Rossi vs. Darden developments [CASE CLOSED]

  • If it was obvious [the data was fake]...why has nobody seen it in 2015?

    They did see it! Everyone who looked at it saw that it was fake, including me.

    FAKE DATA has to be explained for all the paraameters.

    Say flow was fake, but was then a real flow? Not 1500kg/h

    but say 10kg/, or not flow at all?

    I estimate the real flow was probably around 430 kg/h, based on the temperature rise, input power, and likely pressure. That is 3 or 4 times lower than the numbers recorded for the flow meter. These were fake numbers, since they were the same every day for weeks, which is impossible.

    On days when the machine was turned off, there was no flow at all, although it is recorded at 1500 kg/h. Obviously that too was fake. Even you will probably realize that when the machine is turned off, the flow rate is zero.

    The pipes according to Jed were half full, what was the non-fake flow then?

    The pipes under pressure from the heat exchanger with a slow flow were full. Pipes below the heat exchanger were open to the air, in the gravity return. They were partially empty. Look at any fountain and you will see how that works. The schematic from Rossi shows the flow meter was installed in the gravity return. You don't believe that, but that is what it shows.

    Temperature was not 103 c but how much?

    Probably around 103 deg C. It was under some pressure from the heat exchanger, so it was liquid water, not steam.

    Since there was no steam, and the flow rate was far lower than recorded, there was no excess heat.

  • Just a quick question I appreciate you think it doesn't work but do you think or even better know maybe if it is a steam condensor circuit with a 300kWh/day supply or a water circuit with the same power supply or something else?

    I do not understand this question.

    Edit: I don't see how a steam condensor circuit with this power supply and no excess heat could produce enough condensate to even move the flow meter even if wrongly placed let alone give such a high reading

    There was no steam. The radiator (heat exchanger) must have produced some back pressure. Even with a slight increase in pressure, at 103 deg C the fluid would be water, not steam. See:…ressure-boiling-point.pdf

    Do you know how much condensate would be produced per second from this input power?

    I do not see how there could be any steam or condensate.

  • with yur imagined data

    Rossi's data! His data, not mine. He uploaded it to the court papers. Have you even looked at it?

    . . . have you demonstrated or can you COP<1 that is zero excess heat. Show me please the calculations, OK?

    I just did. The methods are dead simple. Here:

    Rossi's data shows the input power ~11 kW. However, he told Lewan and others it was 20 kW. So let's go with 20 kW.

    Rossi often said the temperature in the reservoir was 60°C. Sometimes he said it was 69°C. Let's go with 60°C.

    The temperature of the water coming out of the reactor was 103°C.

    Okay, so the temperature rose about 43°C.

    Observers told me the flow meter was off by about a factor of 4, because it was the wrong kind of flow meter and it was sitting in a half-empty pipe. (They probably measured the flow themselves, but I did not hear the details.)

    Okay, so assuming there was no excess heat, and working backwards, 20 kW is 4762 calories per second. The temperature rose 43°C, meaning the flow must have been 4762/43 = 111 g/s which is ~400 kg/hour. That's about 3.8 times less than the pretend flow rate numbers in the log. Those numbers could not possibly be right -- because they show a giant flow rate on days when the machine was turned off, and because the pumps could not produce that much flow. As I said, observers estimate the flow rate was wrong by roughly a factor of 4.

    That adds up nicely.

  • Very plausible scenario JedRothwell. Now the "customer" could come out and state that they received 3600 Kg/d of steam and IH would have no choice but to pay $89M to Rossi IMO. It would be a slam-dunk case. But for some reason the customer continues to hide here. Maybe Rossi is going for 3x the damages? Of course it's quite likely that there is no customer in which case Rossi has perpetrated a massive fraud. Given this, why would anybody believe anything Rossi has done?

    It boggles my mind that people still believe what Rossi says. For instance Mats Lewan continues to believe in Rossi's technology:…er-interviews-mats-lewan/ Does anybody know if Mats Lewan has any Rossi E-Cat derived investments (besides his book)? His opinion would be far more credible for me if he can make statement clarifying this releationship.

  • Now the "customer" could come out and state that they received 3600 Kg/d of steam and IH would have no choice but to pay $89M to Rossi IMO.

    Well, the customer "stating" this would not be enough. They would have to show a great deal of documented proof such as invoices, employee records and records of sales to their customers. They would have to explain why they needed small sums of money from Rossi to pay routine expenses. They would have to answer many technical questions from experts, such as how they managed to use all that heat, in what sort of industrial process, why they did not heat up the building, and how they operated without people in the production area, and without noise. They would have to explain how they managed to use 1 MW of process heat with only ~4 kW of machinery.

    The customer would need a 1-MW capacity cooling tower outside the building, like the one you see in the photo on p. 4 of this brochure, where it says "Ready to use in an instant."

    I think they would need something the size of the OCT01 model shown on the next page. No one saw anything like that outside the facility. I do not see how they could magically hide it. You can't put it inside the building.

    All in all, I think it is out of the question.

    Rossi claims "the customer" does not want to describe their secret industrial process. It turns out the customer is Rossi and his lawyer. They are the owners and the only employees of the company. So if he wants the money, he -- the company, that is -- better change that policy and describe the process in enough detail to convince people it is real.

    Needless to say, that is all nonsense, as anyone who does not live on Planet Rossi can see.

  • Peter M, " Now the "customer" could come out and state that they received 3600 Kg/d of steam and IH would have no choice but to pay $89M to Rossi IMO"

    Not exactly. Remember the legal case is not about if and how much heat was generated but if the agreements were kept. There is a matter of signed agreed start times, approval of work, if the ERV actually measured the heated flow out of the device as per agreement, if the work in FL was even the GPT and so on. It is about the legal conditions and not so much about delivery of power.

    The case is not about if LENR is real or not but if Rossi played by the rules.

  • .....For instance Mats Lewan continues to believe in Rossi's technology.......

    This is one of the most intriguing chapters of this whole drama. Lewan has an education. He has been involved in the story for a long time. He has seen all the

    promises and claims over the past 5 years and seen that none of them have met with any type of satisfactory confirmation. An yet, he still has not jumped ship.

    It is amazing. He either has been completely blinded and is not seeing clearly, he is not as "educated" as I assumed or I guess there is an extremely slight chance that he is right!

    But then Jim Jones once brought about the death of 950 people! Either by convincing some to kill others or convincing some to commit suicide. Some people can be VERY persuasive and some people can be completely taken in! :(

  • Mats role here is indeed psychologically interesting. I think, having invested all that Alan said, and being chose personally (I guess) to some of the actors, he is just incapable of seeing the strong negative evidence for what it is. He promised, six months ago, to get a definitive independent ruling on the argument between TC and Levi vs Lugano. Anyone seen that? And, he is on record as stating that it is bettwe to back Rossi even if at low probablility because the harm being wrong that way round is much less than the harm done not backing Rossi, if Rossi turns out to have something. This, Mats claims, justifies bending the truth (at least that was implicit).

  • I am sure he does not. His investment has been something far more valuable than mere money, Time, reputation, career. That is quite enough I think.

    I'd like to hear it from himself personally. I once asked MFMP if they had any associations with IH and they promptly disclosed they had none. Not too hard and given Mats comments of late I am wondering a bit about his objectivity.

    I did buy and read his book. I thought his title, An Impossible Invention, was quite clever because it would apply no matter which way this thing went.

  • Jed,

    If a company with the credibility like Johnson Matthey (purely used as an example) contacted IH and said, we can vouch for the 1MW plant and are prepared to do so in court, I think IH would probably change their tune. Yes, they may well ask for invoices etc but my point is this could have been very easily cleared up by the customer compared to long, expensive, protracted legal battle we are seeing.

  • In which case why don't you ask him yourself? Although I personally would find such a request impertinent at least.

    I am! And as a journalist whose integrity is everything, I don't think he would have a probem with the question. He may have already addressed this before but if not I am a bit surprised.

  • If a company with the credibility like Johnson Matthey (purely used as an example) contacted IH and said, we can vouch for the 1MW plant and are prepared to do so in court, I think IH would probably change their tune.

    Perhaps they would. I would take it seriously and listen to what J.M. has to say in that situation. But there is overwhelming physical proof that there was no heat, so before they pay anything, they would have to conduct a real, independent test from scratch, and it would have to show irrefutable proof of excess heat. It would be insane for I.H. to pay $89 million just because someone from J.M. says something that might be construed as evidence in favor of the claim. Not when they have a mountain of experimental proof that the claim is fraud. Physical evidence outweighs testimony.

    Anyway, your scenario is so far-fetched I don't take it seriously. It is an interesting hypothetical, but it has no relevance to the real world. There is not the slightest chance J.M. or any other company produced anything in the factory. We know for a fact that the pretend company was a shell owned by Rossi and his lawyer, that had no income, no capital, and conducted no business. Rossi himself provided proof of that in the court papers. By accident, I suppose.

  • Doc. 137, a notice of attorney hearing, now on the docket.

    This was filed by Rossi's attorney, Annesser. The hearing is Thursday February 23, 2017 at 3:00 p.m.

    The purpose of the hearing is to:

    1. Address objections by Rossi to IH's privilege assertions for a certain document provided by IH , and
    2. Demand information regarding IH's liability insurance company and policy limits, which must be provided (to Rossi as claimant) under FL state law (or if self insured, information stating such).

    (not much to see here)

    Edited 2 times, last by sigmoidal ().

  • Observers told me the flow meter was off by about a factor of 4, because it was the wrong kind of flow meter and it was sitting in a half-empty pipe. (They probably measured the flow themselves, but I did not hear the details.)

    So this is what it boils down to. Some observers told you something about the flow meter, and you believe them. You have no personal knowledge. You didn't actually see the half empty gravity-fed pipe in which the wrong kind of flow meter was installed, did you? You have seen no photographic evidence of this, have you? There seems to be a likelihood that maybe you have been misled before by surrogates of IH, simply by looking at post history evidence on this forum. Is it possible that you are being misled on the flow meter? What about the DN40 exit pipe? Do you believe that one?

Subscribe to our newsletter

It's sent once a month, you can unsubscribe at anytime!

View archive of previous newsletters

* indicates required

Your email address will be used to send you email newsletters only. See our Privacy Policy for more information.

Our Partners

Supporting researchers for over 20 years
Want to Advertise or Sponsor LENR Forum?
CLICK HERE to contact us.