Rossi vs. Darden developments [CASE CLOSED]

  • What? Where? When? No, I am not and did not. YOU are the one who wrote:

    My post stated clearly and unambiguously that the lawsuit was not a surprise. Also see my response above to Jed. How am I the one saying 'suddenly lawsuit'? Are you gaslighting me or was this post made during your "temporary" excursion into knucklehead territory? ;)


    Yes, you're right, it was not you, it was Roger who said "suddenly lawsuit", but I apparently was in knucklehead territory when I conflated your response to my comment on his original comment as coming from you.


    I think I'm out of knucklehead territory now, but that's usually what everyone in there thinks even when they're still in there, so it's a good thing you guys are here to alert me. :)


    So I actually had a couple of posts directed to you that I errantly believed were 'responding' to your comment that was actually from Roger. Sorry for the confusion.


    Anyway, this is not a big point to me - I agree with you that there were several months of legal jousting from December 2015 through lawsuit commencement, and your summary of that including specific examples from the docket demonstrate that well. I do not think that IH thought that Rossi would preemptively sue them for a quarter billion dollars. But Roger's comment implied that IH's behavior was strange because they went from 'everything's working great (especially to investors)' to 'suddenly lawsuit', which doesn't fit my understanding of the docket timeline, showing a more gradual progression of relational deterioration, and also implies that IH was the originator of the lawsuit, which of course they were not.


    So on this issue I think we actually kind of agree (and if we don't, it's 'small potatoes' to me).

  • They were thrilled. Read the email evidence on the docket. They were so thrilled that they attracted tens of millions in investments.


    We agree. They were thrilled, and they would have continued to be thrilled if they hadn't run into that major bummer: non-repeatability, innaccurate heat measurements from an IR camera. But I strenuously disagree with your assertion that IH was 'afraid' that Rossi's plant was working so they would have to cough up $89 Million dollars. The docket shows they had good relations with major financial firms waiting in the wings who were keenly interested in investing in LENR.


    The docket also shows that IH was very idealistic in their hopes for LENR+ and pretty crappy at due diligence and experimental design. But they aren't complete morons when it comes to money. If Rossi had anything that could produce commercially viable net heat, they would have been thrilled. Look at IH's roadmap that they reported to Woodford. They were planning to raise up an entire LENR+ industry. They were staking out plans that required billions, not millions.


    Why don't YOU see that? I'm just looking at the evidence available to us on the docket? Why are YOU making things up? Why don't you point me to a single contemporaneous test report from IH stating that the reactor did not work. I challenge you.


    I accept your challenge. Here's a good one in an email from Vaughn to Darden dated 2013-12-03 (214-20):

    Quote

    I feel pretty confident in the water measurement, and even if I am off by a quarter of a liter... the COP is still above 1.0 (1.042 to be exact), which is more than the ~ 0.94 - 0.97 range I have been seeing.


    I would say that 1.042 is also an example of IH stating 'the reactor not working' (because that is within measurement error and is of no practical use), but in any case, he reports seeing COP = .94 - .97 which is decidedly not working.


    So, mission accomplished - but this diverts from my objection to your argument that IH was 'afraid' that Rossi's E-Cat was working.


    That makes no sense.


    There is no evidence on the docket to support that idea.


    You made that up.


  • Ele? You classify him/her as a normal observer of this saga. I had a different impression. He/she has such a familiar style, with typical Itanglish misspellings and use of false-friend literary translations. Remember when he/she stood for Florida as the state of KSC against someone's criticism? Can you think of anybody else who would do that? Oh yes, perhaps SSC...

  • joshg


    Thanks for this clarification. I think neither sigmoidal nor I are trying to distort your position. And you and I (at least) agree that IH would have considered Rossi's legal action possible. That is different from expected, and from my POV it could be either possible or expected - where possible allows the possibility of surprised (but not astonished). Maybe you reckon the action would also be expected in the sense of thought a likely outcome.


    Thanks for your repeated post elucidating your type 1/2/3 position. If you see my post you will note that within this skeleton I allow nuanced positions - and am well aware they exist.


    But - I'm actually no wiser now how you fit into the 1/2/3 framework. That relates to why and whether you are confident now that Rossi's device works.


    Perhaps the issue here is that I am arguing probabilities. Since I don't claim omniscience there is nothing about the real world I can be 100% sure of. And almost any institutional actor could have ulterior motives, or be deceitful. These things happen.


    "I don't know that IH is 'evil.' I believe there is (circumstantial) evidence that they engaged in dishonest business practices at least with respect to Woodford and the Chinese (which might nevertheless be legal according to the letter of the law). But dishonesty and shading the truth in business is part of the game. So that doesn't make them evil, just dishonest, though probably not more so than similarly situated companies (and here I guess I'm really talking about Cherokee). Incidentally, that reading of events is wholly compatible with the notion that Rossi has nothing and is simply a con man. [It also doesn't make Rossi's claims more credible just because IH says it ain't so.]


    So we actually agree here, except I'm less cynical about institutional actors. I don't call being enthusiastic about one's genuine hopes dishonesty - it is expected, just as it is expected that experienced investors do their own DD and invest on that basis. Nor do I think it high probability that IH principals would overtly lie in this matter. They would know that if all went pear-shaped that could be found out with disastrous (for them consequences). There are people who lie in such cases, but it is very unusual.


    "The circumstantial evidence for the notion that they are trying to stall or discredit LENR (i.e., that they are "evil") is extremely thin and requires a rather tendentious reading of the facts, I admit. But still and all that reading exists. I have a very cynical (or in my view, realistic) perspective of how power works in this topsy-turvy world of ours, so I am willing to entertain that possibility. In my view it cannot be summarily dismissed as a crazy "conspiracy theory." It awaits further evidence one way or the other. However I believe such a reading of the tea leaves is less compatible with Rossi the con man. It either means that they know Rossi really does have something (even if it's only 1.5 COP instead of 20 or 20,000 or whatever Rossi claims), or that they knew Rossi was a con man all along (or figured it out at some point) and used him to make LENR look ridiculous. Or hell, who knows, maybe that was Rossi's goal all along and IH merely gave an assist. At this point in my life, knowing what I now know, I am willing to consider any possibility, though some are much more likely than others. Bob Greenyer said that we cannot underestimate the forces aligned against LENR. I agree with him."


    OK - here I think we get to the nub of your position (though you have still not clarified 1/2/3). Your premise is that there are strong and powerful forces aligned against LENR. That, for me, is a crazy conspiracy theory without any need for elaboration. You then reckon the evidence from IH/Rossi that IH take part in this known (to you) grouping is thin, but I can see that you do not want to rule it out, nor would I if I started from your premise.


    So perhaps we have, for you, a different initial premise which requires you to interprets the Rossi/IH facts differently from those not holding that premise. Not specifically that Rossi has LENR, but that anyone who has LENR will have powerful forces arrayed against them?


    Let us call 1/2/3 R1/R2/R3. Your premise would then be W (for worldwide anti-LENR forces). I don't have any classification of the possibly diverse evidence for W, so I'll leave it at that.

  • This first Rossi email after the 1MW startup could be interesting.

    The Frankie's combine 16 reactors, which seem to be much more efficient, than a single reactor. LENR is a surface reaction. The kinetic reacation products (second step "slow" muons & H* ) are expelled outward. Such an aditional source of energy (cat & mouse..) could be the reason for the strongly elevated COP.


    Edit: Out of 214/E32





    lenr-forum.com/attachment/1880/lenr-forum.com/attachment/1881/

  • Ele? You classify him/her as a normal observer of this saga. I had a different impression. He/she has such a familiar style, with typical Itanglish misspellings and use of false-friend literary translations. Remember when he/she stood for Florida as the state of KSC against someone's criticism? Can you think of anybody else who would do that? Oh yes, perhaps SSC...


    Without doxxing, or hinting at this, let me just say that were any poster here to be some principal in the action, it would be even more interesting to find out their 1/2/3 classification...

  • Thanks for this clarification.


    You're welcome. I agree that one of my working assumptions is that the deeply entrenched political and economic powers that currently control the world's energy supply do not want to see their control and profits evaporate due to LENR. And since it is easy to see that those forces are extremely powerful and do not want LENR, it is reasonable to conclude that these powerful forces will fight LENR. They will fight against independent LENR researchers/inventors (at least a the point where they being to show signs of meaningful success) and they will fight to take control of the (what I hope is now inevitable) roll-out of LENR technology. After all, the most effective way of controlling the opposition is to lead it.


    I'm sorry I don't fit into your arbitrary and inadequate classification scheme. I don't like fitting into molds that other people make for me. I guess you need to scrap it. Or make it more elaborate. Perhaps consider a wider matrix of assumptions and beliefs and how they do or don't or can or can't logically fit together in a more flexible grid.

  • You're welcome. I agree that one of my working assumptions is that the deeply entrenched political and economic powers that currently control the world's energy supply do not want to see their control and profits evaporate due to LENR. And since it is easy to see that those forces are extremely powerful and do not want LENR, it is reasonable to conclude that these powerful forces will fight LENR. They will fight against independent LENR researchers/inventors (at least a the point where they being to show signs of meaningful success) and they will fight to take control of the (what I hope is now inevitable) roll-out of LENR technology. After all, the most effective way of controlling the opposition is to lead it.


    I'm sorry I don't fit into your arbitrary and inadequate classification scheme. I don't like fitting into molds that other people make for me. I guess you need to scrap it. Or make it more elaborate. Perhaps consider a wider matrix of assumptions and beliefs and how they do or don't or can or can't logically fit together in a more flexible grid.


    As you see I am happy to adapt classification as necessary to be comprehensive.


    In your case, I detect also from your post here that you are convinced that viable LENR technology now exists (but has not been rolled out due to the worldwide anti-LENR forces). That would perhaps be part of your evidence that such forces exist. My view would be simpler - that commercially viable LENR technology does not to my knowledge now exist. Anyway, it is easy for any actor to prove me wrong by showing commercially viable LENR technology. They'd need a different attitude to independent testing than that shown by Rossi.

  • Quote

    the deeply entrenched political and economic powers that currently control the world's energy supply do not want to see their control and profits evaporate due to LENR

    This is no doubt true, as it is true for renewables such as solar and wind power. The fossil fuel industry has for the most part done whatever they can to make it tougher for renewables to succeed. They probably have delayed the ultimate domination by renewables by a decade or two. But ultimately, they will have failed. However, there is a crucial difference between those facts and what I consider to be some combination of self-serving rationalization and tin-foil-hat conspiracy theories surrounding the non-progress in LENR.


    The "powers what be" cannot prevent people from providing an unambiguous and convincing proof-of-principle that LENR exists. To even think that requires that every qualified scientist on the planet is under the thumb of the nefarious forces of energy evil. Sure, they can make it tough to get funding, but it is pretty lame to argue that LENR has not been validated because of lack of funding. And the counterargument that such proof already exists is nonsense. Only a tiny handful of people think that way and most of them have no scientific expertise. And make no mistake about it, if such proof was forthcoming, there would be a mad gold rush in LENR and there isn't a damned thing that Exxon-Mobil could do about it.


    LENR has a long way to go before the bad guys could be bothered to plot against it. It is just plain silly to think that a 5 trillion dollar industry is sweating bullets about the pet science dream of a few thousand internet fans that the overwhelming majority of the world has never spent 5 minutes thinking about.


    Let there be a convincing, reproducible LENR demonstration and then we can talk about the entrenched forces fighting against it.

  • "And make no mistake about it, if such proof was forthcoming, there would be a mad gold rush in LENR and there isn't a damned thing that Exxon-Mobil could do about it."


    As a matter of fact, Exxon-Mobil would simply hedge their bets by investing heavily on LENR. Lose oil business, win LENR business.


  • So; I'm trying to summarize (that's with a zeta) the views/motivations from the few here who reckon Rossi and company are the Evil empire (or something more or less similar).


    As far as I can see, they all think that Rossi LENR does not work. That is an unattractive idea, and perhaps an inability to hope is what distinguishes them from others, though I guess they would not see it that way.


    What differentiates them is why they hold this idea. I think there are five possibilities:

    (1) They have direct financial interests at stake, with the prospects of being liable for some or all of hundreds of millions of dollars (type 1)

    (2) They have indirect financial interests at stake, with the prospects of losing some token research grants from IH after having been starved for any kind of research funds to further their non-commercially-viable LENR research (type 2)

    (3) They are connected in some way to the fossil fuels industry (type 3)

    (4) They are connected in some way to the expensive renewal (wind / solar) industry (type 4)

    (5) They are an advisor to IH or have significantly staked their reputation on IH being the saviors of the universe


    My guess here is that:

    Dewey is probably type (1) and/or (4).

    IH Supporter, oldman, Bob, etc. are probably type (2)

    THH is probably type (3)

    Jed is probably type (5)



  • Except that the US granted him a patent in August 2015. Though now I'm being told that is not worth the paper it's written on. Whatever happens, one thing's for sure: the lawyers make out like bandits.


    Josh,


    Guest111 is correct, in that the one "LENR" patent Rossi has been awarded was in Italy. The one you reference (August 2015) with the USPTO, was for a heater system of some sort. It did however mention the "fuel wafer" the energy catalyzer (Ecat) uses, but that was not the main thrust.


    David French....retired patent lawyer and friend of LENR, wrote a good article about that particular patent on either InfiniteEnergy, or CFNs, or both. His "part 2", never came, but in it he was going to explain how this August 2015 patent granted was a "foot in the door" LENR strategy on Rossi's/IH's part.

  • @IH Fanboy: your 5 categories probably account for about 5% of the people who think that Rossi LENR doesn't work and that he is nothing but a classless crook and con man (as close to calling him an evil empire as makes any sense.) The other 95% of us hold our position because it has been jawdroppingly obvious for 6 years and thinking otherwise is utterly inexplicable to the overwhelming majority of people who bother to look into this at all.

  • We agree. They were thrilled, and they would have continued to be thrilled if they hadn't run into that major bummer: non-repeatability, innaccurate heat measurements from an IR camera.


    Cite please? (And pointing to a statement by Vaughn that he was confident in the water measurement with increasing to positive COP is not much of a counterpoint to my original point.)

  • LENR has a long way to go before the bad guys could be bothered to plot against it. It is just plain silly to think that a 5 trillion dollar industry is sweating bullets about the pet science dream of a few thousand internet fans that the overwhelming majority of the world has never spent 5 minutes thinking about.


    Well, the fossil fuel industry's bankers know about LENR, and follow it closely. (E.g., Blackrock)

  • THH is probably type (3)


    I can assure you that is not true. I have no connection with, nor emotional attachment to, any part of the FF industry. I see energy efficiency as a more viable route to low carbon rather than energy generation. Though, as a pragmatist, I'd rather we had gas power plants for base-load instead of coal until nuclear or renewable + storage alternatives exist. That makes me mildly in favour of gas - at least for countries still burning coal. New gas plants could maybe use exciting highly efficient gas turbines or perhaps do even better with an s-CO2 Brayton cycle? The same technology would be used with LENR so I hope that does not make me part of Josh's W conspiracy.


    In fact I must be part of the 95% IO refers to that do not fit your system. You have, I note, only suggested ulterior motives of one sort or another.


    However: I guess you fit my system! That is no disgrace, unless you feel the views you hold are somehow disgraceful...

  • or 6)researchers that although have had some success with "classical" LENR methods, but tried Rossi's patents, visited IH and those trying to get it to work and get nothing.

  • After much thought and reading the Rossi defenders here and elsewhere, it occurs to me that crime does pay. And stupid people, even smart people that are inexplicably stupid anyways, (as well as a huge number of apathetic people who won't do anything about a scam anyways), are probably the vast majority of the Earth's population. All I need is a dime from every one of them. That should net about $700,000,000 from barely fleecing them at all. From those profits I will generate a bigger scam that nets on average a buck a person, after which I will buy a small country in a nice climate where I can sip drinks with umbrellas in them and watch the tides roll in and out, contemplating whether I can scam 10 bucks per stupid person in the fairly well-off countries of the world (I am not mean, and respect that there poor people who can't afford to lose $10 and maybe even scamming a buck was harsh on some of them) or just teach my kids to do it for themselves... My actions will be defended for decades, and even after I die from natural causes a rich and happy person, because I will come up with a story that people want to believe. A purported device that lturns excess atmospheric CO2 into free electricity should do the trick.

  • Oh, another great news today:

    Q.

    Quote


    A.


    The news is that Sigma 5 is the probability that his stuff works, it means: 2,857x10-7 :-D :-D :-D

    Obviously it's a large optimistic estimate.

    JoNP means Journal of Null-Physics (the house of hoax,trickery, junk and psychopathological science).

  • Quote

    Well, the fossil fuel industry's bankers know about LENR, and follow it closely. (E.g., Blackrock)


    A fine example of exuberant extrapolation that is the sole content of so many believers' arguments.


    In 2012, Blackrock made a comment that they were keeping an eye on startups in various fields including LENR. From that one-time remark, the conclusion is drawn that the fossil fuel industry is focused on LENR.


    I guess if you have nowhere to stand, all you can do is execute an endless series of leaps of faith.