Rossi vs. Darden developments [CASE CLOSED]

  • Yup, that pretty much sums it up, except for the remark about capitalists, I kinda like capitalism in fact.

  • This forum seems to be a goldmine of both information AND misinformation. Even more amazing are the certainties of some of the posters regarding the knowledge and beliefs of (a) the Lugano professors and (b) ECW posters and readers. For reference I am posting the following link which is part I of David Nagel's report on ICCF20:


    http://www.infinite-energy.com…agelIE131%20ICCFPart1.pdf


    which contains extensive information on Ni-H based research on LENR.


    It also includes a summary of the conclusions of MFMP regarding the Lugano test which seems to indicate a COP > 1 (e.g. 1.13 at low power and 1.32 at high power).


    Based on this analysis, it appears that there is at the very least some uncertainty regarding the results of the Lugano test, even if there were problems with the test.

    Perhaps more importantly, it seems clear to me that many other researchers (Parkhomov, Brillouin energy, me356, Suhas, Holmlid and others) are obtaining positive results (e.g. COP > 1) along with indications of nuclear effects.


    I might add that there were several tests before the Lugano test (two conducted by Levi and/or others) of AR's technology which gave strong indications of significant energy gain. (At least one, perhaps both melted down.)


    Alan's info regarding recent progress by the Lugano researchers (coupled with "rumors" regarding Fulvio Fabiani) also seem to indicate that additional progress is being made by researchers studying systems which are closely related to Rossi's (and IH's) patents.


    All this being said, regarding the court case, I do find it very odd that the information released so far is so confused and does not compellingly support Rossi's claims regarding the Doral test, which suggests to me that Rossi does not have nearly as strong a case as he has claimed from the beginning. As Bob Higgins noted, if his technology works, then his main concern should be the IP, and it's not clear how this court case will help him with this. At the same time, I remain deeply suspicious of IH for a variety of reasons, e.g. their excessive use of shell companies, badly written contract, stringing Rossi along for one year, strange 'anti-scientific' comments by their consultants regarding COP and conservation of energy, excessive secrecy, history of 'shady' brownfield deals, and attempts to patent and raise funds for technology (which they claim they don't believe in) behind Rossi's back.

  • quizzical: Perhaps more importantly, it seems clear to me that many other researchers (Parkhomov, Brillouin energy, me356, Suhas, Holmlid and others) are obtaining positive results (e.g. COP > 1) along with indications of nuclear effects.


    It might be supportive of Rossi's case for his counsel to introduce into evidence the upcoming video produced by MFMP showing the ME356 replication of Rossi's basic technology as fully functional and gainful. This video would place into doubt the testimony and assertions made by the IH paid expertes that the conservation of energy law cannot be violated. This video could also support an appeal by Rossi that disputes the assertion that LENR is not functional and that the verdict that is based on that assumption is invalid and not operable.


    Furthermore, the MFMP personnel who would have conducted that test of ME356's LENR technology could be called by Rossi's counsel to support the notion that LENR is now capable of substantial and indisputable gainful power production.


    There already existed video of Randell Mills' SunCell System that support gainful energy production that might show that the field of alternative energy production is making progress.

  • Axil wrote "It might be supportive of Rossi's case"

    It is unlikely that either Rossi or IHI would cite evidence from ' competitors.'


    Axil said

    "There already existed video of Randell Mills' SunCell System that support gainful energy production that might show that the field of alternative energy production is making progress."


    Randell Mills has recently written more meaningful evidence than video of gainful (=hydrinoful) energy production.

    http://brilliantlightpower.com…-publication-may-18-2017/


    If the MFMP validations of the Me356, Suhas Ralkar and George Egely technologies DO pan out

    the Rossi-Darden case will quickly pale into insignificance.


    The public focus will be on these technologies

    rather than endless case testimonies, transcripts, depositions...

    which are increasingly futile.

  • Problem is, Rossi has no huge pot of money other than funds that he conned, when that is gone , or forced to be clawed back, he is out of "business" (and if he is convicted of fraud, now or later, he will owe multiples of any damages and possibly attorney fees). Unless of course you wish to "donate" your life-savings and retirement to the "Rossi Cause"; have you done so, if not, why, you all believe it is a sure thing and thus would make $$bazillions$$, and I'm sure that Rossi would take your investment money. Have you written him a check, you should put your money where your mouth is.

  • Problem is, Rossi has no huge pot of money other than funds that he conned, when that is gone , or forced to be clawed back, he is out of "business" (and if he is convicted of fraud, now or later, he will owe multiples of any damages and possibly attorney fees). Unless of course you wish to "donate" your life-savings and retirement to the "Rossi Cause"; have you done so, if not, why, you all believe it is a sure thing and thus would make $$bazillions$$, and I'm sure that Rossi would take your investment money. Have you written him a check, you should put your money where your mouth is.


    You and your like are faced with a whack-a-mole situation. Your interaction with Rossi is not your only problem. I support open source LENR development. There will be more LENR developers than you can shake a stick at. What are you going to do with R. Mills and the SunCell? The LENR reaction is happening in Safire. You just can't fight mother nature.

  • You and your like are faced with a whack-a-mole situation. Your interaction with Rossi is not your only problem. I support open source LENR development. There will be more LENR developers than you can shake a stick at. What are you going to do with R. Mills and the SunCell? The LENR reaction is happening in Safire. You just can't fight mother nature.

    It's a simple question, have you, or any of the other Rossi disciples, donated/"invested" one penny toward "the Cause" (directly to a Rossi, or through an investment fund), or asked Rossi if you might invest in his greatest invention of the century??? If not, seems rather hypocritical (at best).

  • It's a simple question, have you, or any of the other Rossi disciples, donated/"invested" one penny toward "the Cause" (directly to a Rossi, or through an investment fund), or asked Rossi if you might invest in his greatest invention of the century??? If not, seems rather hypocritical (at best).


    I have interested myself since Rossi appeared on the LENR stage to move his technology into open source for scientific research. The next phase is to restrict both Rossi and IH LENR technology under government regulation as a harmful sub atomic particle source.

  • I remain deeply suspicious of IH for a variety of reasons, e.g. their excessive use of shell companies, badly written contract, stringing Rossi along for one year, strange 'anti-scientific' comments by their consultants regarding COP and conservation of energy, excessive secrecy, history of 'shady' brownfield deals, and attempts to patent and raise funds for technology (which they claim they don't believe in) behind Rossi's back.


    ...Also the general obnoxiousness of their PR efforts

  • You and your like are faced with a whack-a-mole situation. Your interaction with Rossi is not your only problem. I support open source LENR development. There will be more LENR developers than you can shake a stick at. What are you going to do with R. Mills and the SunCell? The LENR reaction is happening in Safire. You just can't fight mother nature.


    This is such a grossly inaccurate and confused perspective, but I believe it clearly indicates the 'tribal' thinking that leads to the irrational and ultimately detrimental (to LENR research) support for Rossi.


    I'm speaking for myself, but I can bet that this applies to the vast majority, if not all of the Rossi detractors here:


    1) Regarding Rossi specifically, I would be delighted if he really had a working process. Who wouldn't be? It would create unimaginable increased wealth, prosperity, and increased quality of life for all of humanity.


    2) Regarding other LENR research efforts for commercially viable over-unity energy production (Mills, Suhas, MFPF, etc.). Ditto. If the LENR 'cat' is out of the bag and cannot be stopped, then hallelujah! Great benefits to society are in store.


    3) Unfortunately, Rossi is an admitted scammer. The overwhelming evidence is that his 'stuff' is fake.


    4) Regarding other researchers, if there is any hope for some benefit to humanity, it will require quality, verifiable, and repeatable studies (not crappy, unverifiable, scamming demonstrations like what Rossi has provided).


    Can you Rossi supporters not see A) how tribal and superficial your Rossi cheerleading efforts are and B) how counterproductive to the field of LENR research it is to defend the extraordinary malpractice of Rossi?


    This notion that somehow Rossi detractors desire to 'whack LENR moles' demonstrates a profound mischaracterization and misunderstanding of the motives for pointing out the clear evidence of Rossi's deceit.


    I'd ask Rossi's supporters to try to imagine (for only a brief minute) that Rossi has scammed the field from the very beginning. Now, with that hypothetical fact that you are imagining (if only for a minute), I'd ask you to think about the implications to the LENR field given that this is true (if only hypothetically and for a minute). Do you see the damage?


    OK, your minute is up. Thanks for your understanding.


    The evidence that Rossi has been scamming all along, from Petroldragon, to Thermo-electric devices, to all things E-Cat, Doral, and to Quark-X is overwhelming, in my opinion.


    If you can grasp this, perhaps you could imagine that exposing Rossi's behaviors and 'evidence' for what they really are is a helpful step, overall, in exploring and advancing LENR research (albeit painful as it might seem)

  • axil if I'm correct the Rossi Gullstrom paper mentions the radiating surface 1cm2.


    I understand the quark has gone through some evolutions but I think the latest dimensions I heard of were 0.6 cm diameter by 2cm length. This would have a tube surface area of about 3.7cm2. (+ .56 cm2 or so if we include the surface area of the end caps)


    I think only part of the device is radiating heat.


    Could it be the whole tube is sapphire glass as has been suggested by some here but is capped or contains a 1 cm2 BB radiating surface and it's only this 1cm2 surface that gets to 2700 degC?


    This way perhaps we still would have BB radiation from the thermal surface and the remainder of the device may be transparent to the optical component through the sapphire?


    I suppose the BB radiating surface would need interesting properties. I suppose some metals could fit but some times wonder if it could be Boron Nitride or Carbon or Or Boron Carbide. They have interesting thermal properties but very different complementary electrical ones.


    The SWNT and MWNT Nano tube variants are also very interesting in their sorbant properties with gases such as Hydrogen especially when doped or otherwise treated. although I'm not sure if they share some of the possibly useful properties of metal Hydrides or bi metal Hydrides or not. NT's can also contain nanowires of transition metals but I guess that's another story.


    Edit: Ahh my apologies.... I just realized I miss posted this in this thread. It a bit off topic here. Feel free to move it to a more appropriate one.


  • I think I understand your 'indignation' and conviction that Rossi is a scammer. However, while I'm open to this possibility, I do not agree with you that the overwhelming evidence is that this is true and that his 'stuff' is fake. There is too much evidence on the other side (Focardi, Piantelli, Brillouin, tests by IH, earlier tests by Levi, recent reports of positive results by me356, Parkhomov, Suhas and others).


    More importantly, even if Rossi is a scammer, I absolutely do not think that he has harmed LENR research in the least. In fact, LENR research was 'dead' when he came along and despite the fact that it is now 28 years since Pons & Fleischmann's announcement we still do not have commercial level reproducible LENR. If anything, I think that Rossi has significantly revived interest in LENR, and his work has led to the re-invigoration of LENR research.

  • I think I understand your 'indignation' and conviction that Rossi is a scammer. However, while I'm open to this possibility, I do not agree with you that the overwhelming evidence is that this is true and that his 'stuff' is fake. There is too much evidence on the other side (Focardi, Piantelli, Brillouin, tests by IH, earlier tests by Levi, recent reports of positive results by me356, Parkhomov, Suhas and others).


    More importantly, even if Rossi is a scammer, I absolutely do not think that he has harmed LENR research in the least. In fact, LENR research was 'dead' when he came along and despite the fact that it is now 28 years since Pons & Fleischmann's announcement we still do not have commercial level reproducible LENR. If anything, I think that Rossi has significantly revived interest in LENR, and his work has led to the re-invigoration of LENR research.


    Well, we can agree to disagree on the harm Rossi has done to the credibility of LENR.


    But conversely, if Rossi's pulls a rabbit out his hat and actually produces something useful, then what harm exists critcizing Rossi's research malpractice and undisputed evidence of intentional deception entered into a US Federal court in discussions on a fringe blog?


    In any case, I've seen a tendency in Rossi supporters to excuse outrageously bad behavior because they think doing so somehow helps the field as a whole. To the contrary, I think supporting Rossi's bad behavior provides legitimate basis for critique of such misguided support.


    Regarding Axil's post, he wrongly assumes that legitimate, evidence-based critique of Rossi must imply an 'anti-LENR' perspective generally.


    I think this shallow notion is common to other Rossi supporters here as well, and is counterproductive: the inability of Axil and others sharing his perspective to appropriately address evidence and distinguish the quality of evidence from various LENR contributors, harms the credibility of the field generally.