Rossi vs. Darden developments [CASE CLOSED]

  • There is no credible or repeatable empirical evidence of LENR occurring with nickel-hydrogen. You have no legs to stand on other than suspicion and conspiracy theory. The data support IH's claim that AR did not transfer the IP--almost certainly because there is no IP to transfer. It doesn't work. It never has, and there is not a shred of good empirical evidence showing otherwise.

    This seems to be a rather absurd and discouraging statement. What about the original (and later) work by Focardi and Piantelli? What about the more recent (last few years) claims by Piantelli? What about the work of Brillouin energy, which has been verified by SRI (Stanford Research Institute)? What about the recent work of Parkhomov (he will give a talk on this at the conference in Italy in a few days I believe)? What about the work of Tom Claytor (previous and recent) in which he detected tritium production? What about the recent work of Mizuno et al - here's a link: http://iscmns.org/CMNS/JCMNS-Vol13.pdf#page=432 (although these results may have been "corrected") and another more recent paper by Kitamura et al involving Ni-composites and hydrogen: http://iscmns.org/CMNS/JCMNS-Vol19.pdf#page=143


    You believe that all of this work, including the recent JCMNS reference above and the SRI/Brillouin work is not credible?


    It would be nice to know why you (and others) repeat these flat, but poorly justified statements. Are you the expert on all research in Ni-H? Is there any reason I should believe your subjective evaluation of these works, as opposed to those of other experts such as SRI?


    For the purposes of discussion, it would be nice if you could provide credible reasons for your statements and how they apply to the works I have cited above.

  • WOW you must say that to all Investors that visited Doral with Darden and that had put their money in IH.

    And where is now all this money ? we are talking about 250M$ not just few bucks.

    It would be interesting to understand why IH has approved the first test done by them in Ferrara and payed 10M$ to Rossi.

    250M exists only in "Rossi says". Don't you realize by now that he just puts out things like that (along with heated factories in Italy, robotic assembly lines, endothermic events, .....) just to cloud the issues instead of telling the truth. Why do you constantly repeat such misinformation? And yes, I think that IH did tell investors that Doral just that: Rossi's stuff is not to be believed. It was IH's other research that they were interested in by that time.

  • There is no credible or repeatable empirical evidence of LENR occurring with nickel-hydrogen.

    There is somewhat credible evidence, from Mills and Thermacore, Piantelli, and in recent years from Kitamura. However, these studies have not been independently repeated, so the second part of your sentence is correct.


    There are also many failed Ni-H studies. I think as of now we should put Parkhamov and me356 in that category. If they come up with better evidence we can move them to another category.


    Rossi's 1-year test is not a scientific claim. It was a crude attempt to defraud people. Anyone familiar with conventional instruments and boilers can see that the Penon report is fake, and that even the data and configuration in it were real, it would prove nothing. People who do not see that, such as IH Fanboy and SSC, have no idea what they are talking about. They do not understand grade-school level science, such as the fact that pressure changes the boiling point. You should ignore everything they say.

  • The data support IH's claim that AR did not transfer the IP--almost certainly because there is no IP to transfer.

    Can you point us to the data, that underlays your claim?

    Oh come now. The data has been repeated here time after time, ad nauseam. The data includes, but is not limited to:


    1. A test with an empty cell produced as much apparent heat as a cell with powder! You can't ask for better proof than that. Rossi never denied this happened.


    2. The Penon report. This is a crude fake, as anyone with any knowledge can see. The numbers are obviously made up and impossible, but even if they were real by some miracle, they would prove nothing, because the instruments cannot distinguish steam from hot water.


    3. Additional ad hoc preposterous claims about small quantities of endthermic materials that absorb 1 MW of heat continuously for months, and invisible heat exchangers that could not begin to work even if they real and made according to Rossi's specifications.


    You do not believe this data. That's okay, but you should not keep demanding that people repeat it and repeat it, pretending you do not know about it already. You should just say "I believe whatever Rossi says." That closes the discussion.

  • There is somewhat credible evidence, from Mills and Thermacore, Piantelli, and in recent years from Kitamura. However, these studies have not been independently repeated, so the second part of your sentence is correct.


    There are also many failed Ni-H studies. I think as of now we should put Parkhamov and me356 in that category. If they come up with better evidence we can move them to another category.


    I would maybe add Brillouin Energy Technologies and the Chinese researchers to the list of somewhat credible Ni-H researchers.

    In terms of Parkhomov and Me356 I'd have to agree, if they come up with better evidence we can move them to another category.

    There are as well three wild cards teams in Nickel Hydrogen that does not communicate openly I would add to (my) list of somewhat credible or interesting to follow, but they are not all reputable as those you listed.

    Wild card 1: A larger team that has operated a very long time without the knowledge of the LENR or beyond communities. Their claims are in the "to good to be true category" and they struggle with the credibility needed to raise larger funding.

    Wild card 2: An anonymous researcher LookingForHeat is collaborating with. They have just a little bit of data, so far, it's been extended to experts, some deemed it very interesting, others said with certainty it had no significant value at all. Alan Smith is receiving new data as we speak from a three day test-run that will be analysed by him in the days to follow, possible others.

    Wild card 3: Make yourselves some popcorn


  • The IP transfer.


    It is quite simple. IH have in sworn depositions said that the reactors did not work, do not work, if they had worked things would be different, they told Rossi that they did not work, Rossi refused to help get them to work. They also point to early indications that reactors appeared to work, and equal indications that control reactors were working. From which they worked out there was something wrong with Fulvio's test setup they were initially using.


    Rossi in sworn deposition has not denied this. Nor has he any other evidence that he gave IH the knowhow to make working reactors. So it is Darden's sworn word vs ... Nothing.


    IH never claim IP was not transferred. They claim either IP was not transferred, or Rossi's reactors never worked as he claimed. I think they prefer the latter but quite correctly they point out that they cannot know.


    RossEle, Rossc, etc. Would you like to point out the Court document actual evidence (not summaries in MSJs which are allowed to lie within broad limits) which contradicts this?

  • Can you point us to the data, that underlays your claim? Or do You you just repeat statements made by scientific dilletantes like Darden?

    Did Darden say this? If so, maybe he is repeating what I have been saying. ;)


    Please point to one credible and repeatable claim of excess heating from Ni-H. I can point to lots of null results. We've been down that road, but I can go through the list again if you can't remember.

  • I would maybe add Brillouin Energy Technologies and the Chinese researchers to the list of somewhat credible Ni-H researchers.

    Somewhat credible but not repeated as far as I know. Not independently confirmed, or replicated either. (Repeating, confirming and replicating are three different things.)

  • Ni is much more a common metal then Palladium. All precious metal go up when there is difficult times in Economy so before making conclusions it would be nice to make a correlation plot of Palladium price vs Gold price in order to see if there is a correlation.

    I don't understand your point. Pd is up 21.4% on the year and gold only 10%. Clearly something is moving Pd more than Au. Ni is down 25.8% this month alone.

  • I don't understand your point. Pd is up 21.4% on the year and gold only 10%. Clearly something is moving Pd more than Au. Ni is down 25.8% this month alone.


    Well that is all down to my and your posts here - we've moved the Ni price by sowing doubt in the minds of dealers that Rossi's new fire would actually work and lead to increased demand for Ni.

  • People who do not see that, such as IH Fanboy and SSC, have no idea what they are talking about. They do not understand grade-school level science, such as the fact that pressure changes the boiling point. You should ignore everything they say.


    Eric ,


    Unless Jed can back up his assertion with some evidence, even a single post that suggests what he alleges, do you not think this is a comment better suited for the playground?

  • 1. A test with an empty cell produced as much apparent heat as a cell with powder! You can't ask for better proof than that. Rossi never denied this happened


    JedRothwell : I just don't like the rhetoric: IH has not published any scientific analysis to substantiate their claims. As such these claims have no value in any trial, because the law will interprete this sworn statements as simple party claims.


    Even if sworn and being wrong this will have no consequences for Darden. Consequences will only occur, if IH wins the trial and the statement later can be proven being a lie.

    The worst what can happen for IH is a simple report (from an unknown site) that definitely shows a positive COP with AR's IP.


    There is no need for AR to file any such report, as he per definition, AR claims his IP works. Any witness can read out of such a report!

    There is also no need for AR to deny such a finding like COP 1 by IH.


    Thus IH is playing high risk, with such a sworn statement.


    To repeat it once more: Steam or no steam doesn't matter. Without steam (Doral) you still get a COP of 11! IH has to find an other loophole to survive.

    It would be a shame, if they had to pay for A COP < 6...

  • I just don't like the rhetoric: IH has not published any scientific analysis to substantiate their claims.

    I repeat: Rossi never denied this event took place. He said nothing about in his deposition. I.H. showed him an empty cell that appeared to producing as much heat as the cells with powder in them. He got angry and stormed out. What he did not do is contradict this in his deposition. I presume that is because I.H. has proof. Otherwise he would be a fool not to deny it. This fact alone destroys his claims.


    As I said, the Penon report uploaded by Rossi himself also destroys his claims, except with scientifically illiterate true believers such as yourself. You should have a look at it. Read it and weep.


    http://coldfusioncommunity.net…/01/0197.03_Exhibit_3.pdf

  • There is no credible or repeatable empirical evidence of LENR occurring with nickel-hydrogen. You have no legs to stand on other than suspicion and conspiracy theory.

    So you have not read the many papers published by Focardi and Piantelli and the subsequently granted European patents of Piantelli.

    All that material was published before and independently from Rossi and contains a lot of evidence that the phenomenon exist.

    Note also the results from Celani and Cammarora, also independent from Rossi.

    (Nobody here is talking about conspiracy apart you.....)

  • As I said, the Penon report uploaded by Rossi himself also destroys his claims, except with scientifically illiterate true believers such as yourself. You should have a look at it. Read it and weep.

    Penon had written the report and given to IH and Rossi and then because is Rossi that is part of the trial and not Penon is quite obvoius that was Rossi (or better his attorneys ) that uploaded the material.

    Why should we weep ? Because you say so ? Are you a full Professor of any type of Science to accuse others to be scientifically illiterate ?

    I.H. showed him an empty cell that appeared to producing as much heat as the cells with powder in them.

    Dear Jed fuel is not sufficient to start the reaction. You need also an electromagnetic stimulation and also other condition about the fuel and the reactor chamber have to be verified !

    Probably IH was trying just to blackmail Rossi or the experiment was simply badly assembled. Without a full report with all the details your words are meaningless.

  • To repeat it once more: Steam or no steam doesn't matter. Without steam (Doral) you still get a COP of 11! IH has to find an other loophole to survive.

    As I recall it is a factor of ~3, not 11. In any case, the rest of the spurious heat is easily explained by problems with the flow meter. The flow meter was not working, and cannot work. The pumps could not have produced that high flow rate. The flow meter was the wrong type and it was installed in a mostly empty pipe, which the manual explicitly warned against.


    Even Rossi and Penon admitted the flow meter readings were absurd, when they arbitrarily reduced them by 10%.

  • The evidence of Rossi's tests, even when checked by 6 high-powered academics, giving lagre false positives is legendary. You suddenly seem to have an exaggerated respect for IH competence in the one area they (real estate VCs) were particularly weak. You think Dameron was able to debug Rossi's false positives?


    Call IH, in retrospect, careless and over-trusting, sure. Calling Darden a forsworn liar on the assumption that IH were more technically adept than 6 Profs is stupid and unjust.

    I do not share this view of things: none of us here knows for sure how things have been and you should have more respect for opinions different than yours. In my opinion, if IH was incompetent, they had to hire engineers right from the start, to show respect to investors, instead of trying with Rossi's help. Before asking others to invest in a project, you need to be sure it works. I believe that IH has actually had positive results, you believe the opposite, full stop. You can not be certain that Darden did not lie about his failures with the E-Cat, so calling him a liar is neither stupid nor unfair, but just a chance. Here maybe it's you that have a lack of imagination.

  • This is a typical Rossc excuse. MFMP has demonstrated that they can be quite discrete without even revealing the identity of the inventor or any secrets.

    I do not share this view of things: none of us here knows for sure how things have been and you should have more respect for opinions different than yours. In my opinion, if IH was incompetent, they had to hire engineers right from the start, to show respect to investors, instead of trying with Rossi's help. Before asking others to invest in a project, you need to be sure it works. I believe that IH has actually had positive results, you believe the opposite, full stop. You can not be certain that Darden did not lie about his failures with the E-Cat, so calling him a liar is neither stupid nor unfair, but just a chance. Here maybe it's you that have a lack of imagination.

  • There is no credible or repeatable empirical evidence of LENR occurring with nickel-hydrogen.

    Brillouin's people probably do not think so, and anyway quizzical has already answered you in a proper way.

    I wonder what drives people who do not believe in the veracity of the phenomenon to spend time on LENR forums ....

  • It is quite simple. IH have in sworn depositions said that the reactors did not work, do not work, if they had worked things would be different, they told Rossi that they did not work, Rossi refused to help get them to work. They also point to early indications that reactors appeared to work, and equal indications that control reactors were working. From which they worked out there was something wrong with Fulvio's test setup they were initially using.


    Rossi in sworn deposition has not denied this. Nor has he any other evidence that he gave IH the knowhow to make working reactors. So it is Darden's sworn word vs ... Nothing.

    What should I find in the documents? Rossi saying "my technology works"? Do you think that if he do not explicitly say this thing, it means that he do not think so? Some things are taken for granted, it is not necessary to specify them.

  • So you have not read the many papers published by Focardi and Piantelli and the subsequently granted European patents of Piantelli.

    All that material was published before and independently from Rossi and contains a lot of evidence that the phenomenon exist.

    Note also the results from Celani and Cammarora, also independent from Rossi.

    (Nobody here is talking about conspiracy apart you.....)


    ele - as long as nobody in this world was or is able to at least repeat one of these experiments, independent from the authors, and produce EH indubitable - all this published paperwork remains paperwork, but will not change any main stream science or research opinion....

    This is the main and only problem with current LENR claims I can see - just claims and no proof at all. If the MFMP tests past week would have clearly shown signs of EH - live on the internet! - that there is a LENR reaction as was claimed - then we finally would reached what everybody on this forum and his mother was waiting for since decades: the the new fire really exists....even if nobody understood so far how exactly. But then with the mainstream science focusing on this, we would see a run and it would just be a matter of time for the first commercial products to come, long long before we would have seen safe working ITER, TOKAMAK or whatever billion dollar fusion devices.

    Instead of referring to these papers you better should force your buddy AR to hand over one of his magic devices for a public and independent test. He could have changed the world long time ago, if he would have done so (assuming that his stuff would work...). Since you seem to be close to AR - can you explain from your perspective what exactly drives Rossi to always have excuses to not stick to his promises? Money? Fear that somebody steels his IP he has sold anyway to IH? Any idea when he is finally doing his public Quark demo he was preparing with a partner (!) already last year? I think I know the answer...

  • I do not share this view of things: none of us here knows for sure how things have been and you should have more respect for opinions different than yours. In my opinion, if IH was incompetent, they had to hire engineers right from the start, to show respect to investors, instead of trying with Rossi's help. Before asking others to invest in a project, you need to be sure it works. I believe that IH has actually had positive results, you believe the opposite, full stop. You can not be certain that Darden did not lie about his failures with the E-Cat, so calling him a liar is neither stupid nor unfair, but just a chance. Here maybe it's you that have a lack of imagination.


    Sure anyone can lie. My point is here that you are traducing Darden with no evidence. Rossi is not denying what he says, in sworn deposition.


    In IH's defence here, they had many claimed independent reports showing COP of order 10 from Rossi devices. They felt (Darden says) they did not need complex in-house engineering expertise to check that the device was really working if COP was of that order and they had the device to test in their labs. Pity they did not seek advice from me or Jed or a few others here!


    Just saying anything could be true may be technically correct but is not a good argument for believing things with no evidence. You have a perfect right to this belief, just as I have a perfect right to point out that you have given no evidence for it, and there is significant evidence against it.

  • @IH Fanboy: you are correct. I don't know your expertise, whom you associate with, your other monikers, where else you post, your shoe size, or how you like your coffee. All I know about you is that you have nearly 1,800 posts here desperately trying to defend every ridiculous action by Rossi. That is all anyone needs to know about you.

  • So you have not read the many papers published by Focardi and Piantelli and the subsequently granted European patents of Piantelli.

    All that material was published before and independently from Rossi and contains a lot of evidence that the phenomenon exist.

    Note also the results from Celani and Cammarora, also independent from Rossi.

    (Nobody here is talking about conspiracy apart you.....)

    A patent is hardly an automatic credible claim of excess heating. Piantelli's work has not been replicated. There is no credible and repeatable method for achieving results from any of those things you reference. I am not making claims of a conspiracy, but I do claim AR has been running a scam. Celani has been resoundingly refuted by the work at SKINR with high accuracy calorimetry.


    Instead of just dropping names, why don't you provide some links to empirical evidence supporting the Ni-H effect that has been credibly replicated by an independent third party.

  • Brillouin's people probably do not think so, and anyway quizzical has already answered you in a proper way.

    I wonder what drives people who do not believe in the veracity of the phenomenon to spend time on LENR forums ....

    Sure Brillouin doesn't agree. But Godes thinks he has it all figured out from theory to being able to totally control the reaction. I know he monitors this forum, but has not provided evidence for any recent claims and his old work has never been replicated by anyone else (unless you want to rely on his say-so). I do not buy the last test from SRI, since the input power measurement was done by a system designed by Brillouin. Honestly, we don't really have enough info to say one way or another since all we have is a press release. One thing we do know, is that he has raised even more money than AR! I don't really see Godes as a scammer, but he could easily be deceiving himself. Until Godes shows the data, I will assume that his system works about as well as AR's and Me356's.

  • Alan it would be very interesting to have a comment from you here.

    I find your reactor very interesting but needs improvements on the waveform on my opinion


    The SD card and cores was sent over with courier because of the Asti conference next week. It's premature to speak about data received so recently, but if there is anything out of the normal in the data I'm sure Alan can have the others look at it in Italy to share their opinion as well.

    LFH has worked discretely with several researchers and advised on their data before it blew out of proportions. Was it not for LFH there would have been more work discussed as intensively as Parkhomov or Me356. It's a smart way to go about things, actually working and collaborating with others before huge investments and development of commercial technology etc. (Sanity check)


    At the moment LFH moves forward at 2% capacity, should a researcher have something with value and potential LFH can initiate everything from test and analysis to marketing and help with funding raising (not necessarily asking anything very substantial directly in return). There are much more capability and value that can indirectly be made available than people realise, including (professional) valuable social media marketing. I'll make a bold statement, if the situation was ideal LFH could help to allocate more manpower than ENEA or IH to work on a project, swiftly.

    For example: LFH has contact with a Hollywood celebrity with millions of followers on his social media accounts, one short post from him would be seen by hundreds of thousands, basically that little post would make more impact and drive more attention than years worth of pr outreach from the whole community, including TD's Financial Times article. But it would have to be justifiable, otherwise it's a no-go.

    LFH together with MFMP could be a very a very good launchpad, if there is/was prospective technology. Worst case scenario, if the technology does not work, we can sell it to Dewey for 11.5 million dollars.