Rossi vs. Darden developments [CASE CLOSED]

Quote from IH Fanboy

I know a thing or two about business as well. And I assure you, the single best business decision Rossi could make at this point would be to let the MFMP do a black box test. Even those who are most supportive of Rossi here and at ECW harbor doubts about the e-Cat. If rossi can get the LENR+ community firmly in its corner, its a done deal. He will have hundreds of evangelists spreading the news far and wide for him. He wouldn't be able to buy that kind of PR--not even close. Any risk in revealing a startup detail of the reactor would be eclipsed by what would be gained.

That is only true if such a test had positive results. And I suggest the reason Rossi will never allow that is because - at some level even if not consciously - he realises any such test would have negative results.

Quote from Eric Walker

That's not quite correct. As we've seen with the control run that was cut short, it is a very important detail that Rossi and Fabiani were so involved in the Lugano test. They really should have been included as authors on that paper.

When I talk about important phases I mean everything that happened before and after the various days of constant running of the reactor, so also the control run is a part of the initial phase. I think the professors were present at all the important stages and probably knew about things they could not write in the report because of their NDA. For this reason some of their choices may not be entirely clear to those who externally evaluate them.

Quote from IH Fanboy

I know a thing or two about business as well. And I assure you, the single best business decision Rossi could make at this point would be to let the MFMP do a black box test. Even those who are most supportive of Rossi here and at ECW harbor doubts about the e-Cat. If rossi can get the LENR+ community firmly in its corner, its a done deal. He will have hundreds of evangelists spreading the news far and wide for him. He wouldn't be able to buy that kind of PR--not even close. Any risk in revealing a startup detail of the reactor would be eclipsed by what would be gained.

I do not think Rossi is interested in convincing the LENR community, he wants to convince the markets and to do so he must be the first to impose his own product. Revealing the secrets before having a finished product for the sole purpose of having a greater consensus would be counterproductive.

Quote from THHuxleynew

SSC seems just to be incapable of imagining uncertainty - and then fits his rationalisation around his lack of imagination. In this case that IH could be confused by Rossi's setups, and the other independent tests, working when their own - done with much weaker technical resources, we know, Dameron, did not. So I have some sympathy with SSC - lack of imagination is no crime.

Dear TTH, it may be that I am lacking in imagination, but in any case I would not speak of "uncertainty" talking about IH.... Please read PLAINTIFFS’ REPLY IN SUPPORT OF THEIR MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT (doc 254), where you can find these words:

"Notably, Defendants could not point to a single document in which they notified Plaintiffs of their alleged inability to replicate the technology, whether as a result of their incompetence, faulty equipment, inferior materials, or outright lies. See SOF ¶¶ 31, 33. "

There are e-mails and documents where you can read that IH has initially obtained good results from its E-Cat tests. After Rossi had sued them, they began to say that they had never seen excess heat. But this complaint never came officially to Rossi. If at one point they really realized they were not able to replicate the reactor, why did not they even send an email to Rossi to tell him about it?

Quote from LFH Sam

IH Fanboy I agree that more public tests could potentially raise his credibility, in the LENR community and beyond but you are assuming ongoing tests and demos are not taken place and that huge amounts are not already waiting in escrow accounts. If that would be the case he might not see much to gain from public black-box testing, unfortunately.

I personally hoped the litigation would lead to those types of tests and disclosures you refer to, but so far it has not.
Because it hasn't one could be led to think there might possible be things going on that we are not being communicated here in this forum...

It does not address all of the issues, but if Rossi could show that one of his devices can be got to work as a black box by any independent party it would make it difficult (though still possible) for IH to claim no IP transfer. That is only one of the issues, but it could be an important one. and psychologically it might be decisive, since without that it looks to any Jury ads though Rossi has nothing.

Rossi had the capacity to do this, and present an expert report during discovery. So why did he not? Perhaps he does not really care about the $89M? Or he thinks the IP transfer issue and the "Rossi has nothing" argument do not need contradicting? What do you think... IHFB?

Quote from THHuxleynew

You seem knowledgeable - so you will remember that Rossi said he had several spare reactors - in case one broke. Indeed for a test of such magnitude it would be stupid for him not to have that. And given the long time of the test a day to rerun a control at a lower temperature is nothing.

Ha ha ha ha again !

Not a day but almost the entire calibration process would have to be repeated in case of one broke ! you seem not to consider the fact all those reactor ware done by hands so each device was in fact different from the others that why the Professors have chosen to have a self calibration using the very same device.

In case of "identical reactors" produced in series a good type of test would have been to have two reactors one loaded and one empty and make a comparison. But in that case it was not possible because the reactors ware hand made prototypes ans so any difference could be explained as a due to the charge or due to some different construction detail.

Quote from THHuxleynew

Furthermore the active test operated at two temperatures: (Levi 1250C = 750C and Levi 1400C = 800C)

Again the disinformation and FUD of the Voice of IH. Your numbers regarding the temperature are pure mystification and also you seem to not remember the fact that Dr. Levi was not alone.

Quote from SSC

I think the professors were present at all the important stages and probably knew about things they could not write in the report because of their NDA. For this reason some of their choices may not be entirely clear to those who externally evaluate them.

Ok, that's one possibility (that the professors chose to terminate the control run early). Another possibility: Rossi chose to terminate the control run early. Here we continue to counter suggestion with suggestion, which loses its effectiveness after the first round.

Quote from SSC

After Rossi had sued them, they began to say that they had never seen excess heat. But this complaint never came officially to Rossi. If at one point they really realized they were not able to replicate the reactor, why did not they even send an email to Rossi to tell him about it?

I think you've got your timeline mixed up. We know that Rossi got very upset when there was the incident early on with the dummy reactor that showed a high COP. I'm somewhat confident that IH voiced doubts to Rossi later on as well. Also, the lawsuit happened in April 2016. IH sent out at least one of their PR statements, where they hinted that all was not well, long before April. I can only assume they were more straightforward with Rossi behind the scenes once lawyers started to get involved some months before the lawsuit.

Quote from Eric Walker

Another possibility: Rossi chose to terminate the control run early. Here we continue to counter suggestion with suggestion, which loses its effectiveness after the first round.

No there is not this possibility. Only the people who takes the data should be able to control the system !

Quote from ele

No there is not this possibility. Only the people who takes the data should be able to control the system !

It is no good asserting that something isn't a possibility (that Rossi was the one responsible for terminating the control run early) when it very obviously is a possibility. I'm starting to grow weary of your contributions here, ele. I will probably start regularly moving them to the Playground thread unless you raise a solid point instead of just responding to people.

Quote from SSC

Dear TTH, it may be that I am lacking in imagination, but in any case I would not speak of "uncertainty" talking about IH.... Please read PLAINTIFFS’ REPLY IN SUPPORT OF THEIR MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT (doc 254), where you can find these words:

"Notably, Defendants could not point to a single document in which they notified Plaintiffs of their alleged inability to replicate the technology, whether as a result of their incompetence, faulty equipment, inferior materials, or outright lies. See SOF ¶¶ 31, 33. "

There are e-mails and documents where you can read that IH has initially obtained good results from its E-Cat tests. After Rossi had sued them, they began to say that they had never seen excess heat. But this complaint never came officially to Rossi. If at one point they really realized they were not able to replicate the reactor, why did not they even send an email to Rossi to tell him about it?

Ok, fair enough. I should have been more precise.

The issue here is either inability to conceive of uncertainty, or inability to conceive of IH changing their internal judgement.

The evidence here of lack of official notification cuts both ways. They never officially notified Rossi that his device worked, either. For quite some time, using Rossi's tests, they thought his stuff did work. They did later ask Rossi to come and help them get stuff to work, and were refused [where is the precise reference for this - from Darden I think or Vaughn?]. That they never officially notified Rossi is understandable when it is documented that people who claim his stuff does not work get called snakes and liars. They thought with reason that to keep Rossi on side they needed to treat him with kid gloves. After all, according to the agreement he was meant to help them, and they knew these tests are complex and they might be getting them wrong - with only Dameron as tech expertise.

It was a bad call.

One thing to remember here is that the source evidence, taken under oath where to lie is to commit perjury, must be considered more reliable than summaries in MSJs which can (and sort of are obligated to) twist truth as much as possible. Where in Rossi's evidence has he contradicted what IH have said in their evidence?

Quote from SSC

I do not think Rossi is interested in convincing the LENR community, he wants to convince the markets and to do so he must be the first to impose his own product. Revealing the secrets before having a finished product for the sole purpose of having a greater consensus would be counterproductive.

If Rossi wants to convince the markets, he must first convince the LENR+ community. Because the markets look here first. Don't misunderstand me: going to ICCF and convincing the aging traditional LENR researchers is not what I'm referring to. I'm referring to the crowd at ECW, primarily. I'm referring to the MFMP. I'm referring to a subset of the participants here. Convince us first by way of an open black box MFMP test, and the markets will open up like the parting of the skies.

IHFB - great news (I hope that you'll see it that way) - a new generation of smart, well educated researchers and enablers are beginning to emerge. The pioneering elders

that have kept the faith through 30 years of minor feast and major famine (through pure perseverance and belief) are in position to hand-off the baton when they are ready. We still need the guys who can

do the math by hand to stay in the hunt for as long as possible. (including our Dirac trained specialist warrior). Your aging out mantra is Planet Rossi story lore and belongs in the rearview mirror.

Quote from Dewey Weaver

Your aging out mantra is Planet Rossi story lore and belongs in the rearview mirror.

It's not my mantra. It's Jed's.

Quote from IH Fanboy

If Rossi wants to convince the markets, he must first convince the LENR+ community. Because the markets look here first. Don't misunderstand me: going to ICCF and convincing the aging traditional LENR researchers is not what I'm referring to. I'm referring to the crowd at ECW, primarily. I'm referring to the MFMP. I'm referring to a subset of the participants here. Convince us first by way of an open black box MFMP test, and the markets will open up like the parting of the skies.

Mercy, absolutely unbelievable.

Roseland67:

Good comment! But try putting the text below the quote box. This is a strange messaging system that makes that difficult, but give it a shot. Put the cursor below the quote box and the lines should open up. Or put it at the edge of the box and press enter. Your comment should appear below it.

Quote

Quote here.

Comment here.

So I am to understand that the several dozen people who are the mainstay of this website and ECW have the power to influence world markets? A nod from you folks and "the floodgates will open"?

Who knew?

Quote from interested observer

So I am to understand that the several dozen people who are the mainstay of this website and ECW have the power to influence world markets? A nod from you folks and "the floodgates will open"?

Who knew?

It does seem bizaare. But remember to sustain the view that e-cats work, important to some here and all on ECW, it helps to have a conspiracy theory along the lines of: this technology is being actively suppressed because it would disrupt markets if released. From which it is logical to suppose that some significant fraction of Wall Street is hanging on to every post here. Personally I'm quite sure all those disruptible markets go up when I post.

Quote from interested observer

So I am to understand that the several dozen people who are the mainstay of this website and ECW have the power to influence world markets?

The poster whose post you refer to in this case seems to intentionally make tendentious statements, so I would take the views he expresses with a grain of salt. It is true that there is a group of people here who share similar views, but they are probably a minority on this site. LENR is a fringe topic, and the Internet is a big place. ECW is a pretty different place than LENR Forum, and I won't attempt to summarize the views there.

One element of the suggestion that seems plausible is that if at some point LENR is vindicated in the eyes of mainstream science, I would expect the revelation to be a pretty disruptive one, although it is hard to say how disruptive and in what ways. Also, I would not be surprised if there would be private funding that would become available for someone like me356 if he were to successfully complete a series of rigorous tests, and possibly, unfortunately, even if the tests were not rigorous. It would also not be surprising if what private funders there are looking to invest money in LENR consult LENR Forum in addition to other sources of information.