Rossi vs. Darden developments [CASE CLOSED]

Quote from Pjotr

In the link above:

"86. Rossi, on behalf of Leonardo, refused to grant Joseph Murray (“Murray”), an Industrial Heat employee, access to the Doral Facility in July 2015. Johnson, on behalf of J.M. Products, complied with and enforced this refusal."

Darden in Sep 27, 2015 interview:

"Q: So you licensed the technology of Andrea Rossi, an Italian scientist and entrepreneur who’s been having some success with cold fusion.

A: That’s right. Rossi's was one of the first investments we made. We’ve been seeing the creation of isotopes and energy releases at relatively low temperatures—1,000 degrees centigrade, which could be a sign that fusion has occurred. We have sponsored tests and more research for Rossi’s work. A group of Swedish scientists tested the technology, and they got good results. A number of other people say they are also getting positive results but these haven’t been confirmed. A Russian scientist, for example claims to have replicated Rossi’s work in Switzerland and got excess heat. That’s a good sign.

Q: So you’re optimistic?

A: Yes, In fact, Rossi was awarded an important U.S. patent recently, which is part of what we licensed, covering the use of nickel, platinum or palladium powders, as well as other components, in his heat-producing device. This is one of very few LENR-related patents to date."

http://fortune.com/2015/09/27/…-energy-nuclear-reaction/
------------------------------------------

My side of this story: I had no trust in Rossi or his tech before that Darden interview. I had only done some cursory following of LENR. But because of that interview I've invested something like 50 hours of my precious free time reading posts and articles posted at E-Cat World and LENR Forum. In the course of that activity there has been an immense exposure to greed, hatred and delusion. And I'm a Buddhist!

I hold Mr. Darden and his Sep 27 2015 "optimistic" statements, IMO clearly misleading at that time, responsible for my suffering.

50 hours x 40 USD/h precious free time = 2000 USD
compensation for psychological trauma = 3000 USD

Where should I send my 5000 USD bill?

Display More

So: you could reckon $2000 of your time and some psychological trauma a small price to pay for you learning the first law of investment: it is risky! Venture Capital investment is even more risky than most. IH was not looking for money from casual investors: their investors would be sophisticated and well aware of the high risks.

ECat World is censored - you would not have got both sides of the argument.I was banned from posting there, for example. But this place has never been that and you must have read the voices here arguing against Rossi? Your judgement - not Darden's.

As a Buddhist you would surely have benefited from the chance to strengthen your mental discipline against such adverse influences...

Quote from Paradigmnoia

Certainly no visitors have remarked upon a loud fan blowing large volumes of hot air out of the front of the building, only 3 or 4 m from the front door.

Have they been asked? I can't see in any of the depositions where anybody was asked this question. Maybe those parts of the depositions have been hidden from us, as we only get a few selective parts of them.

One thing is for sure. If there was a large fan blowing out hot air out of an open window, more than one visitor would have noticed. This will easily be resolved by putting a few people up on the stand and asking them what they heard and saw in front of the Doral location.

Quote from Paradigmnoia

There are many birds-eye angled air photos, well-dated.

And they are useless (at least indeterminate) for their oblique views.

Quote from IH Fanboy

Have they been asked? I can't see in any of the depositions where anybody was asked this question. Maybe those parts of the depositions have been hidden from us, as we only get a few selective parts of them.

One thing is for sure. If there was a large fan blowing out hot air out of an open window, more than one visitor would have noticed. This will easily be resolved by putting a few people up on the stand and asking them what they heard and saw in front of the Doral location.

I think you have to be a bit strange to believe that this second floor heat exchanger actually existed. Ever. I take the point that as with many things in this story, where evidence is spoliated and Rossi comes up with ever more ingenious stories, proof is hard to come by.

In this case maybe you could just go on probability?

• Why is there no evidence for its existence. At all. Other than a RossiSays?
• Why did Rossi claim on blogs ages ago that the 1MW did not heat up his warehouse due to its going into an endothermic process? (BTW this is an idea he clearly got from blogs, and is itself rubbish)?

But, if the heat exchanger was as Rossi claims, then it would not dissipate anything like 1MW. Rossi (sorry, I mean Wong with an obscure Italian reference to the critical heat transfer coefficient) got it wrong. That cannot be disputed by anyone with a computer on the internet, ability to read Wong's report, and a calculator.

So the matter is unimportant. We already know that Rossi is duplicitous.

Quote from IH Fanboy

Have they been asked? I can't see in any of the depositions where anybody was asked this question. Maybe those parts of the depositions have been hidden from us, as we only get a few selective parts of them.

One thing is for sure. If there was a large fan blowing out hot air out of an open window, more than one visitor would have noticed. This will easily be resolved by putting a few people up on the stand and asking them what they heard and saw in front of the Doral location.

I would think that the landlord would be the one to ask. Most sites have landlords and/or security guard types that check the buildings (after all he was there for a year+). And most of the landlords of rented industrial sites even check to make sure that their structures have not been altered without approval. I would think that removing windows would not go unnoticed by the landlord.

Quote from THHuxleynew

I think you have to be a bit strange to believe that this second floor heat exchanger actually existed. Ever.

I think you are a bit strange for putting words in my mouth. Did you not read my comment? I said: "Now, let me be clear: I do not know whether the heat exchanger ever existed or not."

It is you (and others here) who have already formed a conclusion that the heat exchanger did not exist, and on flimsy (non-admissible) evidence.

Quote

I take the point that as with many things in this story, where
evidence is spoliated and Rossi comes up with ever more ingenious
stories, proof is hard to come by.

In this case maybe you could just go on probability?

• Why is there no evidence for its existence. At all. Other than a RossiSays?

Why is there no evidence for the flow meter being misplaced, other than JedSays? This one issue is probably the most important question to be resolved in this dispute. Jed claims for a fact that the return pipe was only half full and repeatedly points to Murray's deposition as proof. But Murray, when asked whether the flow meter was above or below the pipe inlet, stumbled on his language, equivocated, and then eventually said he didn't know. Do you really think Murray didn't know the answer to this question after his careful study of the layout, supposedly taking pictures and measurements, and then trying to reconstruct and simulate it all in a separate location?

Quote

Why did Rossi claim on blogs ages ago that the 1MW did not heat up
his warehouse due to its going into an endothermic process? (BTW this is
an idea he clearly got from blogs, and is itself rubbish)?

But, if the heat exchanger was as Rossi claims, then it would not dissipate anything like 1MW. Rossi (sorry, I mean Wong with an obscure Italian reference to the critical heat transfer coefficient) got it wrong. That cannot be disputed by anyone with a computer on the internet, ability to read Wong's report, and a calculator.

So the matter is unimportant. We already know that Rossi is duplicitous.

Do you have proof that no endothermic process was taking place? You say Wong, an expert in the matter, got it wrong. IH Fanboys (except this one) have a history of dismissing experts who disagree with them, but uplifting experts that agree with them to near god-like status.

Quote

It is you (and others here) who have already formed a conclusion that the heat exchanger did not exist, and on flimsy (non-admissible) evidence.

How do you come to this unfounded and incorrect conclusion? I've never come to any such conclusion. Nor said anything to imply it.

Smelling fish when they are rank is not conclusory.

@THH,

Okay, respect if you remain without conclusion on this issue, as do I. It seems that most of your comrades, however, have formed that conclusion already.

Quote

Do you have proof that no endothermic process was taking place?

Well, no. Of course not. But you have to be weird in the extreme to believe that day in day out 1MW could be used up in an endothermic process with no sign of processing, process inputs, or process outputs. And Rossi himself seems to find it necessary to claim the existence of hitherto unknown second floor heat exchanger to explain where the heat went...

Quote

You say Wong, an expert in the matter, got it wrong.

You have got it wrong. Wong got it wrong, as several who have looked at it here agree. Is Wong an expert in this matter? His paper CV looks good, but for some weird reason he references an obscure Italian source of heat transfer coefficients, and then uses them incorrectly. He does not, in this report, behave like an expert on this specific matter.

Why not use your brain and check the calculations above with one of the many web calculators?

@THH,

You are weird. Use your brain. Are these the best insults you've got? Thought this was supposed to be a place for more sophisticated exchanges.

The same coefficient can be found in many sources (including offline) , but Wong is a joker; at his stated hourly rate, anyone would have spent an extra hour or two delving deeper into the numbers, if it was truly the case that he would be "paid whatever I write" (I paraphrase slightly).

Quote

It is you (and others here) who have already formed a conclusion that the heat exchanger did not exist, and on flimsy (non-admissible) evidence.

It's less flimsy than your claims of non-bias...

And why not use your brain/investigate it yourself? No one wants to be a pathobeliever, eh?

Quote from IH Fanboy

@THH,

You are weird. Use your brain. Are these the best insults you've got? Thought this was supposed to be a place for more sophisticated exchanges.

Apologies. Let me say it in a more sophisticated way.

IHFB: may I suggest that you check the Wong report, and the commentary on it from me and others, then reference the web to discover for yourself why in this matter Wong got it wrong.

Quote

The same coefficient can be found in many sources (including offline)

I agree, which makes Wong's selection of an obscure Italian language reference for this all the more unexpected. Perhaps, however, he is a native Italian with a Chinese family name working in the US. That is possible, and Rossi might have chosen such an expert.

Perhaps I should look into Wong's background to check this matter?

My point is that Rossi has shown an unusual ability to convince experts that his view of matters (which might well be justified by reference to Italian data books) is correct even when it is glaringly wrong. Wong might well be the victim of this effect.

Aha yes, I see.

D'oh!

Edit: To spell it out for others as dense as me, hmm, actually on second thoughts this might get a bit too libellous for my tastes...

Edit2: Aha, you did eventually spell it out... I disagree and have a much dimmer interpretation that references things I mentioned above.

"1) Rossi never mentioned any upstairs exchanger until deposition. Odd even for him."

+++ Why would he have? Murray never clarified the glaring errors in Exhibit 5 until his deposition. Why didn't he clear that up before his deposition?

"2) No one mentioned seeing long pieces of pipe going upstairs in any of their depositions. Including Rossi's witnesses. Especially convincing was the state regulatory inspector."

+++ As far as I remember, they weren't asked. And the state regulator never mentioned going upstairs, and was never asked about that part of the warehouse.

"3) Some have stated it would take at least DN150 pipe going upstairs to keep pressure down... a quick check on Home Depot.com does not show that they sell any of this pipe! Yet he testified that is where he bought it."

+++ Rossi testified that multiple pipes (at least four as I remember) led to the alleged upstairs heat exchanger. Home Depot sells 2in+ diameter 10 foot long steel pipes. Gang some of those together in parallel, and you could transmit the steam and heat energy. He stated under oath that there was an accounting of those purchases.

"4) The pressure required to move that volume upstairs would surely be higher than atmosphere, and thus meaning phase change did not happen at 101 or 103.

There goes that exit pipe size of being DN80 that you have so often stated was the case. What do you do with this now? You have said the entire case hinges

on the exit pipe being DN80. The heat exchanger precludes that!"

+++ So, you think it was DN40? Even Murray conceded in his deposition that the exit pipe was larger. You seem to have a hard time admitting that I have been vindicated on the DN40 fable.

"5) Why did Rossi tear this all out within days of shutting down the test?"

+++ He should have left it up. I don't know why or defend him on this. I really wish he would have, and I think it will damage his chances before the jury, just like the JMP ruse.

"6) Using Rossi's own testimony, the intake air and exhaust BOTH came in the same window. poses double problems."

+++ Well, technically, one went out and one came in. The outside is a huge heat sink.

"7) No photos that we have seen show this great exchanger. Do you not think Rossi would have provided a photo to support his testimony?"

+++ IH stated in the spoliation document that there were no photos, and then cited to a bunch of deposition excerpts that had nothing to do with whether there are no photos. I have no idea if there are photos or not. But I think IH trying to use Rossi's deposition as proof that there are no photos is ridiculous. He wasn't even asked the question (based on the deposition excerpts we have access to).

"8). Heat transfer has been calculated by THH with very good consideration and detail. Does not seem possible."

+++ There is one thing you can always count on: THH thinks he is more of an expert than the experts.

"9) System taken out in 2016, yet windows just replaced in 2017 while Mr. Wong was there? Amazing"

+++ The window mystery can be easily resolved by asking a few visitors to the Doral warehouse to state under oath what they saw and heard near the front entrance of the warehouse.

"10) Oh yes, and photos showing that the windows were in place during the time the exchanger was to be there."

+++ Ah, yes, the number one (well I guess 10 here) reason why IH Fanboys (except this one) have such a surety that the heat exchanger never existed: an inadmissible Google image with uncertain date.

Quote

THH thinks he is more of an expert than the experts.

Numbers don't lie.

Quote from joshg

Do you really think Darden told them "we're giving him one last shot at this because we haven't been able to get it to work."

There is no doubt he did. If he had not, Woodward would have pulled out their money by now, or sued them -- as I pointed out before.