Rossi vs. Darden developments - Part 2

  • sigmoidal ,


    Yes I think you have it. It's all a bit of a stretch and given what we know there is is no harassment, bribery, coercion etc. But it does seem to indicate that Levi is tied at the hip with Rossi, no?


    On the other hand, and I'm no lawyer, once the case started, it probably was a mistake for Dewey Weaver to contact potential witnesses outside of the discovery process. The possibility of what the plaintiffs are claiming is one reason why.


    I can't wait till June 26th when the trial starts.

  • sIG,


    Thanks for the good summation. Somehow though after reading it all, I get the impression Rossi, his lawyers, and maybe some here, feel the Lugano profs were off limits to IH. That Rossi, and Rossi alone had/has the sole right to communicate and work with them.


    However that is not the case, as IH was invested in the Lugano Hotcat, and the outcome, every bit as much as Rossi was. Both parties acknowledge the Lugano reactor was built at IH's facilities. Darden even worried that they had put it together perhaps too quickly before shipping it off to Lugano. Darden also mentioned that they wanted to have it tested there in NC, but Rossi did not want the profs having to fly back and forth.


    Being that this was a joint venture, IH had every right to contact, email, show-up on their doorstep of the profs, or whatever to discuss with them their Lugano results, methodology, clear up this or that, or even to inform them of any new developments like Dewey did. They signed onto testing in the first place, and part of their responsibility then would include answering questions as needed. Even uncomfortable ones. Of course, we know they refused from the get-go to answer any questions, choosing instead to bury their heads in the sand.


    So sorry, I have little sympathy that they felt pressured when Dewey advised them that Lugano was "increasingly controversial". It was always so, and they knew it...what cry babies.

  • I am not clear as to why people think that "the professors" should have been considered potential witnesses to activities in Fl. It seems all they could offer is "hearsay" evidence. I have not hear anything that says they has any first hand information about Doral at the time of contact.


    ---unless perhaps the pinball payoff is considered.

  • I was waiting for a true IH believer to defend the indefensible.


    I'll infer that there is at least some tongue-in-cheek in your response. ;-)


    So there now is at least some hope for IH detractors to find some dirt on IH, but only if specific connections to Sha come to light or some new evidence that we have not seen emerges. Weaver's email seems ill-advised to me, but hardly rises to 'bribery, intimidation, harassment, or coercion'.


    But this same filing, to me, provides some quite positive insight into Darden. As IHFB conceded, he's far more informed and involved in the research than I anticipated, and what I find to be an appropriate level of skepticism and simultaneous patience and willingness to risk a lot of money to get to the bottom of things.


    The summary that he wrote in 2014 (Document 167-02, Exhibit 1) was very impressive and informative.


    On the other hand, I think that this filing adds further evidence that Rossi is delusional. He seems to earnestly have the capacity to believe he is 'Nobel Prize-worthy' despite his many provable deceits (HydroFusion 'masterpiece', JMP is related to Johnson Mathey, JMP is 'independent' or Rossi/Leonardo, etc.). He also seems to have paranoid tendencies (shutting out Murray, instabilities noted by Darden).


    I can see why Rossi was hoping to have this under court seal.


  • My hope is that they are moving on and performing new tests with systems they have designed. If they can produce rock solid results -- hopefully self sustained operation like Songsheng achieved -- with their own fuel and reactor, the results will hold ten times the significance of any previous E-Cat test. This will especially be true if they run a series of tests, figure out the key parameters that allow excess heat production, and share the know how in any report they may release -- if they are performing such testing. This could trigger an avalanche of replications by third parties around the world.

  • If I read Darden's status email correctly both Rossi and Fiabini were to be present for the 3rd so called 'independent' test (Lugano) the entire time with the other professors showing up on occasion. This is getting to be too much.


    Peter,


    Good point. It was not spelled out that way in the Lugano report authored by Levi either. He was very clear that this was independent in the true sense of the word. Nor did he (Levi) mention the Swedes would be dropping in from time to time. He also wrote in the report that Rossi was only there to start it up at the beginning, and came back at the end to assist draw the fuel sample, but we now know Rossi/Fabiani, were there maybe the whole time.


    One would think with the huge importance of this test, were the Hotcat to be proven real, that Levi, and those that signed the report, would have been much more careful in describing the roles of all. Especially Rossi's, considering the controversy over Rossi's participation in the first Hotcat Ferrara test, and their saying it was "independent", when it was not..

  • Somehow though after reading it all, I get the impression Rossi, his lawyers, and maybe some here, feel the Lugano profs were off limits to IH. That Rossi, and Rossi alone had/has the sole right to communicate and work with them.


    Yes, I completely agree.


    And this thought occurred to me regarding Uzi Sha. Apparently, from googling, he either has some significant finances or knows people with significant finances in Eastern Europe and Russia. So suppose he see's what IH is doing, and hopes that he (or his contacts) can get a piece of the action in Europe or other places that don't fall under the IH's territory or compete directly with IH. He might reasonably want to find ways to get resources to move LENR implementation forward (ultimately for profit). And if so, he might reasonably be in contact with Darden regarding IH's progress.


    When Darden gets sued, Sha might reasonably converse with Darden (perhaps even through lawyer Jaffe) about this incident, in order to not waste resources on a 'dead end' potential technology. And Sha might reasonably try to recruit Levi to do collaborate with other researchers as long as Levi is willing to distance himself from Rossi and work on more promising research.


    I admit this is speculation on my part, but I don't think it is an unreasonable scenario. And given the 'evidence' in Rossi's motion, Rossi's assertion that Darden was directly involved in getting Sha to to try to recruit Levi is also speculation. The assertions by Levi that he felt "harassed, threatened and coerced into doing something that I do not wish to do." seems pretty lame. Like, how dare Sha try to recruit me?


  • What matters to me, most of all, is not what "dirt" the court case turns up on Andrea Rossi or Industrial Heat. My hope is that it reveals more about the fundamental nature of the E-Cat nickel hydrogen reaction. In my opinion, regardless if the mud balls are real, fictitious, or something in between, the fight is obscuring the truth about the reality of the technology as a whole. This is the biggest tragedy. Multiple and rigorous third party replications is what will clear away the negativity about the actual existence of a high powered effect.

  • My hope is that they are moving on and performing new tests with systems they have designed. If they can produce rock solid results -- hopefully self sustained operation like Songsheng achieved -- with their own fuel and reactor, the results will hold ten times the significance of any previous E-Cat test


    If you are talking about IH, Dewey said on here the other day that IH was abandoning NiH. I wrote a post earlier today about that in light of the new documents, which as Sig notes, could possibly look incriminating to IH, and that maybe IH/Dewey said what he did to make IH's actions appear less incriminating.


    When the suit is over, with Rossi either in jail, or wearing a Nobel science medal, while prancing around his new billion $ mansion facing Miami Beach, IH will be actively back in the NiH game...maybe.

  • Multiple and rigorous third party replications is what will clear away the negativity about the actual existence of a high powered effect.


    That most likely doesn't exist. (I know, we obviously differ on this - and to be clear, I'm referring to pure NiH LENR).


    If, in fact pure NiH LENR is a dead end, it's a good thing to know that it is a dead end. And yes, it would be super-awesome if somehow it works.


    I just don's see any credible evidence that pure NiH has ever produced LENR.


    And I've seen a lot of evidence that it doesn't.


    But, like Edison, if we can rule out NiH, that helps move things to more promising materials.

  • And this thought occurred to me regarding Uzi Sha. Apparently, from googling, he either has some significant finances or knows people with significant finances in Eastern Europe and Russia.

    Really ? That's interesting. I have tried to type that name on google but there were no significant results or at least no that info.

    Can you please post the link ?

  • If you are talking about IH, Dewey said on here the other day that IH was abandoning NiH. I wrote a post earlier today about that in light of the new documents, which as Sig notes, could possibly look incriminating to IH, and that maybe IH/Dewey said what he did to make IH's actions appear less incriminating.


    When the suit is over, with Rossi either in jail, or wearing a Nobel science medal, while prancing around his new billion $ mansion facing Miami Beach, IH will be actively back in the NiH game...maybe.


    I was talking about the Swedish replicators and/or other groups that may be gearing up for projects. My opinion, which may not be worth a grain of salt, is that the NiH technology is real and the Rossi Effect was just the Focardi/Piantelli effect scaled up a few orders of magnitude (mainly due to increasing surface area and incorporating additional methods of atomic hydrogen (or ions of atomic hydrogen) production. If this can be verified by so many third parties -- all utilizing the same set of guidelines -- that the effect becomes indisputable, it will cast a new light on the conflict between Industrial Heat and Andrea Rossi. Other than confirming that his technology as a whole was real, this may not glamorize Rossi to any significant extent. In fact, it could possibly -- this is hypothetical -- reveal a situation in which Industrial Heat intentionally tried to marginalize the significance of NiH technology and Andrea Rossi withheld the best evidence of his effect for petty reasons. My gut feeling is that replicating the high powered NiH effect is not difficult if you have gained the hands on experience and know how to properly prepare the nickel. I honestly feel that Andrea Rossi, at least in the past, didn't want other parties to realize how simple it is to reproduce the effect with focused, concentrated, and methodical effort. If Industrial Heat at some point realized this too -- regardless if they were able to gain the know how themselves -- they might have wanted to downplay the significance of NiH technology to allow some parties to catch up.


    All of this is just my wild speculation -- I'm thinking out loud. The only part I'm personally convinced of is that the basic NiH effect is real and that by increasing the surface area and applying stimulation to produce atomic hydrogen you can boost the effect. But I'll admit, since I am not God, I could be wrong there too.


    One thing I am pretty certain of is that we will learn much, much more during the trial. Making accusations at any party with the limited information we have is flat out risky and wrong. And, to be blunt, I just want to see how this technology can be put to use. I wouldn't even be typing here if there was an organization posting videos of their replications showing massive excess heat release.

  • Despite what we might think, Rossi's lawyers did make a big deal out of the contacts with Dewey Weaver and Dewey got questioned about it. And this act may have prejudiced these potential witnesses. Whether it amounts to anything we shall see. I hope not.


    I am not impressed with Tom Darden's hands on involvement with the E-Cat. He is out of his element despite his eloquent evaluation of what is happening. Ditto for Dewey. There should be technically competent and knowledgeable people evaluating LENR technology including Rossi's E-Cat IP. Outside of Murray I do not see any real engineering and scientific know-how within IH. Things may have changed--I hope so. Murray probably would have shut down the whole 1MW plant test before it even started. Things never would have gotten to this point had that been done. Of course I have to say I only know what we find out here but from Darden's letter it strikes me as he (or Vaughn) was not managing things well. I'm just calling it as I see it.


  • I personally think the work of Focardi and Piantelli showed strong evidence that the NiH effect was real. They performed extensive tests and experiments. By simply going from bulk nickel to micron powder the effect should be capable of being increased a hundred times or more due to a much greater percentage of the fuel absorbing hydrogen. I don't want to debate this issue, but this is my opinion. If you feel that Focardi and Piantelli provided no evidence of an effect that is your opinion. And your opinion may be much more qualified than my own -- I'm not an engineer or scientist.

  • Peter,


    Good point. It was not spelled out that way in the Lugano report authored by Levi either. He was very clear that this was independent in the true sense of the word. Nor did he (Levi) mention the Swedes would be dropping in from time to time. He also wrote in the report that Rossi was only there to start it up at the beginning, and came back at the end to assist draw the fuel sample, but we now know Rossi/Fabiani, were there maybe the whole time.


    One would think with the huge importance of this test, were the Hotcat to be proven real, that Levi, and those that signed the report, would have been much more careful in describing the roles of all. Especially Rossi's, considering the controversy over Rossi's participation in the first Hotcat Ferrara test, and their saying it was "independent", when it was not..


    Shane,


    Things may have happened as described in the report but according to Darden Rossi/Fiabini was supposed to be there during the entirety so there is at the very least a disconnect here.

  • Ele,


    I would you to ask you a basic science question.


    How far in microns can hydrogen typically diffuse into a bulk nickel sample in a gaseous environment? I believe I've read papers -- if I am interpreting them correctly -- that a beta phase nickel hydride layer develops within the first few microns that inhibits further migration of hydrogen into the bulk of the sample.

  • I can see why Rossi was hoping to have this under court seal.


    I take a slightly different perspective on this point. I think Rossi filed this under court seal because some of the materials were marked confidential by IH. There is no good reason, in my mind, why Rossi would not want this information out and well-known by all.

  • One would think with the huge importance of this test, were the Hotcat to be proven real, that Levi, and those that signed the report,
    would have been much more careful in describing the roles of all. Especially Rossi's, considering the controversy over Rossi's participation in the first Hotcat Ferrara test, and their saying it was "independent", when it was not.




    "Since we required that our measurements be carried out in an independent laboratory with our own equipment, the experiment was purposely set-up and hosted within an industrial establishment which was not in any way connected with Andrea Rossi’s businesses or those of his partners. The test was thus performed in Barbengo (Lugano), Switzerland, in a laboratory placed at our disposal by Officine Ghidoni SA."

    Lugano Report, page 2


    "The dummy reactor was switched on at 12:20 PM of 24 February 2014 by Andrea Rossi who gradually brought it to the power level requested by us. Rossi later intervened to switch off the dummy, and in the following subsequent operations on the E-Cat: charge insertion, reactor startup, reactor shutdown and powder charge extraction. Throughout the test, no further intervention or interference on his part occurred; moreover, all phases of the test were monitored directly by the collaboration."

    Lugano Report, page 7


    "It should also be noted that our total sample was about 10 mg, i.e. only a small part of the total fuel weight of 1 g used in the reactor.
    The sample was taken by us at random from the fuel and ash, observing utmost care to avoid any contamination."

    Lugano Report, page 28


  • And for me to be accused of pure speculation fitting the facts in Rossi's favor, oh my!

  • That most likely doesn't exist. (I know, we obviously differ on this - and to be clear, I'm referring to pure NiH LENR).


    If, in fact pure NiH LENR is a dead end, it's a good thing to know that it is a dead end. And yes, it would be super-awesome if somehow it works.


    I suggest you might ask Brillouin whether they, and their investors (recently to the tune of $8 million), believe that pure NiH LENR is dead.


  • As to the "pure" alumina question..

    I had previous posed an answer as a question in the hope that someone else would pick-up that XRD was not appropriate to determine the purity of a material. This is especially true where the XRD spectrum is not shown for independent analysis. I want to reiterate that (IMHO) XRD will provide a false impression if the diluent is amorphous (or of small crystalline size). This is often the case for binders.


    From a quick search an interested party may wish to look at:

    http://www.americanpharmaceuti…-Powder-X-ray-Diffraction


    It refers to drugs and binders here the binders often outweigh the drugs but the principle will be the same for alumina. The broad background may be missed or ignored. Note the 10% comment.


    XRF would have been a better methodology to apply and would have been much more meaningful for emissivity determinations as XRF only samples the near surface - say 20um (depends on the element and matrix).


    Thus, everyone can be right - if the correct sample was taken, the XRD spectra could show 99.9% alumina. This does not mean 99.9% pure material. Reporting that XRD shows X does not mean that it is X. It just means that some analytical method say that it is and not supplying the actual data is a mistake.

    The material may have been Durapot. But that can be 99.9% pure alumina plus lots of other amorphous binders and finely ground-up road dirt with lots of asphalt thrown in. You cannot tell. Reporting that it is 99.9% alumina would be correct.

    The sample may not have been taken in the correct place. Who knows?

    The sample may have been coated with some other paint. And guess what - it could be too thin to see by XRD or amorphous or not sampled.


    Bottom line, they used the wrong analytical method. The analytical method reported X. And in end it really does not matter for this current case.


    From my reading of Darden's EMAIL, the testers and Darden had a better handle on emissivity than tends to be made-out in this forum. Given the difficult testing situation with Dr. R, they did the best possible.


    Dewey,

    Wasn't there a shake-down of the 1MW plant in Italy? How good was that data set? Was it 250KW in and 250kW out? Or the dry vs. wet steam problem because no one sparged anything?

  • And for me to be accused of pure speculation fitting the facts in Rossi's favor, oh my!


    I would agree that it's pure speculation, and would suggest that by making this clear and explicit in that post, I am conceding the weakness of the suggestion.


    So we agree.


    On the other hand, it is a fact (not mere speculation) that Rossi did not present any evidence that Darden instructed or 'incentivized' Sha to contact Levi.


    We can agree on that too, right?


    The problem is when speculation is asserted as fact. We all have mixed those up in our head at some time or another. I find it helpful to try not to do that.

  • @sigmoidal


    I'm just razzing a little because of a historical need for me to don my flak jacket while being among your presence and that of others here. I have a keen sense for hypocrisy (don't we all?) and tend to highlight it when it makes sense. Much of my analysis that I offer here is based on pure speculation, so I openly admit that as well. We still don't have much to go by. The reason I do this is because I sense a widespread tendency for some here and among the LENR community to jump to conclusions, without thinking through alternative possibilities.


    Of all communities, the LENR community should be the MOST on-guard for such close-mindedness. Those who have followed the cold fusion / LENR story for any length of time will understand the high quantity of smoke and mirrors involved. Not everything is as it seems at first. And in the case of Rossi vs. IH, this is equally applicable in both directions.

  • I suggest you might ask Brillouin whether they, and their investors (recently to the tune of $8 million), believe that pure NiH LENR is dead.


    Well, I sincerely hope they prove NiH works, and that my strong skepticism is unwarranted.


    Some other investors spent $11.5 million on a NiH LENR technology and have decided to bail on NiH.