at the Penon report. It is preposterous nonsense and obviously fake. Not difficult at all. I expect that if you did look at it, even you would agree -- although you would not admit that. You would go on saying it was a clever, difficult smoke screen. If that was difficult, what would be easy?

There must be a lot of turbulence happening is RossiWorld. There are decisions beingmade and unmade in a rapid fashion as ideas come and go at lightning speed. Nobody has said that Rossi is a good manager. Don't let this turbulence confuse you into assuming fraud. It is just poor management in a rapidly changing and dynamic situation.

Rossi's impact on what will happen in his company will be greatly reduced as the partner takes on the major effort in moving the E cat product forward.

The only excess heat generated by Rossi comes from all the "warm regards" he dispenses on his blog.

Quote from PhysicsForDummies

The only excess heat generated by Rossi comes from all the "warm regards" he dispenses on his blog.

Rossi has said that he will demo the SK reactor in January. I will hold in abeyance my opinion about Rossi as a con man till then. But I am thinking about investing in ABB as a safe and promising investment. I want to confirm who the partner is before I invest.

Cheers and Godspeed! And what a convincing demo in Stockolm...

Quote from zorud

Cheers and Godspeed! And what a convincing demo in Stockolm...

Tracking Rossi is like making coffee. You must filter out the grounds before you enjoy your cup.

Quote from axil

There must be a lot of turbulence happening is RossiWorld. There are decisions beingmade and unmade in a rapid fashion as ideas come and go at lightning speed. Nobody has said that Rossi is a good manager. Don't let this turbulence confuse you into assuming fraud.

Turbulence has nothing to with it. The Penon report was filled with peposterous lies, such as claims that the machine produced heat on days Rossi's own records show it was turned off, and when witnesses saw it was turned off and disassembled. Rossi claimed there was a heat exchanger. There is irrefutable proof that no such exchange existed. No one saw it. It does not show up in photos. There was no sign of it later on. Without that heat exchanger everyone in the warehouse would have been cooked if his claims had been true.

What better proof can you ask for? How much easier could he make it to "strip off the subterfuges"? After you strip off the ones that would not fool a 6-year-old, there is nothing left. Obviously, this is why you refuse to look at the Penon report or the lawsuit depositions. Rossi's own testimony and the documents he uploaded prove beyond doubt that everything he said was a lie. Not a subtle, smoke-screen type lie that takes Sherlock Holmes to see through. It is not difficult to look at a photo of an empty room and see there is no heat exchanger it it.

Quote from axil

Tracking Rossi is like making coffee. You must filter out the grounds before you enjoy your cup.

Those are not coffee grounds. You are looking at dried horse manure. There is nothing left after you exclude it. As I said, that is why you refuse to look before you drink.

Quote from JedRothwell

Turbulence has nothing to with it. The Penon report was filled with peposterous lies, such as claims that the machine produced heat on days Rossi's own records show it was turned off, and when witnesses saw it was turned off and disassembled. Rossi claimed there was a heat exchanger. There is irrefutable proof that no such exchange existed. No one saw it. It does not show up in photos. There was no sign of it later on. Without that heat exchanger everyone in the warehouse would have been cooked if his claims had been true.

What better proof can you ask for? How much easier could he make it to "strip off the subterfuges"? After you strip off the ones that would not fool a 6-year-old, there is nothing left. Obviously, this is why you refuse to look at the Penon report or the lawsuit depositions. Rossi's own testimony and the documents he uploaded prove beyond doubt that everything he said was a lie. Not a subtle, smoke-screen type lie that takes Sherlock Holmes to see through. It is not difficult to look at a photo of an empty room and see there is no heat exchanger it it.

Those are not coffee grounds. You are looking at dried horse manure. There is nothing left after you exclude it. As I said, that is why you refuse to look before you drink.

The courtroom is the crucible of justice and honesty. If the information that was supplied in the IH case was false, why was the purveyors of that information not convicted of perjury: he offense of willfully telling an untruth in a court after having taken an oath or affirmation.?

Quote from axil

The courtroom is the crucible of justice and honesty. If the information that was supplied in the IH case was false, why was the purveyors of that information not convicted of perjury . . .

Because there was no trial. No one is convicted of perjury when there is no trial, and nothing comes of the lies.

But you do not need a conviction of perjury to see that Rossi was lying. You can read the report, look at the Penon report, or look at the photos yourself. If you are as smart as a 6-year-old, you will see he was lying through his teeth. That is why you refuse to look. That is why you resort to dodges like asking "why wasn't he convicted of perjury." You should be asking yourself "why don't I see a heat exchanger in this room?" or "how could the machine have produced heat this day, when Rossi says it was turned off?" Those are questions anyone can answer, as opposed to legalistic, hypothetical questions about imaginary perjury convictions that would never happen.

Quote from JedRothwell

Because there was no trial. No one is convicted of perjury when there is no trial, and nothing comes of the lies.

But you do not need a conviction of perjury to see that Rossi was lying. You can read the report, look at the Penon report, or look at the photos yourself. If you are as smart as a 6-year-old, you will see he was lying through his teeth. That is why you refuse to look. That is why you resort to dodges like asking "why wasn't he convicted of perjury." You should be asking yourself "why don't I see a heat exchanger in this room?" or "how could the machine have produced heat this day, when Rossi says it was turned off?" Those are questions anyone can answer, as opposed to legalistic, hypothetical questions about imaginary perjury convictions that would never happen.

Penon report could have been inaccurate, but there is no evidence that I know of that Penon and Rossi colluded in the production of that report. If Penon did produce a invalid report, then it is on IH since IH hired Penon to referee the test. In the end, It is the responsibility of IH to make sure that the test was accurate.

Quote from axil

Rossi has said that he will demo the SK reactor in January. I will hold in abeyance my opinion about Rossi as a con man till then. But I am thinking about investing in ABB as a safe and promising investment. I want to confirm who the partner is before I invest.

ABB, Siemens, Schneider, Rockwell are all excellent companies in that arena,

GE is great if want to roll the dice and buy low, hoping they rebound.

Don’t buy anything connected with

Andrea Rossi, or you may get “IH’ ed”

Quote from axil

Penon report could have been inaccurate, but there is no evidence that I know of that Penon and Rossi colluded in the production of that report.

I am sure they colluded, but even if they did not, the report still proves that Rossi was lying. Even if Rossi did not write it, he uploaded it as proof of his claims, and I am sure he knows it is full of lies, so that makes him a liar as well.

You cannot challenge my assertions about this, because you refuse to read this report, or the depositions, or any other evidence that punctures your delusions.

Quote from axil

If Penon did produce a invalid report,

It is invalid in the sense that it describes many impossible things and it is full of outrageous lies. But Rossi claims it is valid. He uploaded it as proof of his claims. It is the opposite of proof to anyone who reads it. It only "convinces" people like you, who refuse to read it, and people who have no technical knowledge whatever.

Quote from axil

, then it is on IH since IH hired Penon to referee the test.

Yes, it was "on" them, and that is why they rejected the report. Anyone with an ounce of sense would reject it. Even you would see that the machine could not have produced heat when it was turned off. They refereed the test themselves. They did not believe Penon. They told me and others long before it ended that it was garbage. The whole fiasco would have been over when the test ended, if Rossi had not filed a lawsuit.

Quote from JedRothwell

I am sure they colluded, but even if they did not, the report still proves that Rossi was lying. Even if Rossi did not write it, he uploaded it as proof of his claims, and I am sure he knows it is full of lies, so that makes him a liar as well.

You cannot challenge my assertions about this, because you refuse to read this report, or the depositions, or any other evidence that punctures your delusions.

It is invalid in the sense that it describes many impossible things and it is full of outrageous lies. But Rossi claims it is valid. He uploaded it as proof of his claims. It is the opposite of proof to anyone who reads it. It only "convinces" people like you, who refuse to read it, and people who have no technical knowledge whatever.

Yes, it was "on" them, and that is why they rejected the report. Anyone with an ounce of sense would reject it. Even you would see that the machine could not have produced heat when it was turned off. They refereed the test themselves. They did not believe Penon. They told me and others long before it ended that it was garbage. The whole fiasco would have been over when the test ended, if Rossi had not filed a lawsuit.

Display More

and Penon did not use the equipment he originally told IH he would use.

and what ever happened to the analysis of the instruments he promised to run after the testing?

Quote from axil

If IH really believed that the E Cat could not work, then Rossi could get IH to do what he wanted IH to do when IH was properly tenderized. The goal of IH in the legal battle was to get out from under the legal situation with Rossi as cheaply as possible. The legal burn rate that IH had to fund was far more than Rossi so Rossi was spending less money per day than IH was. Rossi was sure to win the case because IH had nothing to gain in continuing the legal fight. IH was on the defensive and Rossi was playing with them like a cat toying with a mouse until Rossi had IH where he wanted them to be. When the time was right and IH was desperate enough, then Rossi pounced and he got his IP back.

As you seem to like playing lawyer, please provide your evidence (which does not include RossiSays, FrankSays, or AASays) for all those factual conclusions you just stated. You can't so I suggest you stick to something else (I would say your area of expertise, but I am not sure there is one). Also, please let us all know what law school you attended and when you graduated.

Axil's knowledge of the law is comparable to his knowledge of physics: very imaginative and not constrained by reality.