What sense should the installation of this heat exchanger make, if the Ecat plant does not work?
It's quite simple, the same sense behind this famous and big hoax, the RAR generator (now "ENGINE").
Rossi vs. Darden developments [CASE CLOSED]
- barty
- Closed
-
-
I don't know, but either way Rossi was the one who did it, and presumably he would have worked out he was going to do it at least from the time the relationship broke down.
Sorry, you folks can't have it both ways. Have your cake and eat it too. And all other similar cliches. We don't know when, in Rossi's mind, he reasonably knew or could foresee a legal dispute. According to you folks, it was all a big shocker for everyone. Sort of works against your insistence on spoliation punishment.
-
The heat exchanger story is a good example, as the IH expert Rick A. Smith has shown in his report by means of photographs, there was this serpentine heat exchanger, just as Rossi has described it to Wong. What sense should the installation of this heat exchanger make, if the Ecat plant does not work? Because according to the agreements between IH and JM Products, no IH personal would have been allowed to take a look into the black box. This heat exchanger makes sense only if heat is actually produced, if this was all a fake, this installation would have been completely unnecessary.
https://thenewfire.files.wordp…_1_to_15_ocr.pdf#page=136Rends. this was a heat exchanger in an insulated box inside a factory, which IH experts proved (and it was blindingly obvious) could not dissipate 1MW. Actually, the container itself, even if not insulated, could dissipate 1MW or anything like. So this just does not wash - and you don't need to be good at engineering to work this out.
I agree with you - it was totally unnecessary. As was the fake customer. as was the fake GPT.
-
Sorry, you folks can't have it both ways. Make your cake and eat it too. And all other similar cliches. We don't know when, in Rossi's mind, he reasonably knew or could foresee a legal dispute. According to you folks, it was all a big shocker for everyone. Sort of works against your insistence on spoliation punishment.
Not all here believe the sue was a shocker. That is just your straw man. Realize from the exhibits that IH had an investigator taking picture of building as early as Nov. I personally think that IH didn't have an idea that Rossi was going to claim it was the GPT until late Aug where we first see any documented statements using the specific term GPT for what was going on in FL. So there was no reason for IH to worry until that was claimed but it was soon after that IH had investigators and lawyers involved. So yes it was late but not that late. Your timing is off.
-
it seems, have any number of internet aliasses which he uses especially to post on his own blog. It carries the inherent narcissim of blogging to a whole new level.
Come on THH !
Who is the real narcissist ? The person who risk with his own name or the person who dispense FUD behind a pseudonym ? "It seems....." does not mean that you are proving something it means only that you want to discredit a person in an anonymous way !
I do not think that this so courageous behavior!
The vast majority of Internet users is not native English speakers and huge number use tools like Google translator to post, so trying to identify or automatically attribute
not "perfect English" post to Rossi is simply FUD.
I'm not native English, so what now ? Did you think to try to automatically dismiss every line I write ?
Let us clarify the facts here. Yes, 6 academics backed the Lugano report and have never recanted it but they do not defend it against very substantial scientific criticism.
Sorry sir. The criticism was far to be scientific, ill based and probably guided by the sole interest (money not Science) of IH.
No scientist will ever respond to a critics that is of that low level.
Bo Hoistad responded in front of his own Dean to the sloppy criticism of Pomp and others and as a result his Dpt, Elforsk and Volvo are financing research on the Ecat,
This are facts. Facts that for obvious reasons are omitted by you and others.
-
Very simply, from the Court documents, you will note that Rossi has not transferred the IP to IH. Actually he can't because his devices don't work, but it is all the same.Until that happens there is absolutely no point having a long-tern test. Getting just one reactor to work in IH hands comes first. And rightly so.
Actually, that is an 'IH says' ...and even they seem to be confused about whether they had working reactors or not. At least they were before they got their total denial story together.
-
Sorry, you folks can't have it both ways. Have your cake and eat it too. And all other similar cliches. We don't know when, in Rossi's mind, he reasonably knew or could foresee a legal dispute. According to you folks, it was all a big shocker for everyone. Sort of works against your insistence on spoliation punishment.
I'm not insistent on the Spoliation result. I hope IH win, it would reduce money given to lawyers if so.
In this case I've shown that IH and Rossi could naturally have had a very different idea of whether legal action was likely. As Bob points out, Rossi was talking to lawyers in December. It is just unfortunate that he was so hell bent on this stupid action.
I'll also give you that I can't read Darden's mind, so I don't know how likely he thought legal action would be at what time. Certainly a real possibility after the December letter.
-
...and even they seem to be confused about whether they had working reactors or not.
Rather like MFMP? And MFMP did not have the excuse of up close and personal hypnotic mind-controlling rays from Rossi. It is extraordinary how on ECW everyone there knows he is a liar and cheat but still think his stuff must therefore work... Some here too.
-
The heat exchanger story is a good example, as the IH expert Rick A. Smith has shown in his report by means of photographs, there was this serpentine heat exchanger, just as Rossi has described it to Wong. What sense should the installation of this heat exchanger make, if the Ecat plant does not work?
The answer is simple and obvious: 20KW dissipated in a "super secret" shipping container that isn't, from the outside, obviously a crude 20KW radiator.
In order to promote the intentionally deceptive notion that there was real heat being produced, there must be some heat produced and a corresponding temperature drop from the customer's 'use'. Otherwise, it is much more obvious that it was a fraud. The crude serpentine heat exchanger inside the 'customers' black box cooled 10-20KW of the circulating fluid.
The whole 8' plywood partition (with no ceiling) dividing the 'customer' from the E-Cat (which we now know was undeniably a ruse) is pretty crude in and of itself.
I thought that once everyone saw the pictures of the inside of the JMP black box (which Rossi attempted to have 'sealed'), that the exposed fraudulent hoax would be obvious to everyone.
But no, people here and elsewhere are staring at pictures of this obvious farcical 'production' container along with the now incontrovertible proof (because Rossi himself confirmed it under oath) that Rossi lied about JMP and the 'satisfied customer(s)' (which are now known to be himself), and still believing that magically disappearing 1MW heat was produced.
It's like looking straight at the 'man behind the curtain' without noticing that the levers he is pulling correspond with the actions of the Great and Powerful Oz. It does amaze me.
-
an insulated box inside a factory, which IH experts proved (and it was blindingly obvious) could not dissipate 1MW.
THH ??
Which experts ? The experts that ware NOT there and have not seen anything ? Just if you are somebody controlled by IH difficult technical fact could be blindingly obvious.
Let us read read the court documents :
As Rossi told,
the excess heat was carried out through a heat exchanger in the second floor and the air was expelled through the central window.
Wong and Rossi testified in a series of statements all the facts about related to the air extraction window: all the glass of the window were removable !
The window panes were removable in whole or in part as necessary to disperse more or less heat.
Therefore, one single photo, made in a randomly chosen moment means absolutely nothing.
Anyway, looking at the photo, the central window seems to have glasses only on the right side, while the two left glasses appear to be missing.
-
The answer is simple and obvious: 20KW dissipated in a "super secret" shipping container that isn't, from the outside, obviously a crude 20KW radiator.
In order to promote the intentionally deceptive notion that there was real heat being produced, there must some heat produced and a temperature drop. Otherwise, it is much more obvious that it was a fraud.Those are only assumptions without any proof !
Just for people with an agenda there are obvious answers ! Now you would have to prove (but you can't) that all the measurements were invented ! But this is exactly the assumption (not proven) of IH !
Npw you are saying that there was no reactor and no steam.
If you start assuming as only truth yours conclusions (Rossi is fake) you will be able to find an answer, good only for you and IH,
But starting from the conclusions id not scientific !
-
Display More
THH ??
Which experts ? The experts that ware NOT there and have not seen anything ? Just if you are somebody controlled by IH difficult technical fact could be blindingly obvious.
Let us read read the court documents :
As Rossi told,
the excess heat was carried out through a heat exchanger in the second floor and the air was expelled through the central window.
Wong and Rossi testified in a series of statements all the facts about related to the air extraction window: all the glass of the window were removable !
The window panes were removable in whole or in part as necessary to disperse more or less heat.
Therefore, one single photo, made in a randomly chosen moment means absolutely nothing.
Anyway, looking at the photo, the central window seems to have glasses only on the right side, while the two left glasses appear to be missing.
Hmm. Are you saying that an insulated container can dissipate 1MW? Please explain how.
On a separate issue, can you please explain how those fans can generate a wind velocity of > 50m/s transverse to the piping? You note that Wong is not exactly supporting Rossi, because he gives an estimate based on a figure that does not take into account velocity or cylinder diameter. So you claim that the Siemens web calculator here- which agrees precisely with Holman's textbook examples, is wrong? Or what?
-
On a separate issue, can you please explain how those fans can generate a wind velocity of > 50m/s transverse to the piping? You note that Wong is not exactly supporting Rossi, because he gives an estimate based on a figure that does not take into account velocity or cylinder diameter. So you claim that the Siemens web calculator here- which agrees precisely with Holman's textbook examples, is wrong? Or what?
Seems like a lot of guessing and estimates on what was in the alleged heat exchanger, even by Wong. Rossi is known to use finned radiators. It wouldn't surprise me if those were included in the insulated box, assuming it existed (and based on markings on the floor of the mezzanine, it appears that it did).
-
Because according to the agreements between IH and JM Products, no IH personal would have been allowed to take a look into the black box.
Clause 9 ot the term sheet (245-3):
Quote9. The personnel of IH and Leonardo will not have access to the plant of JM, and the personnel of JM will not have access to the inside of the 1MW plant, or to the information about how the 1mw (sic) plant operates, which are trade secrets of Leonardo and IH.
Damn, because Rossi represented both (director of Leonardo as well as of JM), he wouldn't have been allowed neither inside the 1MW plant, nor at the JM side!
-
Seems like a lot of guessing and estimates on what was in the alleged heat exchanger, even by Wong. Rossi is known to use finned radiators. It wouldn't surprise me if those were included in the insulated box, assuming it existed (and based on markings on the floor of the mezzanine, it appears that it did).
Not according to Rossi's testimony. And in any case a few fins would not help. You are not surprised because you have not tried to work out how you could get the claimed 1MW from the 200m of piping Rossi swore he used.
-
Since this "homemade" heat exchanger issue pops up again and again, here once more a link to a website which helps one to calculate the heat loss from a bare (as well as if insulated) pipe:
https://cheguide.com/tag/bare-pipe/
Just downloading their excel tool makes it even easier:
https://cheguide.com/wp-conten…_Loss_Insulated_Pipe.xlsx
Here the calculation for a DN150 pipe (BTW: Who the heck would use DN150 pipes for such a heat exchanger?)
-
Therefore, one single photo, made in a randomly chosen moment means absolutely nothing.
Anyway, looking at the photo, the central window seems to have glasses only on the right side, while the two left glasses appear to be missing.
ele,
With all respect, a single photo WOULD be much. How about Rossi providing a photo of the exchanger! It would really resolve much debate would it not?
However...
It is absolute fact that Rossi had his lawyers engage IH in December of 2015, specifically about the Doral event and his claim of it being a GPT. See..
http://coldfusioncommunity.net…7/01/252-01-Exhibit-A.pdf
Why would Rossi dismantle this entire setup without ANY documentation of it, knowing that there was a definite dispute about the GPT. That the GPT would need to be proven. He took no photos, no documents of design or capacity, nothing what so ever! And then dismantled the system almost over night! And now nothing is left of it at the Doral facility! Hmmmm.....
Dissipating 1MW of heat is no easy task! One would not design such a powerful piece of equipment on the back of a napkin. Surely there are drawings, calculations, quotes for components all done and dated before hand! Otherwise how would Rossi know that 1MW of heat could be dissipated by the exchanger! In his view, $89 million dollars was riding on a successful test. Would he leave this major component up to chance that it would handle such a massive load?!? Surely not!
This stretches even the most ardent believer's imagination that here would be NO evidence of this amazing heat exchanger! No purchase receipts, no drawings, no calculations, etc.
Can you provide any reasonable logic why this would happen?
Thank you.
Edit:
And this question goes to those who think there are marks on the floor believing the heat exchanger DID exist!
Really?
I have seen no evidence of markings on the floor that clearly "indicate" that a heat exchanger capable of 1MW of heat existed on that floor. I have seen no evidence of electrical capacity. I have read testimony stating otherwise. I would really like to see what marks were there and exactly HOW they suggest an exchanger capable of expelling 1MW of heat existed! Seriously
! -
There was no contractual requirement (AFAIK) that this plant should produce 1MW of heat continuously. Running at 250kW would be fine, so long as the COP was high enough to meet the required standard. Perhaps someone can point me to a contradictory clause in the disputed contract that says otherwise?
-
With all respect, a single photo WOULD be much. How about Rossi providing a photo of the exchanger! It would really resolve much debate would it not?
I remember discussions that there was one in the shadow in one of the 1MW plant photos posted some time back. It was supposed to be the large square thing in front of the white door here still wrapped in cardboard. If I recall correctly (I may not, though) the first version of this photo had the heat exchanger manufacturer printed on it; eventually they photoshopped it away so they sabotaged their own proof:
-
There was no contractual requirement (AFAIK) that this plant should produce 1MW of heat continuously. Running at 250kW would be fine, so long as the COP was high enough to meet the required standard. Perhaps someone can point me to a contradictory clause in the disputed contract that says otherwise?
No-one disputes that. Perhaps the problem is that the Penon report indicates 1MW. If in fact only 250kW or less was generated, then the Penon data is clearly wrong by at least a factor of 4 and can clearly not be relied upon to indicate any excess heat.
