Rossi vs. Darden developments [CASE CLOSED]

Quote from Roseland67

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

Science has nothing to do with believing.

I see evidence that indicates that Rossi reactors have a COP >> 1. I see also many stakeholders that do not like this fact for their mere economical interest.

Quote from interested observer

As for Rossi, he is unequivocally a fraud

Another man with sure ideas. You (and others) seem to have founded a new type of religion in which Rossi ( and Levi, and all others) are the Evil.

I hope that the Jury will consider only the real documents in the trial and not this interested chatting.

Quote from Malcolm Lear

Ele seems to be upset, thats for sure, and that writing style looks familiar.

I feel well. Did you think that we are relative ?

Quote from zorud

...ele has a hard time to accept, that his lawsuit seems to go south...

Is not my lawsuit. Is Rossi vs IH . If you are suggesting that I'm Rossi: ..... try again....

Quote from ele

Is not my lawsuit. Is Rossi vs IH . If you are suggesting that I'm Rossi: ..... try again....

I did not mention nor suggest that you are Rossi....so why do you seem to feel addressed by this?

Quote from Alan Smith

A new thread would be better. This has drifted a long way.

In the meantime, Mats Lewan has published (Feb 28th) a pretty much on-topic long read in his blog. It will be controversial for sure.

https://animpossibleinvention.com/blog/

If you look at Mats stated reasons, the main difference between him and many people here is that he has come to the conclusion that Rossi is honest. He takes that as fixed and fits other facts around it. He seems to give as his reason for this a conviction gained from personal contact. He adds the idea that many other people would otherwise have to be wrong/dishonest/etc - which I'd reckon is in part confirmation bias. I find this judgement of Mats extraordinary even given the fact that people can make bad misjudgments when it comes to character.

He makes another substantive point, which is that if the Report is correct the device works, if not Penon would have to be dishonest. I'd suggest an alternate possibility illuminated by another part of Mats blog, where he says that Penon signed off a Report on a previous test that somone else had written, without carefully reading it.

Given this is what Penon has previously done with Rossi, it seems plausible that the ERV report could similarly be signed. Whether this is dishonest or not I'm sure people will have opinions on, perhaps withholding these till we hear Penon's side of the story.

Notable is Mats lack of comment on the previous blog entry, one year ago, when he says that he will get independent opinion on the Lugano report vs TC comment controversy and publish the results. Lack of any followup here is telling both of the facts and Mats approach to journalism on this issue.

Also worth noting that mats has delayed this blog entry for 4 months, publishing only now (look at the date at the bottom).

Quote from THHuxleynew

He makes another substantive point, which is that if the Report is correct the device works, if not Penon would have to be dishonest.

That stands to reason. In my opinion the report cannot be correct. The pressure could not have been 0.0 bar and the other readings could not be so consistent. Therefore the device cannot work. Therefore Penon was dishonest.

Quote from THHuxleynew

I'd suggest an alternate possibility illuminated by another part of Mats blog, where he says that Penon signed off a Report on a previous test that somone else had written, without carefully reading it.

That would be dishonest. Signing something without carefully reading it is dishonest. A licensed professional doctor or engineer who does that will have his license revoked.

(So, I do not understand why call this an alternate possibility. It looks like the same thing.)

Quote from JedRothwell

Signing something without carefully reading it is dishonest. A licensed professional doctor or engineer who does that will have his license revoked.

(So, I do not understand why call this an alternate possibility. It looks like the same thing.)

I realise many will argue that, and have some sympathy with that view. But consider: Mats has directly stated that Penon did this 4 years ago. And he has not it seems yet had his license revoked - though I'm not clear exactly what license he possesses.

Mats information presumably came from RossiSays, and may be wrong. That does not help Penon since the previous report was egregiously bad, so actually Mats description of how it was signed by Penon is plausible. But, whatever, Penon cannot be trusted as ERV because either incompetent or what you consider dishonest.

There is I suppose one final possibility, which is that Penon did not sign the earlier report. And possibly did not sign the current one. But, in that case, Penon's silence is a form of dishonesty but much less direct. No doubt were these fraudulently signed reports to be used in fraud, and Penon aware of this, he would be an accomplice. Otherwise is it necessary to have a row with somone who uses one's name incorrectly? It is certainly proper professional practice to do so.

On balance, if I had to say what was likely, i'd reckon probably Penon knew well he was putting his name to (or Rossi was putting his name to) a report that he could not properly vouch for, except by relying on Rossi. Rather like Mats.

Did anyone ever replicate the early boot-shaped device? Seems like worth testing. I can see it accidentally becoming a pipe bomb if done poorly, though.

Quote from monty

I didnt read anything from Dewey the last couple of days.

Does anyone know why he is silent recently? I guess it can't be because he aint got nothing to say...

I am guessing (in jest) that he is on the Miami beach getting some rays before the big site visit tomorrow.

I would love to get a look at the site.

Tour day in Doral

@monty, Dewey went quiet after it was suggested Penon and Cures were one and the same person and a call to Dewey was made to confirm or deny. Maybe just coincidence though.

And is there a photo of Penon?

Quote from Malcolm Lear

And is there a photo of Penon?

So far not.

But Penon would be younger than the DF we have (supposedly) seen.

Edit: Found a picture of Penon. He is definitely not the DF from the Ecat test photos.

Quote from THHuxleynew

But consider: Mats has directly stated that Penon did this 4 years ago. And he has not it seems yet had his license revoked - though I'm not clear exactly what license he possesses.

I do not think he has any license. I believe he is a scientist, not a professional engineer. However, the authorities seldom revoke a license unless:

1. The licensed professional violates professional rules.

2. That results in a bad outcome.

3. The authorities find out about it.

Suppose Penon has a license in Italy. If I.H. sues him and wins, I suppose the Italian authorities might hear about it and revoke his license, but that hasn't happened yet.

In the U.S. it can take a long time and many abuses before they revoke a medical license. On the other hand, when licensed engineer or an architect screws up, and a building falls down, they are often tossed out of the profession quickly. When a commercial airline pilot shows up at the gate drunk, the FAA revokes his license immediately, for life. (My office happens to be at the airport, and I often chat with pilots.)

Doc. 158 and its attachment now on the docket:

Quote from barty

Dewey Weaver

How went the site visit yesterday? Any news?

I think the site visit is today Mar 3

post corrected-

oops, my mistake, I checked and it was yesterday 2nd

Been busy - site visit was yesterday. A long combative day between the lawyers but it went well and our experts have all they need to finish out their reports.

Suddenly - folks cannot remember how to speak English - fascinating.