Something like that. He and his grandson Redding said he wanted a "100%" market share. I think I told him he will probably get that: 100% of nothing. That's how it turned out.
As I recall, he also helped torpedo F&P's patent. He was not a nice person.
sad but true
Display MoreI don't buy that theory. I think Rossi has been able to produce kilowatts of power at enormous COP in the past. His earliest systems seemed to have been capable of producing such power output with ease. Even the reactors in his first one megawatt plant were allegedly capable of going into self sustain mode with one hundred watts of RF power being the only input for the whole plant.
To account for his actions is simple: he wants it all. The E-Cat technology, in his opinion, is his ticket to total market domination of an industry. However, the problem is that he knows the basic fundamentals of how to build systems such as his is NOT THAT COMPLICATED. The problem is that most individuals are not willing to work non-ceasingly day after day and year after year like he has done. Regardless of all the negative things that can be said about him, he is obsessive compulsive about his work. If anyone were willing to perform such rapid testing, they could figure it out too. So in addition to not being willing to accept anything less than total market domination, he has become paranoid and secretive.
Looking back at his games and schemes, they have all been about getting the money to move forward towards the BEST system that no one can exceed without giving anything away that could help potential competitors. Every system up until now has been abandoned because he came across something BETTER that he knew a larger team would discover very quickly. So to prevent proving the reality of his technology, he performed sloppy (barely adequate) tests that prevented most parties from taking him seriously while allowing him to get investment funds.
I may be wrong because we need proof that it works, but I think the QX/SK are devices that cannot be easily exceeded. They can be instantly turned on and off (perfect control), can be configured to produce little harmful radiation, produce high reaction rates, and don't have many of the problems of powder based systems. The downside from Rossi's point of view is that the tech can be easily copied. It's technology that has been re-invented over and over again.
I'm not too interested in what Rossi does from this point on. I would like for him to make a deal with a large company, but I don't expect that will ever happen. What I hope is that someone will replicate the QX and be open about the results so that a tidal wave of non-commercial replications can take place.
You missed one improtant point. LENR distroys all matter that encloses it. Rossi has come up with a system that produces energy and keeps from falling apart. This has taken a huge amount of effort and time to come up with. Yes, anyone can come up with a system that melts down but to keep going for a year or more takes much time and effort to come up with.
https://www.coldfusionnow.com/podcast/Ruby-Carat-Dennis-Cravens-Cold-Fusion-Now-015.mp3
Very recently Ruby did a Podcast interview with Dennis Cravens. The whole 20 minutes is worth a listen to, but at 18:10 he talks about Patterson, the beads, grandson. Very, very interesting, tragic, and informative. If anyone would know about that story, he is the one.
BTW, Cravens is one of IH's researchers now. Towards the end he expresses his gratitude for the freedom they give him to pursue his research.
At 2:00 Cravens talks about the real problem for LENR developers. When run hard, "the reactor tears itself up". It took Rossi 10 years to solve that problem.
Something like that. He and his grandson Redding said he wanted a "100%" market share. I think I told him he will probably get that: 100% of nothing. That's how it turned out.
As I recall, he also helped torpedo F&P's patent. He was not a nice person.
Rossi is not concerned about market share. He needs to go very slowly to keep himself away from the bone saw.
Display MoreThe more I think about it the more I would HATE having an LENR technology I was trying to push commercially. There would be so many issues to consider such as who to trust, how to avoid helping competitors, when to stop improving the initial product, how to avoid over zealous government regulators that would have thrown Nikola Tesla in a deep dark hole if he'd existed in today's age, how to raise funds without losing control over the technology, fighting the impulse to share breakthroughs, deciding whether or not to go the patent route, etc. I can see how with a REALLY AMAZING LENR technology (not some puny device that produces a few watts) thinking about all these issues could drive someone to inventors syndrome and then towards manipulative/sleezy/deceptive behavior.
The only two solutions I can come up with are:
1) Go completely open source with the details of the technology. (You could still try to market/sell your own implementation of the technology, write books about your discovery, go on speaking tours, and do other things to obtain some modest amount of recognition or financial rewards.)
2) Go to a big company with hundreds of engineers and billions of dollars to throw at the project. Sign a contract with them relinquishing most or all of your IP and rights in exchange for cash/royalties and a guarantee that they HAVE to mass produce the technology in some form and put it on the market within a reasonable time period or they must pay an extremely insane amount of money.
I could be that Rossi when with step #2, but the company turned out to be a patent troll.
Director - you seem to be more involved in attempting to shape this story that you've been willing to let on. Dubious is the word that comes to mind at present.
If the R'ster was so concerned about security at that demo then perhaps he should not have left the fueled reactor behind. Sort of along the same vein as shipping the blue container reactor across the ocean and thru US customs with fully loaded reactors fully exposed and unsecured ON TOP of the container. He was busted and lazy - not paranoid.
I have no idea.
Think about all the different ways you can connect three heating coils to three phases available
(No, you don't have to connect all phases all the time)
And think about what this can do for the magnetic fields.
Also think about the fact that changing the connection configuration between dummy and active run can explain the large resistance drop between dummy and active runs.
You missed one improtant point. LENR distroys all matter that encloses it. Rossi has come up with a system that produces energy and keeps from falling apart. This has taken a huge amount of effort and time to come up with. Yes, anyone can come up with a system that melts down but to keep going for a year or more takes much time and effort to come up with.
Axil,
If he has, (which I don’t believe), he deserves all of the accolades humanity can thrust upon him.
If he hasn’t, (and it turns out he never has),
in your opinion what does he deserve?
My first boss out of college told me
“Never confuse activity with accomplishment”.
This is basically a restatement of an epigram due to Seneca
"Love of bustle is not industry"
This is basically a restatement of an epigram due to Seneca
"Love of bustle is not industry"
Bruce,
Never heard that, but wouldn’t be surprised,
My boss just “Americanized” it.
Earlier this year I was prepared to bet that Rossi would produce something that worked and got no takers.
I don't think the critics are any more certain now, despite what they write.
I will bet $100 against $1000 if you lose (as you are certain and I am not) that Rossi demonstrates a working SK reactor, with a COP >20, within six months. If there is not proof one way or the other the bet is off.
Any takers? Or should I assume you are not as certain as you make out?
Edit, Added COP
Adrian, you apparently are not versed in certain elements of logic. Out of curiosity, what would you consider to be proof that the e-cat does not work? I am sure many of us as well as numerous long-dead philosophers would be keen to hear your explanation of a negative existence proof.
You missed one improtant point. LENR distroys all matter that encloses it.
That is not even slightly true. You have an amazing imagination, and you make up stuff. That's fun, but it isn't science.
QuoteI will bet $100 against $1000 if you lose (as you are certain and I am not) that Rossi demonstrates a working SK reactor, with a COP >20, within six months. If there is not proof one way or the other the bet is off.
I'll happily take your money but there is one small issue: exactly how do we decide who wins the bet?
Display MoreEarlier this year I was prepared to bet that Rossi would produce something that worked and got no takers.
I don't think the critics are any more certain now, despite what they write.
I will bet $100 against $1000 if you lose (as you are certain and I am not) that Rossi demonstrates a working SK reactor, with a COP >20, within six months. If there is not proof one way or the other the bet is off.
Any takers? Or should I assume you are not as certain as you make out?
Edit, Added COP
No you didn’t Adrian,
You bet that he would build a plant.
Again,
What exactly is a “Working SK reactor”?
Some sock puppet saying it works and he’s making money?
interested observer & seven_of_twenty,
If a third party reports the SK is working in their plant, or a reputable newspaper/journal reports that it is, I win.
If either of the above reports it doesn't work, yo win.
If there are no reports the bet is off.
Even though you are certain the SK doesn't work and therefore cannot lose unless you are wrong, no one will take the bet because you are getting cold feet. You will always come up with a clause to avoid betting.
If a third party reports the SK is working in their plant, or a reputable newspaper/journal reports that it is, I win.
AA,
Make that a "credible" third party and someone may take you up on the offer. Not too sure about a newspaper report though. Much could go wrong with them as a reliable source.
If either of the above reports it doesn't work, yo win.
If there are no reports the bet is off.
Why would a reputable newspaper or journal publish a story that something that is universally believed to not work doesn't work, as expected?
It is like Astronomy magazine reporting that despite flat-earther claims, they have shown the earth is not flat.
But even beyond that, Rossi will never give them enough data to prove or disprove anything.
That is what he is best at, avoiding any traceable evidence. Why do you think he says this demo is not to show it works, but to show "industrialization" (which means nothing).
This bet has only one final possibility, that the bet is off due to no evidence, it is a waste of time.
Display Moreinterested observer & seven_of_twenty,
If a third party reports the SK is working in their plant, or a reputable newspaper/journal reports that it is, I win.
If either of the above reports it doesn't work, yo win.
If there are no reports the bet is off.
Even though you are certain the SK doesn't work and therefore cannot lose unless you are wrong, no one will take the bet because you are getting cold feet. You will always come up with a clause to avoid betting.
That is a mind knumbingly stupid bet,
and nothing different from your last one you proposed that no one took because you can’t lose.
The 3rd party is some Rossi Sock puppet and you know it.
The only way this works is that if a reputable laboratory, (Fermi, Argonne, Los Alamos, NASA, etc), does testing and determines
Energy Out > Energy In
that is in quantities that eliminate chemical energy.
Roseland67: Who needs a third party to verify the results when we have Rossi to tell them to us. As Adrian points out, who knows more about it than Rossi? 🤪
