Rossi vs. Darden developments [CASE CLOSED]

    Quote from joshg

    If Rossi is a con artist, he is also exceptional, I think, in his ability to "talk shop" with physicists such as Focardi, Hoistad, Essen, Kullander and others with whom he has interacted with in person on an extended basis. According to Mats's book, the Swedish group was apparently quite impressed with him and his knowledge of physics. And Focardi worked with him, as well. I think that is one of the things that makes it difficult for some people to come to terms with the notion that he is just scamming people. I don't know that it makes it more or less likely, but it certainly seems to make him a unique con man with unusual talents.

    Quote from interested observer

    Sorry joshg, but anyone with a decent knowledge of physics who reads or listens to Rossi's statements about science finds them laughable. There have been numerous examples of this over the years. You are just falling into the "he must be the greatest, most talented con man in history because he has fooled me" fallacy. Rossi's only talent is choosing his marks and he is great at it.


    Quote from Alan Smith

    Hi Jack. Well, the 'hard work' information is not based on anything but the comments of people who have actually worked alongside Rossi. Work alongside somebody and they can't fool you about the effort they put in for more than a few days, as I am sure you are aware. One soon detects who the shirkers are.


    Rossi's character is one of the things that keeps me and I know many others glued to this saga. It fascinates.


    Rossi is hard-working. In fact he is intensely driven, it seems to me, the very epitome of an effective single-minded potentially brilliant inventor. I suspect he has a pretty high IQ, as well, and I'd expect (I've never met him) can put up a good show of being very clever. All of that helps him to convince.


    Is he a talented physicist? This is where I'd expect differences of opinion. He gets things wrong, over trivial matters of practical physics and engineering like how to measure power. You could argue that is just deliberate deception but I think it is more. His grasp of things is variable - it will be weak where that makes it easy for him to get the results he wants, and seem strong where that allows him to wow an audience with abstract theories - look at his dissertation topic. He is probably much more interested in abstract ideas than real engineering. It is possible to seem much cleverer than you are by being good with abstract ideas, making connections other people do not, and directing a very open-ended conversation to things that make sense to you. That ability can be valuable, and often goes with high IQ, but its value tends to be overestimated and it allows someone to sound convincing and deeply knowledgable when in fact they have no deep knowledge.


    Rossi has shown himself an appalling engineer, in the sense of making things work and checking that they work. Because he does not take correction kindly he is slow to correct errors. I'd expect him to be very good at intermediate-level bullshit on physics. He will have read widely, have wide interests, and enough knowledge of the maths to convince many. If he is clever he will adjust what he says to his audience and will be able to seem knowledgeable even to an expert, by saying the right things at the right times. When examined carefully by an expert he would be obviously flaky - but Rossi is not likely to let that happen. Ever. He seems to be very good at choosing his topics of conversation, and avoiding a challenging audience.

    • Official Post
    Quote from THHuxleynew

    Is he a talented physicist? This is where I'd expect differences of opinion.


    Focardi's comment on this was along the lines of:- 'Andrea is incredibly intuitive, things that took me years to properly comprehend he seems to grasp immediately, and then prove he has grasped them by going one jump ahead.'


    This is not a quote btw, but was reported to me as a 'Focardi says'. a few years ago.

    yes you are right, Jones town was the origin of the koolaid trope, the heavens gate mob was similar in its use of mass suicide by libation but the reason they sprang to mind was the willingness of the participants like some of Rossi's acolytes! Jim Jones used operant conditioning to normalise the koolaid ritual before the fatal poisoning of the final batch. The TV show is the big bang theory ,very successful and funny despite featuring some characterisations of quite severe social functioning disorders in its protagonists.

    Quote from Roger

    The most plausible hypothesis is of course that Rossi is a hypnotist conman able to successfully mass hypnotize the scientists and engineers he works with, or who can study his works closely.

    Sociopaths are often reported as hypnotic and hypnotically charming, even world experts dealing with known cases are noted to emerge from interview with them reporting precisely that fact, the feeling they were in someway hypnotised. I'd recommend Dr Robert hares tome

    " without conscience" as reading matter for anyone, forewarned is forearmed so to speak.

    Quote from Wyttenbach

    One of the pressure sensors failed very early in the test, aswritten I an AR e-mail to all IH people. But all instruments weredoubled – also the thermocouples.

    They were not doubled as far as I know. People who saw the test equipment did not tell me there were redundant instruments. They are not shown in Penon's schematic. Perhaps Rossi said this on his blog, but Rossi often lies.

    Quote from Wyttenbach

    Why Penon still used the failed one is a mystery. In the same AR'se-mail, he writes about a COP of 33.


    Look at Penon's data. It shows 0.0 bar for every day for the entire test, including the first days. The pressure gauge did not "fail"; it never worked in the first place. Not from the first day. Either that, or Penon's pressure data is fake.


    My guess is that the data is fake, because if Penon showed the actual pressure, everyone would see the water was pressurized liquid, not steam. The temperature is so low that even a little pressure would ensure this.

    Quote from Wyttenbach

    I would ask everybody to reevaluate their statements based onthese facts...known by IH!

    These "facts" are not true. But suppose they were true. Suppose there is a record of the actual pressure. Suppose also that the test was actually legitimate, and all of the problems can be explained. The question remains: Would you pay $89 million based on this report?


    Do you think this report as written is good enough to justify paying eighty-nine-million dollars? Given the problems such as 0.0 bar, no explanation of how 1 MW could be dissipated, and no mention of critical components such as mezzanine heat exchanger and the extra pump, don't you think a better report is called for? If there is a true record of the pressure, why wasn't it included in this report? If there were redundant instruments, why didn't the report say this?


    I would think that even the most enthusiastic Rossi supporter would see that this is an amateur report, full of obvious mistakes. It leaves out critical aspects of the test. A professional scientist seeking a multi-million dollar payment should do a better test and write a better report.

    Quote from joshg

    I should add that his apparent ability to constantly dream up new ways of faking excess heat also attests to very particular set of engineering skills.


    I have experience working as an Engineer (over a decade). Rossi has demonstrated that he DEFINITELY DOES NOT have good engineering skills in any traditional sense. This may boil down to semantics, because I think what you are more accurately observing is that Rossi has some unique 'technical' skills.


    Here's why I see that he has rather deplorable engineering skills:

    Engineering training and practice can be summarized simply as 'intensive problem solving'. In school, the vast majority of the 'work' is solving rather complex story problems (in the theoretical) and debugging problems (in the practical). What this develops in an experienced engineer is a set of abilities to efficiently check and recheck conclusions, come up with a systematic approach to identifying problems through a series of tests (e.g., do I have a signal at point X?; is the signal what I predict? Is there a subsequent signal at point Y? Is it what I predict?; etc.).


    As an engineer, I find Rossi's behavior shockingly crude. For example, using a thermal camera for calorimetry is, from the start, a bad idea. Thermal camera's are good for identifying spatial thermal differences, not absolute heat energy. Using a thermocouple is much better, and using an array of thermocouples is even better than that. An even better approach, and the only method in my opinion that is rigorous enough for meeting the requirement of validation of performance for significant financial compensation, is to use water bath (or water flow) calorimetry with no phase change.


    The fact that after all these years, when we know that IH was trying to do that (the water bath 'pig') and that many have proposed to Rossi to do that but he has refused, demonstrates conclusively his poor engineering skills.


    Good engineers go about trying to 'break' our conclusions and our devices. We stress test them (for example on vibration tables, by blowing sand and dust into our devices to see if they break, by stressing their load capacity - even to destruction if it's important. When we come to analytical conclusions, we try to think of every possible alternative explanation that would invalidate the conclusion we have come to in order to avoid the time and energy spent operating under false conclusions.


    When analyzing mechanisms of action, good engineers use controlled experiments to identify in detail those mechanisms. We use spectrometers to break down chemical reactions, we use scales and multiple probes, we use 'control' or 'dummy' devices to identify and isolate differences that characterize the mechanism of action.


    Good engineers avoid like the plague single point failures. The idea that we would use a single measure of temperature (camera or a single thermocouple) is utterly amateur and absurdly poor engineering. Yet Rossi promotes single point failure designs. We know this from the docket. We also know from there that he eschewed thermocouples and water baths over cameras for calorimetry (which is absurd).


    It's obvious to me why he does this: from a practical standpoint, it's the only way to effectively manage the plausibly deniable scam that he has created.


    That he is a scammer cannot now be refuted. By his own admission, the Doral customer was a scam of his own creation.


    The history of the rest of his stuff smells to high heaven of a series of scams: 100% Ni62 ash?; broken and failed thermoelectric devices purchased, not 'manufactured' in his 'factory' that conveniently 'burned down', single thermocouples for measuring heat for 'validation'?, fully 'functioning' unfueled 'reactors', etc., etc., etc.


    Finally, engineers pay extreme attention to even minute failures, because they are the most efficient means for learning and improving. Rossi is threatened by identified failures. This is consistent with trying to promote a scam or perpetuate delusion (or both). It is very inconsistent with engineering.


    Rossi's expertise is shared with the expertise of a fictional character: the Wizard of Oz. He has created an image of himself that is not unlike the Great and Powerful Oz: JoNP, sock puppet adulations, lights (QuarkX), steam (E-Cat with 'enhanced' heat strips). I believe that his behavior indicates that he sometimes believes his own illusions.


    The evidence that he is a delusional con man is quite clear, in my opinion.


    The evidence that he is a crappy 'engineer' is, in my engineering opinion, irrefutable.

    the most interesting and obfuscating thing about the whole con relies on one fact to convince the less scientifically literate audience into a state if confusion, the mention if thermodynamics, saw it over and over again in Rossi's con, there's the thermodynamics of the testing , then there's the thermodynamics of the lenr reaction itself. Because of the supposed exotic physics any mention of thermodynamics involved and the acolytes pipe up about the special physics involved etc and detract from the thermodynamics of where 1mw of heat went, to the scientifically illiterate this is an avenue for confusion that was greatly played on. The reality of if there's excess heat output to input? Then the experiment should clearly show it!

    But no "there's a heat exchanger in the roof and anyway its "" special"" physics going on so thermodynamics thermodynamics you don't understand you shill etc" has been a particular con line. Fanboy I'm looking at you.

    on the psychology side of things...Rossi is analogous with Trump. Right down to the anger upon challenge, the hard working, the narcissism, the illucid excuses that only fool the uneducated and those unaware of his sociopathy. The fake it till it looks like you make it philosophy, the repeated returning to similar scams, the downplaying of failure to the extraordinary claims. Trumps got his not a wall.

    Rossi has his no excess power.

    Nothing stops the claims though.

    Quote from joshg

    If Rossi is a con artist, he is also exceptional, I think, in his ability to "talk shop" with physicists such as Focardi, Hoistad, Essen, Kullander and others with whom he has interacted with in person on an extended basis. According to Mats's book, the Swedish group was apparently quite impressed with him and his knowledge of physics. And Focardi worked with him, as well. I think that is one of the things that makes it difficult for some people to come to terms with the notion that he is just scamming people. I don't know that it makes it more or less likely, but it certainly seems to make him a unique con man with unusual talents.

    laughable - He doesn't even know how to multiply by 1 see watt hours/hour and then there is a claim of endothermic chemistry that can mysteriously soak up 1MW for a year unnoticed. (of course he change that when he got caught)

    Quote from oldguy

    laughable - He doesn't even know how to multiply by 1 see watt hours/hour and then there is a claim of endothermic chemistry that can mysteriously soak up 1MW for a year unnoticed. (of course he change that when he got caught)


    I agree. I mentioned previously a video (which I've searched for recently but can't find) of Rossi, Focardi and Levi (I think it was Levi but for sure Focardi), where Rossi was at a white board going through an excruciatingly slow calculation of power using the equation P = VI. (an absurdly simple calculation: electrical power P = voltage V times current I). I watched this video because I was intrigued with Rossi's 10KW E-Cat and was hoping to learn more about his theoretical thinking. As I watched the video, I kept looking at Focardi's expression, as I also thought to myself, 'Why would anyone choose to post a video showing himself struggling through such a rudimentary calculation?'. Focardi was nodding in a seemingly impatient manner, like 'yes, yes, I see your answer, can we move on?'.


    This was one of the early signs to me that something seemed strange. But it wasn't until almost a year later when he refused a controlled experiment that I had strong suspicions that the E-Cat probably didn't work and that Rossi was earnest and incompetent or intentionally deceptive or some combination of the two. (There were a lot of other signals along the way, and I'm trying to be brief here to make a point).


    Over the years, it became clear that he was definitely both intentionally deceptive and incompetent.


    The most satisfying thing about Rossi's lawsuit is that it has now been made clear to anyone who has 'eyes that can see' and 'ears that can hear', that Rossi goes to extreme measures to intentionally deceive people.

    Quote from sigmoidal

    Rossi has demonstrated that he DEFINITELY DOES NOT have good engineering skills in any traditional sense.

    I strongly agree.

    Quote from oldguy

    laughable - He doesn't even know how to multiply by 1 see watt hours/hour and then there is a claim of endothermic chemistry that can mysteriously soak up 1MW for a year unnoticed. (of course he change that when he got caught)

    Yes. What was with that? Did he actually expect to fool anyone with such a weird claim? Ditto the invisible heat exchanger in the mezzanine. Apart from IH Fanboy and a few other people on Planet Rossi, no one would believe that. You can see in the photos from Penon that there are no pipes going from the pretend customer site up to the mezzanine. No sane engineer would put a 1 MW heat exchanger inside a building. You would put it outside, of course.


    I hope he is not able to persuade gullible members of jury with this kind of nonsense.


    However, regarding "watt hours per hour," Arata and a few other elderly Japanese scientists use that expression. I don't understand why, but they do.

    Quote from Roger

    So those scientists and engineers have been hypnotized by Rossi, who is also a sociopath. All those swedish scientists are really suffering from Stockholm's Syndrome...


    Can't someone call the police? there are people in danger!

    Sadly, psychology doesnt work like that, the successful psychopath will do everything in their power to "save face" often manipulating to the extent where they are not prosecutable at all, you grossly misunderstand what a psychopath is, dangerously so. What differentiates the psychopath from the the rest of us is the total, absolute lack of conscience and moral compass yet the ability to convince and scam others that they are morally impeccable. Wise up is my advice. I'd recommend the book "snakes in suits: when psychopaths go to work" and you will realise how your flippant attitude is precisely why they are such a problem in all spheres of life. Believe it or not there is a large group of people who truly think Donald trump is a "great guy" because of his hypnotic ability to convince them thusly. I'm not usually insultory but you sir are a numpty or possibly a Muppet.

    stockholm syndrome is a whole other kettle of fish, it doesn't refer to the marks in a conman situation but to the victims of kidnapping and direct psychopathic abuse, where through normalising the experience of being actually kidnapped the abused individual develops a seemingly inexplicable emotional bond with their captor/abuser, in cases of fraudulent conartist type sociopaths its moot as Rossi hasn't actually kidnapped anyone now has he? Muppet.

    Rossi isn't your run of the mill sociopath either, the level of his outward grandiosity and successful long con modus single him out as a very political type narcissist, much like trump or other almost cult like leader, targeting his demographic with almost clinical precision, very hypnotic and convincing to those who "buy in" to his scam, obsessed as much with adulation and attention as he is with control. Your common or garden emotionally abusive deceiver would never be as stupid as to attract so much attention, choosing notoriety is not normal psychopathic behaviour at all, they have to be extreme public narcissists to perform such a public and longwinded con. Far more common are sociopaths who just abuse and control spouses or individual marks with any manipulative behaviour they can get away with. Go read a book.

    it is not so much he used watt hours per hour, but his refusal to acknowledge it was the same as watts.

    Quote from JedRothwell

    However, regarding "watt hours per hour," Arata and a few other elderly Japanese scientists use that expression. I don't understand why, but they do.


    My understanding is that it's used in Europe, and in the power industry. "Watt hours per hour" means "watt hours measured over one hour" . Similarly "watt hours per day".


    eg http://www.interconnector.com/…ools-guides/key-to-units/


    MMJ/d (TJ/d) = Million Mega (10^12) Joules per day (1 MMJ = 1 TJ)
    kWh/d = Kilo (10^3) Watt-hours per day

Subscribe to our newsletter

It's sent once a month, you can unsubscribe at anytime!

View archive of previous newsletters

* indicates required

Your email address will be used to send you email newsletters only. See our Privacy Policy for more information.

Our Partners

Supporting researchers for over 20 years
Want to Advertise or Sponsor LENR Forum?
CLICK HERE to contact us.