Rossi vs. Darden developments [CASE CLOSED]

  • I cannot imagine a stronger "proven negative" than Exhibit 5. If that does not convince you the results are garbage, nothing will.


    Jed, THHuxley agrees with you that Exhibit 5 is convincing that the measurements are garbage. That doesn't automatically mean that there was zero excess heat.


    Since the results are garbage, we can't know for sure that there was zero excess heat.


    For me personally, I'm highly skeptical that there was any excess heat, and it seems highly likely to me that Rossi is just a con man faking everything. But I can't be absolutely sure (ironically) because all I know for sure is that his data is garbage (and that he's a liar). THH would likely state, like me, that if you (Jed) or any other truly independent and competent engineer were given $20,000 to measure the COP and came up with no excess heat, that would convince me beyond any doubt that the E-Cat has not excess heat.


    Since that hasn't happened yet, there is some slim possibility that there is some small effect despite Rossi's garbage measurements and con-man ways.

  • It's not either exhibit 5 is correct or it's a lie.


    First, of course the exhibit is correct in that Murray should be asking those questions.


    Then, I don't think there are any lies in there. Just Murray trying to understand what's going on.


    Finally, it is likely that at least some of those concerns could have been dispelled if Penon had answered.


    There are 5 observations in the e-mail.


    #5 could be a mistake if Murray got the pipe diameter wrong.


    #1 has the potential to be proven wrong. Specifically the part about minimum operational flow rate being a major issue needs to be confirmed. Murray apparently has a point, but it needs to be tested. What if Penon's reply was that they calibrated the device at that flow and were satisfied with it?


    #2 I'd like to see an explanation from Penon as to why the flow was written down as 36m3/day for a month. Did Penon pull a Parkhomov cut and paste? Did Fabiani's control system pull a masterpiece?


    What about the rest of the year? Did it then vary from day to day?


    # 3 is about the number of units varying while keeping the same output. I submit that perhaps there was some redundancy in the system.


    #4 I don't really understand.



    So no, no lies. Not necessarily 100% correct either. I'm more concerned that Penon came only once in a blue moon (was it once a month in the contract?) and ended up just collecting data fed by Rossi.

  • # 3 is about the number of units varying while keeping the same output. I submit that perhaps there was some redundancy in the system.


    LC,


    Nice post. As to your quote; yes, there was redundancy...the older 1MW composed of 51 Ecats. Crowded in that warehouse :) . Here is what Murray said about the back-ups:


    "Also, all 51 of the smaller units were disabled."

  • Thanks for the clarification.


    We should probably remove the older 51 cats from the equation then. I understand Rossi said he stopped using those altogether at some point. Murray doesn't seem to have been given that info. Therefore he includes those in his question, and compares October unit counts to the 111 units at the beginning of the 1 year run.


    Rossi would have then been running 31 out of 64 units on October 13. Then, 43 out of 64 units in February.


    Redundancy seems like a very plausible explanation.


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

  • Since the results are garbage, we can't know for sure that there was zero excess heat.

    The results are garbage, therefore Rossi has lost all credibility. It is as if he claimed he made a neutron detector with a wet mop and a can of Sterno. He has no business ever making any other claim about anything.



  • So which if any of the units actually functioned for 350+ days and which did not? And did the ones that were running for 340 days the ones that actually achieved COP of 6. It seems like only there combined output was measured and there would be no way to tell if an actual unit functioned for the required length of time for the required level of output and not just a bunch of rotating various parts in and out.


    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. It would be like saying I can have device that can operate for so long at a given level to produce heat and I just keep putting in lighted matches a few at a time. I think the intent of the test was to show that the heat was long lived so it ruled out chemistry and such. If you keep turning things off and doing who knows what to them and then replacing them, Who knows:?


    I guess I am missing something.


    Theseus's paradox, is a thought experiment that raises the question of whether an object that has had all of its components replaced remains fundamentally the same object. Like saying I have the axe that Washington cut down the cherry tree with. It just has had 10 new handles and 5 new axe blades replaced over the years. Do you really have the axe or not.

  • We should probably remove the older 51 cats from the equation then. I understand Rossi said he stopped using those altogether at some point. Murray doesn't seem to have been given that info. Therefore he includes those in his question, and compares October unit counts to the 111 units at the beginning of the 1 year run.


    Thx LC, but this totally confuses me.

  • I was under the impression that the 51 small modules were not used in the test. Supposedly they were fired up some time near the beginning to verify that they were functioning, then turned and left off. These were the original (more or less) modules from inside the blue Plant.


    The 64 modules are the 4 Tigers, 16 reactors in each Tiger. These seem to have begun their lives on the roof of the old Plant, and were moved inside, requiring the extended length red container in order to fit the Tigers and the 51 smaller modules.


  • I'd agree with this. There is no way that this initial evidence can be definitive, it is not meant to be without Discovery and testing in Court. However we have heard nothing in rebuttal from Rossi in his answer. He needs to give some indication of his arguments in order for IH to have a fair shot at discovery. And he is giving nothing of substance here which means i guess there is nothing of substance. The Court will not like him introducing whole new lines of argument at a later date - if i read this correctly. Wish Abd were here...


    Which means: this evidence is damning, because not answered.


    There is also a whole lot of other evidence that points so strongly in the direction of this test being a charade that this is proven beyond reasonable doubt, even though any one piece of evidence, as this, can always be argued around.

  • 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.

  • 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......

  • 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".

  • 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.

  • If the Quark-X device produces


    People, this demo is not going to happen. It never does....


    Rossi himself has stated that the Quark X produces heat, direct electricity, light and even thrust.


    Forget the heat and the light. Produce electricity and loop it back for self sustain mode... Let it run... ba da bing! All the proof you need.


    But is it not interesting how Rossi NEVER mentions the direct electricity production any more and the followers NEVER hold him to his claims!

    Just like the 13 plants sold, at least (3) satisfied customers, robot factories, military consultants, aerospace consultants or not ONE person going

    public to support him. (Other than one post by Fabiani and we now know who he was working for!


    So do the test with direct electricity production. Simple testing and easy!

    This will not be done however due to "safety reasons"! Even though a Quark is only pencil sized, it is an excuse that Rossi will give and his supporters will accept without question. His detractors will point out this obvious side step and nothing will be changed.


    This has become a religion. The believers versus the non-believers. Just like religion, you will occasionally get a believer who finally gives up on the rhetoric and jumps ship. (Me for example) On an even rarer occasion, a non-believer will "see the light" (pun intended) and jump on board. Most believers will continue believing regardless of the facts provided.


    From my opinion, based upon the 5 years of facts (or even as important, lack of facts) that have came out, Rossi has no credibility. It would be simple and easy to prove if the eCat works, but Rossi is not going to do the simple and easy route. He will make claims about IP and some people will believe him others not.


    The number of people who are staying onboard the ship are getting smaller every day, yet some will stay and go down with the ship. There is nothing we can say that will convince them otherwise. I for one am going to quit trying. There is no need. They have a need to believe and will do so regardless.


    What happened to Engineer48? What happened to Sifferkol and his certainty that JMP was a real customer and his many other "Factual posts"? Why is there NO long term, known entities that have stayed in support of Rossi. None! (Perhaps Mr. Lewan is the one exception) There are very good reasons why, it is just that some cannot admit it.


    It has become a religion.... "faith is the things hoped for, the substance of things not seen...."

  • 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.

  • Great, beautiful photos. The 1MW Plant seems very close to its natural environment (the bin). ;)

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

    JoNP means Journal of Null-Physics (the house of hoax,trickery, junk and psychopathological science).

    The post was edited 2 times, last by Henry ().

  • 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?

  • Quote



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


    Oh right, Rossi built his masterpiece and then leave it close to the rubbish (under the rain) because without the alleged catalyst, even if thousands of USD of hardware are still inside.
    A thought quite logic. :-D

    JoNP means Journal of Null-Physics (the house of hoax,trickery, junk and psychopathological science).

    The post was edited 1 time, last by Henry ().

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

    I have to ask!

    Where was this photo found and is the locatoin in Doral Fl.? How did Paradigmnoia come across it?


    Or Is this location in NC? I thought the plant was moved to Florida. I have read the plant was under lock and key in the Doral address and that

    the year long test plant had both the "Tiger" reactors and the original 100+ reactor in it as backup.


    I would appreciate the thoughts on what this photo is, where it is located and how the photo was located. The top view photo could have been

    Google Earth, but it appears the side view would have had to been a regular photograph. Did someone visit Raleigh and snap a few photos?

  • Quote

    Where was this photo found and is the locatoin in Doral Fl.?


    35.893323° -78.749139° it seems a place in North Carolina, not in Florida.



    JoNP means Journal of Null-Physics (the house of hoax,trickery, junk and psychopathological science).

  • 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).

  • This is beside the original IH lab in NC

    Thank you for the info!

    Can you (or anyone else) comment as to whether the "backup reactors" in the red one year test container where from this "original" plant or were they a "second generation"? The reactors supposedly tested were nicknamed "Tigers" to my understanding and were significantly different than the design in the blue container. Did Rossi build a intermediary type of reactor?


    Not that this lends or takes away anything about the reactors working, I am just curious how much effort Rossi put into building stuff! :/


    Since Rossi most clearly stated that the original blue plant worked and often stated was ready for production, it is quite interesting that it is left "rusting" outdoors! He must not have thought it worth much! Such a revolutionary piece of equipment left to decay? That in itself ought to tell people that the thing did not work. No company, (IH or Rossi) would leave the "first cold fusion plant" in history out in the junk pile!


    P.S. "deep into private property"... someone has done a little sleuthing! impressive!  :)