Rossi vs. Darden developments [CASE CLOSED]

  • THH Yes, Rossi's chance of winning against IH is almost non-existent.


    My hope is that the countersuit will end up with Rossi paying some back to IH and that money can be directed by IH to "real researchers" in the field. A few million in the hands of people like Miley, Letts, Mizuno, Biberian, Swartz.... could work wonders.

    Dear Oldguy


    I quoted this in part. What I want is to ask you to try to tell in some detail:

    - wht will do the "real researchers" from your short list with the great money? That is what, in your opinion, is the Tao of LENR?

    I have the impression that actually you are a LENR professional, present on CMNS so you could ask the real researchers about their wishes- for a start

    "what will you do with a 3, 5, 10 million US$ LENR funding?

    Or yyou, in case you are still active?

    thanks,


    peter

  • I do not wish to play your game.


    I treat this as a doxing attempt to learn if I have access to CMNS and if so to post your question so you will learn who I am. If you have access then you can ask your own question.


    It is not my place to tell IH what they might do with any possible financial settlement and each researcher would have their own priority list. I think that role is actually Dewey’s (see the Deep River info in the court documents) since I understand his task is to search for researchers and patents for IH.


    But if I had the 10 million that Rossi was given, I would spread about 8M around to about 4 researchers allocated over about 4 years with the purpose of developing something that can be engineered to levels above 100 W or or better to 1kW or so. And I would hold about 2M for duplication, verification, and analysis.


    Perhaps IH can ask such questions at the next ICCF meeting when and if they host it. I think a workshop with where to go would be very interesting.

  • Rossi did not deliver then had the unmitigated audacity to pick a fight that he cannot finish.

    THH Yes, Rossi's chance of winning against IH is almost non-existent.

    However, since it is blindingly obvious to all except a few strange people here that Rossi has not a snowball's chance in hell of winning the $89M,


    Oh guys ! I see that you are so sure ! Are you expressing what you think is a fact or just a hope ?

    From my external point of view is "blindingly oblivious" that you are trying to form an opinion and a preconception about the trial so to influence the Jury members and/or keep investors quiet.

    But I think that Jury members will not read all your biased statements and will base their opinion only on documents.

    What I find really silly is that anyone that would eventually express an opinion in favor of Rossi here, would be immediately tagged as "planet Rossi indigenous" possibly living in a wild state and with reduced mental capacity: a stupid Troll with no brain.

    But that not real.

    People is much more clever then Mr. Weaver (an IH worker) think.

  • Dear Oldguy,


    What game? If you have reasons to hide, it is your own business. I take responsibility for everything i

    ask and assert-say. But tastes can be different


    All we can do si to wish IH success with their funding for LENR. LENR is great and there are many unknown possibilities.


    Your plan has to be taken in consideration

    and I will convey it to my readers with no comment. The researchers of your list will be proud. Do you want to add names?

    Going PdD or NiH, something else? Your favorite way?


    Do not fear I am only barking not biting


    peter

  • ele,


    Do you really, truly believe deep in your heart that Andrea Rossi has built a machine where Energy Out > Energy In?

    Remember that the issue in the Rossi vs Darden case (this thread) is not if Energy Out > Energy In but if Rossi has presented enough evidence against IH to unanimously convince a jury that IH is guilty intentional wrong doing.


    So far, Rossi has not delivered very much factual evidence at all. His typical response has been I don't have information or they must prove it. Yet it is he that must prove the case he brought against IH. I default to innocent till proven guilty.


    From my perspective I don't see that Rossi has proven his allegations against IH with a "preponderance of evidence". The fact that there are people here that doubt there was an agreed to start of a GPT, that the data is correct, and so on tells me that there is at a greater than 1 out of 6 chance that someone would doubt the guilt of IH. That is all it takes for Rossi's case attacking IH to fail.


    The counter suit is a different story.

  • From my perspective I don't see that Rossi has proven his allegations against IH with a "preponderance of evidence".


    Question: I think at this stage of the trial they're just getting the pleadings sorted out. One strategy at this stage of a trial might be to provide a minimum of evidence needed to get an allegation into the pleadings, so that the other party can be wrongfooted later on with further evidence. Even if we suspect that Rossi does not have the evidence to really substantiate his allegations at a later stage, is it possible that the behavior of his lawyers is still consistent with that kind of strategy, if such a strategy is ever employed?

  • IMHO, I think that the people with money do not deal with the researchers directly. They should first develop a small team of knowledgeable people to interact with those actually in the labs.


    Peter, you will not like this comment but- That was the failing of this Rossi situation. People in the field had great doubts about Rossi and would have advised different instrumentation, redundancy in all measures, different verification techniques (i.e. avoid phase change- or at least a heat exchanger to get away from steam measures, and powers more in the 1kW range )- live data feeds and so on.

    IH should have brought in the likes of Mike McK. or Ed S .... to examine the systems and measurements. People with lab experience.

    If Rossi would not allow for close external review then tough, no money.


    I could not help but notice when Woodford visited Rossi and others, they didn't bring a single technical guy. Just fund managers. Sorry to say, they got what the deserved. I only hope it was a lesson learned.


    What is lacking is technical oversight and material development.