Rossi vs. Darden developments [CASE CLOSED]


    He he he ! I am glad someone else did the triple light bulb 3 phase set up. Great for testing delta-wye hypotheses.

    (Although using more linear (not tungsten) resistors will be better for some things...)

    Quote from THHuxleynew

    During the pseudo-GPT test they discovered without doubt that the reassuring Rossi/Levi COP=9 methodology gave COP=9 also on dummies. This would have been transformative of their views. Both Rossi, and much more significantly Levi, would have backed this flawed methodology. If they cannot trust Levi that is a big deal given his past involvement. This turned "we are very positive but not certain and know Rossi is unreliable" into "Rossi has been fooling us - we can't believe how stupid we have been". I'm uncertain here what was the strength of Darden's caution before this, so I'm not sure how surprised they were. But once they realised that Lugano-style tests could be so badly wrong that blew up both their earlier in-house results and the Lugano test and their confidence in Levi and therefore also (perhaps unfairly, given likely different error mechanisms, but they were done by Levi alone with Rossi) the Ferrara tests.


    THH, this is one of your most balanced and level-headed posts to date. Here I will just mention that your timeline is off: the positive result with the alleged dummy reactor happened before the Doral test. I agree it must have been transformative of their views, which makes it even hard for me to believe they went ahead with the Doral test, in addition to all the problems they recognized prior to the Doral test.


    Quote from THHuxleynew

    and it is only in bizarro-land that a test which cannot be understood conducted by the inventor is viewed as positive evidence for an extraordinary and incredibly valuable new invention not otherwise validated.


    Agree. That's why I cannot wrap my head around IH agreeing to it.

    ele

    Quote

    And so using the Internet that surely works in UK even after Brexit, they would find that Rossi has been cleared by all accusations and refund by the Italian state.

    Is your (IH) way of doing to say a half information accurately hiding the parts that you don't like ?

    Could you please show us where you got this bit of "Rossi said" wisdom? Or maybe check the real facts Steve Krivit carefully amassed directly from Italian news sources and with interviews:

    http://newenergytimes.com/v2/s…al-Criminal-History.shtml


    Rossi, in his entire professional life, has NEVER had ONE lasting achievement. Petroldragon was an environmental disaster. The thermoelectric project was purely deception and fraud -- no prototype as described by Rossi, has ever been seen by anyone credible. And now the ecat and its derivatives is a disaster as well.



    JedRothwell

    Quote

    The University of Bologna is a major university. Elforsk is one the world's top energy research organizations, like EPRI. The scientists from Sweden are world class experts. Unfortunately, they made mistakes. Many world class experts have made terrible mistakes in cold fusion. In nearly every case I know of, they made mistakes in the other direction, producing a negative result by methods that I described as akin to "trying to tune a piano with a sledgehammer."


    http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/RothwellJlessonsfro.pdf


    For an intelligent guy, I am amazed at how often and how completely you misquote or misunderstand what I write. Either that, or my writing is singularly unclear!


    U of Bologna, U of Upsala, and Elforsk never officially endorsed the ecat or stated AS AN ORGANIZATION or even as a university department that it worked. What you had were some scientists (Kullander and Essen) who did NOT perform any experiments themselves and were simply flummoxed by Rossi trickery and low level scientists from Sweden (the blind mice) who also did not do all their own experiments, relied far too much on Rossi and allowed him to dictate conditions and to handle equipment. The one thing we agree on is that they made mistakes-- monumental mistakes. In the case of Kullander, Essen and Lewan, the mistake was not requiring proper calibration using their own instruments and their own instrument placement. The Swedes should have simply refused to be involved unless the experiment was much cleaner and performed without Rossi's presence from start to finish. They also should have provided their own instruments for calibration of the system.


    Both sets of observers (because that is what they were) should have required Rossi and Levi to repeat under proper controls and observation the startling experiment he claimed to have done producing 135kW peak and 18kW average power as described by Lewan here: http://www.nyteknik.se/energi/…cludes-combustion-6421304 . The very same experiment Dr. Brian Josephson wrote Levi about, requesting replication, and was ignored. I pointed out all these issues in a timely manner in various discussion forums as did others at the time, starting in mid 2011. Of course, in several forums, at the time, such comments were deleted on sight and the posters were banned. That alone should tell you plenty.


    I hope this is clear enough. To restate, no university ever said that they had tested the ecat and it worked. For that matter, neither did Kullander and Essen. All they said was that the tests appeared anomalous and needed further study. As for the Swedish "blind mice", I don't know what their latest thinking is. For people who supposedly verified the biggest discovery of the century, they are strangely silent. As for Elforsk, I wrote an open letter to their CEO pointing out all the issues with Rossi and his background and his tests. He replied that he would look into it and he assigned someone on his staff to do so. He did not express any confidence in Rossi or the ecat. As far as I know, Elforsk never did any tests of their own on the ecat and never came to any definitive conclusions as a company about its performance. It is a common red herring that universities and large companies tested and approved the ecat as real and functional. Far as I can tell it, as far as the public record shows, it has never happened. You mislead people when you claim it has.

    Quote from JedRothwell

    Where did you read this? That is not true as far as I know. He did not check the performance of the flow meter and he did not take possession of it.


    I never said he personally checked the performance of the flow meter. What I said was that he checked the total flowmeter amount every, say, 4 months, and compared that total to the sum of the daily totals that Rossi was giving him. Or in other words, he cross-checked the numbers. That is what I said. By 'taking posession' of it, I meant he took it from the Doral facility, and then sent it the company to check its performance and make sure it was properly re-calibrated/re-certified. I did not mean to intend that it then became his property. But in terms of 'chain of custody,' it was in his possession between the test and the (re-)certification.

    Quote from joshg

    THH, this is one of your most balanced and level-headed posts to date. Here I will just mention that your timeline is off: the positive result with the alleged dummy reactor happened before the Doral test. I agree it must have been transformative of their views, which makes it even hard for me to believe they went ahead with the Doral test, in addition to all the problems they recognized prior to the Doral test.



    Agree. That's why I cannot wrap my head around IH agreeing to it.


    OK - so why would IH agree to the Doral test even though they were doubtful about Rossi's stuff? They still had the Swedish mice, not known to be mice, validating the tests. They had Levi agreeing with Rossi and their in-house expertise minimal. They had paid a lot of money and did not want to walk away without being sure. Doral helps that surity both by keeping Rossi on side and perhaps providing better validation (from the customer).


    I said I was not sure the status of their doubts. I'm still not sure. When presented with conflicting data everyone judges differently and Darden must have been positive in this case, hoping in spite of the known issues with Rossi's tests that that whole set of tests still must mean there was something. Any real working LENR woiuld be a big deal for IH, they could reckon they could turn that into product (for example, COP of 1.3 can be turned into COP infinity with a little care by standard engineering an active cooling. The very arguments that Rossi supporters make now when it is pointed out that specific tests are obviously wrong. these are people who have thrown $10m at Rossi. A small extra amount of money is surely worth it if there was even a small chance of validation. I don't believe at this stage they thought Rossi suing them was a concern. Frankly - it looks like a very bad decision from Rossi, though in keeping with his character.


    Hi LDM


    First of all thanks for taking the time to comment on the spreadsheet.


    The situation you describe is the one at low input drives that matches the pictures in the appendix. Triac delay is set to 143 deg, and indeed for these low powers (132W real, 168W when inverting I1) the COP is underestimated. The spreadsheet (mockingly) states "COP" 0.8.





    Now if you change cell A3 "triac delay" from 143 to 87 and change Rload to 34.77 ohm to increase the input power in order to match the Ferrara March test (device named "HT2"), you get 2344W real, and 810W when inverting I1. The apparent "COP" is now 2,9 .




    [ETA: replaced data of device "HT" with "HT2" as the Ferrara test was single phase for "HT2" only]


    Herebelow an extract of the Ferrara report aka TPR1.



    [...]


    Quote from joshg

    I agree it must have been transformative of their views, which makes it even hard for me to believe they went ahead with the Doral test, in addition to all the problems they recognized prior to the Doral test.

    Quote from joshg

    Agree. That's why I cannot wrap my head around IH agreeing to it.

    My understanding is that it was a last ditch effort, and they agreed because it did not cost them much. (Or it did not cost them anything -- not sure which.) In the e-mails they talk about "even a 1% chance." Something like that.


    The $11 million was already paid. It was water over the dam. They thought why not give Rossi one more chance. It was his time and effort, and not so much their's at that stage.

    Quote from Henry

    Yes, two. Not bought from Kensington University :D :D :D

    Also, note that Kensintgon "University", was shut down as a diploma-mill SCAM by the states it was "operating" (a good term actually) in, and their "degrees" are illegal to use as professional credentials in certain states. Seems Rossi won't even claim them (a humiliating rebuke indeed) , in that he will not cite WHERE he received his supposed science degrees, but only saying that he HAS such degrees). My, my, how appropriate and predictable.

    Quote from maryyugo

    U of Bologna, U of Upsala, and Elforsk never officially endorsed the ecat or stated AS AN ORGANIZATION or even as a university department that it worked.


    That is because universities and departments of universities themselves don't make such proclamations. Scientists working for universities, departments of universities, or other institutions such as national labs, are the ones researching and reporting in published papers.

    Quote from JedRothwell

    My understanding is that it was a last ditch effort, and they agreed because it did not cost them much. (Or it did not cost them anything -- not sure which.) In the e-mails they talk about "even a 1% chance." Something like that.


    The $11 million was already paid. It was water over the dam. They thought why not give Rossi one more chance. It was his time and effort, and not so much their's at that stage.


    Mr. Rothwell,


    Thank you for writing the above. To me it proves a lot.


    I understand that you believe them. Somehow IH gave you the feeling that you are part of the inner, trusted circle and the information you receive(d) from them, directly or indirectly, therefore feels authentic.


    But if you think about it, looking at why Darden has become who he is, the crowd he hangs out with, IH's bigger, strategic plan it doesn't add up, does it?


    "One more chance", "his time and effort", "water over the dam" are three statements (yours or IH's?) that are impossible to combine with everything that IH stands for. Every action, every partner, every sketchy entity structure they set up has one and one goal only. To collect as many dollars as possible. You can see that shining through from the court documents as well, right?


    The respect you receive from people on this forum proves to me you earned your stripes in LENR Land, but why are you so vigorously defending IH? You have so much to lose. You can also just outright debunk Rossi without constantly defending the hypocrites.


    If you reply, you will probably ask me the same question. Do you defend IH / Rossi based on facts or has initial enthusiasm turned into an ideology? Feel free, i am more than happy to answer that one.


    Cheers,


    JB

    Quote from guest111

    Also, note that Kensintgon "University", was shut down as a diploma-mill SCAM by the states it was "operating" (a good term actually) in, and their "degrees" are illegal to use as professional credentials in certain states. Seems Rossi won't even claim them (a humiliating rebuke indeed) , in that he will not cite WHERE he received his supposed science degrees, but only saying that he HAS such degrees). My, my, how appropriate and predictable.


    He actually addressed this today (Gee, I wonder why :/).



    Is there any truth to this?

    Quote from Mustafa Kemal Astroturf

    :/

    Is there any truth to this?


    As usual a half truth.

    Rossy has a degree in Phylosophy.

    Not sure whether it equates to a bachelor or a master, because at the time it was a 4 year course requiring a final thesis. edit: the attachment by Can shows it equates to a Master's degree.


    In Italy you are called Dottore with such a degree.


    To call it a Doctorate in the US is obviously misleading, as it is not a PhD. That would be a "Dottore di Ricerca" in Italy and require a couple years minimum research work plus a thesis after a Master's degree (with which you are a "Dottore Magistrale").

    Quote from we_cat_global

    I understand that you believe them. Somehow IH gave you the feeling that you are part of the inner, trusted circle and the information you receive(d) from them, directly or indirectly, therefore feels authentic.

    No, they did not give me that feeling. On the contrary, they never told me anything about contracts, business or their relationship to Rossi. I would never ask about that. The only thing we discussed are the technical merits of some experiments, including Rossi's. The only thing I saw was a sample of his data. That was all I needed to see. It was immediately clear to me that the test was a mess.


    I could not see how big a mess it was based on only that. I had no idea he had a fake customer, or that he would invent imaginary invisible heat exchangers.

    Quote from we_cat_global

    The respect you receive from people on this forum proves to me you earned your stripes in LENR Land, but why are you so vigorously defending IH? You have so much to lose. You can also just outright debunk Rossi without constantly defending the hypocrites.

    First, I see nothing hypocritical about I.H.


    I have nothing to lose. Anyone can read Penon's report and reach their own conclusions. Either you agree with me, or you don't. I have no hidden motives and no hidden sources of information. (It was hidden before, but not now.) This is a technical judgement, and all of the technical facts have now been made public. Many more than I knew about previously.

    Quote from we_cat_global

    If you reply, you will probably ask me the same question. Do you defend IH / Rossi based on facts or has initial enthusiasm turned into an ideology?

    I do not defend I.H. so much. I say that Rossi's data is fake and impossible. I say he is using a pressure gauge at 80 to 100 deg C which is only rated at 60 deg C, so it cannot work, and 0.0 bar is ridiculous in any case. These are technical assertions. You can check them yourself, and decide for yourself whether I am right or wrong.

    Quote from we_cat_global

    "One more chance", "his time and effort", "water over the dam" are three statements (yours or IH's?) that are impossible to combine with everything that IH stands for. Every action, every partner, every sketchy entity structure they set up has one and one goal only. To collect as many dollars as possible. You can see that shining through from the court documents as well, right?

    Every businessman I have ever known wants to collect as many dollars as possible. Including me. Why would you leave money on the table?!? The people at I.H. seem no less ethical than any other businessmen or venture capitalists I have known, and I've known a lot of them. Nothing in their e-mails seem out of line to me. Perhaps you are not familiar with business discussions.


    Money could not possibly be I.H.'s only goal. They would be crazy getting involved with cold fusion or Rossi. There must be a million ways to earn money more easily with less risk than cold fusion! It is by far the most ill-defined and problematic science in the last 200 years. No one knows that better than I do. The number of things we know with certainly would fit on a post card. The unanswered questions will no doubt fill many textbooks, if they are ever answered. This is like investing in genetics a week after Gregor Mendel published. It is not like investing in genetics after week after Watson and Crick published. We are far from that stage, alas.

    Quote from JedRothwell

    The only thing I saw was a sample of his data. That was all I needed to see. It was immediately clear to me that the test was a mess.


    I could not see how big a mess it was based on only that.


    And why is it do you suppose that IH felt the need to share this sample of data with you, despite there being no additional context? Have you ever stopped to wonder what their objectives were by doing this?

    I unsealed a message from IHFB to reveal:

    Quote from IH Fanboy

    And why is it do you suppose that IH felt the need to share this sample of data with you, despite there being no additional context? Have you ever stopped to wonder what their objectives were by doing this?

    What the hell difference would it make what their objectives were?!? The data speaks for itself! Penon's report is grotesque nonsense. Rossi himself uploaded it, so there is no doubt that was actually Penon's report.


    You, apparently, cannot see that the report is grotesque nonsense, because you are blinded by wishful thinking. Clap all you like to keep Tinkerbell alive -- it won't help.


    Suppose I.H. was organized by the fossil fuel industry to crush cold fusion. Heck, suppose they engage in witchcraft when the moon is full. That has no bearing on this report. It would not affect my technical judgement of this report. Penon and Rossi with their own words, numbers and schematic proved they have nothing and their claims are nonsense.


    Even if we suppose the machine works, this report is garbage and it proves nothing. People say that somewhere Rossi has actual pressure data and redundant instruments. Okay, why isn't the real pressure data in the report, instead of 0.0 bar? Why aren't the redundant instruments shown in the schematic? Why isn't the invisible heat exchanger shown? Even if the machine works, it would be crazy for anyone to pay $89 million based on this report. It is so poorly written it would fail in high school. No sensible person would pay eighty-nine cents based on this report. If the machine is real, Rossi has to do the test over from scratch with proper instruments and techniques, and then he or someone else has to write a decent report.

    Shhhhhh, there is a vast, worldwide, coordinated governmental and industrial-complex black-ops secret conspiracy to squelch Rossi's greatest invention of the century...like was done with the invention of fire, the wheel, printing-press, gunpowder, radio, internal-combustion engine, transistor, laser, computer, nuclear fission... .... ...................

    Quote from JedRothwell

    If the machine is real, Rossi has to do the test over from scratch with proper instruments and techniques, and then he or someone else has to write a decent report.


    @JED: That's the way to go!


    But guess what? IH doesn't like this idea.


    Bdw: Where are the fotos of the second container with the tiger (big Frankies) modules?


    Thank you for confirming. It's especially helpful given that you are native Italian. I had made this point earlier about Rossi. It was based on a Milan student I met with a Dottore Magistrale degree (from the 'old regulations' that were in place in 1975 when Rossi graduated under the Vecchio Ordinamento ) who told me that he never refers to his Italian degree as a Masters, because it's really more equivalent to a U.S. bachelor's degree (even though it's a five year degree with a thesis) in terms of the amount of work and rigor.


    Rossi himself claims no higher degree from Italy (and his only other degree is a 'Masters' from fraudulent Kensington).


    But Rossi declares himself a 'Doctor', purposely using the confusion of the Italian language to deceive ignorant English speaking Rossi fans.


    It's just another example of how Rossi goes to extreme measures to intentionally deceive people.


    It takes a 'special' kind of person with 'special' kind of thinking to fraudulently take upon yourself the title of a higher degree.

    Ditto for salting your 'ash' with purchased 99% pure Ni62. Ditto for salting a subsequent sample. Ditto for explaining to IH why he couldn't accommodate their requests for more information about Johnson Matthey because the customer (who was Rossi himself) wouldn't 'permit it'. Ditto for the super-secrecy of the customer's 'endothermic manufacturing process'. Ditto for preemptively suing your sponsor (for a quarter billion dollars) with your sponsor's own money. Ditto for claiming you have a Journal which is really just a sock puppet stage. Ditto for accusing thoughtful posts here that are critical of Rossi as 'sock puppets'. Ditto for claiming excess heat when running .5MW electric generators and measuring .5MW of heat out and claiming that this demonstrates COP > 10. Ditto for the farcical 'GPT performance report'. Ditto for farcical 'indipendent testing' , ditto, ditto...


    But the Rossi fans are like, 'What pattern of deceit? I see no pattern. And even if there was one, it doesn't matter, cause it doesn't prove he doesn't have high COP."


    Based on clear and convincing evidence, the question regarding Rossi should be: When has Rossi NOT been fraudulent?


    That answer to that would be far more parsimonious with pixels.

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.