Rossi vs. Darden developments [CASE CLOSED]

Quote from axil

The best way to convince a jury that your system works is to prove it in public before the trial begins. Delaying proof of performance just improves the case for the defence.

Every time Rossi made a public test, there always been someone who considered that test was not accurate enough, someone who thought the test could have been done in a better way.

If you want to prepare a proper test, you have to choose carefully every detail, especially if you are disclosing to the world a new and revolutionary kind of object. How could you do everything in the right way if you are spending most of your time with an attorney?

Now Rossi is trying to win a battle, and I think he can't do it in the best way if he has to organize the QuarkX launch. His choice is the best one.

Quote from oldguy

That is: what evidence is offered that a unit actually fulfilled the requirements? It seems to me that a single unit had to deliver the level of output for the entire 350 days and not just a series of individuals.

The Doral test was the first one of that kind even for Rossi.

As far as I know he had never tested a single Hotcat for such a long time, so he choose to use many of them in order to ensure a continuous heat production. It doesn't seems to me such a strange thing......

Quote from LENR Calender

Redundancy seems like a very plausible explanation.

I wouldn't put all my marbles on exhibit 5, question #3 if I was IH.

I agree with you. Exhibit 5 is just a list of questions addressed to Penon. We don't know his answers, so why should we consider it an important evidence? What do those questions prove? Maybe there are suited answers for every kind of doubt. For example, some data may be average values, and 0 pressure could mean "0.0 more than a fixed value". We haven't the last report of the ERV on our hands, therefore we can just speculate about that. Regarding redundancy, it is a confirmed condition: we can check this if we read this old ECW page:

http://www.e-catworld.com/2015…1-mw-e-cat-plant-emerges/

Quote

"We have in the same container two sections, one with the small E-Cats and one with the 4 Tigers, each section with a power of 1 MW. The strategy consists in using the 4 tigers, maintaining as a reserve the small E-Cats. [...] I try not to consume the reserves, to maintain them intact in case of serious failure of one or more “Tigers”. For short reparations it is not necessary to turn on the reserve. That is my safety boat if the ship sinks. This is the strategy. As a consequence of this strategy, we do not use the reserve together with the fighting “division”. We turned it on for several days at the beginning of the test, just to check it working, then turned it off and used only the 4 x 250".

SSC - what does this say about the 1MW unit providing 24/7 factory heating claims in your WIPO, IT and USPTO patent filings from the Focardi days?

Quote

Now Rossi is trying to win a battle, and I think he can't do it in the best way if he has to organize the QuarkX launch. His choice is the best one.

I'm with AxilAxill in this matter (as I already said before). The demonstration of Quark-X reactor may be actually quite simple, as it's miniature device running at high temperature with high COP.

So its demonstration should be all very clean, simple and transparent at open air. No complex devices, exact but cryptic water calorimetry and similar BS - just show for crowds.

Radiation detectors and many cameras from multiple angles and distance, everything should be streamed to the web and saved for later analysis by public.

Just let it glow like the light-bulb connected to miniature energy source separated from any possible background fields and hidden sources of energy on the transparent desk under the transparent cover.

Demonstrate few similar devices at the same moment for to avoid the doubts and shame at the case of premature failure of some of them.

Everyone can calculate himself, how high the thermal radiative flux of hot body of known dimensions can be and how much of energy can be supplied by chemical battery. This disproportion should be quite apparent and out of any doubts thinkable.

If the Quark-X device produces some radiation or even glow at distance, the better.

Once it will stop running, then its radiation would disappear and everyone can check it - the science doesn't know any nuclear reactor of the similar size, which would behave in the same way.

Quote from Dewey Weaver

SSC - what does this say about the 1MW unit providing 24/7 factory heating claims in your WIPO, IT and USPTO patent filings from the Focardi days?

Dewey, you believe SSC is Rossi?

IHFB - not sure. Your thoughts?

While we're at it, do you have thoughts on Rossi's patent claims to a 1MW unit heating an Italian factory on a long term 24/7 basis in two issued and one pending patent filings?

It seems that Paradigmnoia accurately located the old blue box at 35.893323° -78.749139°.

All rather sad seeing it neglected outside next to a rubbish bin without any obvious security. It also seems to have some of the reactors attached to the roof, so if anyone is in the area might be worth a look. Images were taken in April last year.

spoliation of evidence?

https://www.floridabar.org/div…FA2F10B8E85256ADB005D6155

http://www.butler.legal/recent…n-floridas-spoliation-law

This improper destruction of evidence is referred to as “spoliation.” Common examples of spoliation include purging documents or records, failing to preserve video surveillance footage, disposing of dangerous objects, and prematurely repairing damaged structures without opportunity for inspection. A party’s failure to preserve evidence can be extremely prejudicial in personal injury cases because the plaintiff, who bears the burden of proof, may not be able to prove their case without certain evidence.

Quote

This is the hoped smoking gun, an unquestionable evidence that it works.

Not surprisingly without catalyst whole the plant is just priceless junk.

Quote from SSC

I agree with you. Exhibit 5 is just a list of questions addressed to Penon. We don't know his answers, so why should we consider it an important evidence?

Rossi and Penon never answered. Rossi filed a lawsuit instead of answering. That is what the lawsuit paper say.

It is important evidence because the questions themselves reveal the test to be ludicrous farce that could never work.

If Rossi had provided satisfactory answers, I.H. would have paid him, and there would be no lawsuit.

Not junk, evidence. If Rossi destroys it, he will be in loads of trouble.

There would be a wealth of evidence in that container such as pipe placement.

Also the plant ,which would include the catalyst, is IH's unless otherwise ordered by the court.

priceless junk your use of priceless and junk seem to indicate you are not a native English speaker. It is priceless, that means worth so much you cannot put a price on it. It is not junk in the least. It is very valuable for the defense. Also do you have any idea how much all those pumps, sensors, computer boards are worth?

This is the old blue box, not the new red one that hopefully is still under lock and key

This is beside the original IH lab in NC. R shipped it from Italy with loaded reactors on top of the shipping container. Wondered for a while why in the world the most secret formula / tradesecret would be allowed to ride on a cargo ship and enter US customs with loaded reactors on top. Rossi never fired it up in NC. It is still in the possession of IH. The side picture that Para somehow possesses is from an adjacent property and is private property (deep into the private property actually).