Rossi vs. Darden developments [CASE CLOSED]

    Shane D.,


    Haha, yes, that promotion says more about this site than about me. I guess the excitement it brings me says something about me though. Just as i like "Grasshopper" or "Chicken Little". What a wonderful time to be alive.


    Some people are called "chemists", some call themselves "doctor" and you are labelled "professional". Strange world, no?


    Maybe Rossi's team is hacking the Uppsala website as we type. Quickly, check it out before they delete Michael Jackson's involvement as well;


    Fabiani, to visit or not to visit?


    Cheers,


    JB


    We know form the Gullstrom paper the (large) "Wien and Boltsmann" mistake. So - if Rossi claims some other calorimetry does as well - looks like he is in good form and back to mis-sited TCs (or whatever - there is quite a choice of methods if you check the old demos).


    The only mystery here is why Alan and IHFB quote this kind of stuff with a vaguely positive slant...

    • Official Post

    There is evidence THH, but not of the kind you like. Open mindedness in both science and society is a precious and diminishing asset, since It is the open-minded mavericks who sometimes save the herd. It's therefore the mavericks who interest me, of whom Rossi is currently the supreme example.


    There is something else you miss, though I have pointed it out many times. I am very pro LENR. I'm not sure that you are, TBH. I am also even keener on forms of LENR which don't depend on Pd/D, which represents an essentially elitist approach to a global problem. Pd/D may be a great research tool, but I suspect it can never play a huge role in the developing world (for example).


    So for me Ni and other transition metals and regular everyday hydrogen represent an opportunity to really make a difference, hence my interest and partiality.

    Alan,


    There is something else you miss, though I have pointed it out many times. I am very pro LENR. I'm not sure that you are, TBH.


    I don't see LENR as like a political party, where you vote for it. Either there is a definite anomaly, other than various experimental errors, or not. If there is a definite anomaly, either it is some chemical, unusual, thing, or some weirder, unusual, thing that could even be nuclear.


    Exploring this probably benefits from more people with an inherently negative slant to their thinking about LENR, since, naturally, most work is done by those convinced LENR is a real probably nuclear anomaly.


    The obvious high benefits become relevant once an effect with industrial relevance is found.

    Quote from THHuxleynew

    If there is a definite anomaly, either it is some chemical unusual, thing, or some weirder unusual thing that could even be nuclear.

    You have said that before. What chemical anomaly do you have in mind? Please list a chemical anomaly that can:


    1. Produce ~10,000 times more energy than any known chemical reaction with no fuel and no chemical changes to the reactants.


    2. Produce tritium anywhere from 50 times background to several million times background.


    3. Produce helium in the same ratio to the heat as D-D fusion.


    If you cannot list a chemical reaction that does that, chemical reactions are ruled out.


    You mentioned that it might be an experimental error. The same question applies: What error do you have in mind? If you cannot name the error, your statement cannot be tested or falsified, so it is not scientific. Also, your hypothesis applies equally well to every replicated experiment in the history of science. Any day now, someone might come up with a test that shows heavy objects fall faster than light ones in a vacuum. But, until that happens, the fact that it might conceivably happen someday is not a valid reason to doubt Galileo’s findings.

    Quote from THHuxleynew

    SSC - what in your fictional scenario does IH get from 52 weeks of test that it cannot get from 1 week of test?


    Your point here makes no more sense than the test itself, which no-one sensible would want to run.

    You should ask them. JT admitted he had not warned Rossi immediately when they decided that the test was not the GPT because he feared that Rossi would end the test. IH wanted to see how it was going to end .... (I hope you don't believe to the "I don't recall" statement.....)

    254-04

    Did -- any time after October 2013 and

    18 prior to this lawsuit beginning, did Industrial Heat

    19 inform Dr. Rossi that, The time had passed, you could no

    20 longer achieve guaranteed performance, and you could no

    21 longer achieve an $89 million payment?

    22 A. I'm not sure that we informed him of that

    23 verbatim, as you stated.

    24 Q. Okay. Did you say it to him in any -- any

    25 summary of that, in any -- in any way did you say, Listen,

    the time has passed, you are -- we are not having a

    2 guaranteed performance test?

    3 A. I am trying to recall. You know, I -- I don't

    4 recall.

    5 Q. Do you think that was something that would be

    6 important to inform him, that he no longer had the

    7 opportunity to earn $89 million?

    8 A. Again, we were planning to pay him, if he could

    9 perform. Notwithstanding the fact that he had violated

    10 the agreement, not met the conditions of the agreement.

    11 So if we had done that, let's take a hypothetical

    12 scenario, dealing with a volatile character, you don't

    13 know how he is going to respond. Our goal, as stewards

    14 and as managers, is to determine definitively the state of

    15 the art. And by being confrontational, sooner rather than

    16 later, it ensured that you would just blow up in -- there

    17 was a chance, at least, that you would blow up the entire

    18 relationship and Andrea would stop working on it

    19 altogether and so, therefore, we just wouldn't know.

    20 Versus getting more information and getting more data to

    21 determine the state of the art.

    Quote from IH Fanboy

    First sentence of IH's Statement of the Case:


    "Plaintiffs claim to have invented a technology called the "E-Cat" capable of violating the law of conservation of energy by producing far more energy than it consumes."

    When funds are to be raised by investors, LENR technologies are promising and will save the planet from pollution, but they become "impossible" when they are at the center of a lawsuit. Yet IH has invested so much money into so many different research groups, like Brillouin ..... thrown money?

    Quote from THHuxleynew

    You need a company competent and willing to formulate and stand by their own tests, rather than one that validates your tests. The best solution would be:

    testing company + skeptical academic. Get the skeptical academic to agree a bomb-proof black box test with a testing company who conduct it. Better, get another skeptical academic to review the test protocol from the first and suggest improvements. You end up with a very carefully instrumented test with no motivation for any of the testers to seek positive results. The report from this would be convincing. For added validation you document iterations of the protocol with reasons for changes (though this is not really needed).

    Industrial secrecy needs to be taken into account. If you need to know some things ( like the right trigger or the correct sequence of actions or the right frequency of powering up, etc.) for the Ecat to work, it is obvious that a team of experts would not be able to do it without the help of Rossi.

    Quote from SSC

    Industrial secrecy needs to be taken into account. If you need to know some things ( like the right trigger or the correct sequence of actions or the right frequency of powering up, etc.) for the Ecat to work,

    If that is the case, the patent is invalid and Rossi's inventions have no value. It is not possible to protect a technology as important as this with industrial secrecy. If you have no patent, then as soon as you introduce the first commercial reactor, every industrial company on earth will reverse engineer it and take the technology from you, paying nothing. That is perfectly legal, by the way.


    Without a valid patent (pending or granted), Rossi has nothing. He might as well give the technology away.


    Let me again point out that a valid patent requires there be no industrial secrets. Any person having ordinary skill in the art (PHOSITA) has to be able to replicate from the patent. You cannot hide anything. If you do, the patent will be ruled invalid.

    Quote from JedRothwell

    If that is the case, the patent is invalid and Rossi's inventions have no value. It is not possible to protect a technology as important as this with industrial secrecy. If you have no patent, then as soon as you introduce the first commercial reactor, every industrial company on earth will reverse engineer it and take the technology from you, paying nothing. That is perfectly legal, by the way.

    My goodness ! You don't know nothing about patenting !

    Many industries do not patent core details of their technology in order to keep them secret but do patent all the surrounding technologies and eventually applications that are necessary to exploit the core technology and make profit from it.

    Also US Patent Law states that to patent a technology you don't need to show that is fully functional. Even partially functional prototypes can be sufficient.

    Also if you read carefully the MPEP you can see that there are conditions that let maintain the confidentiality in US.

    https://mpep.uspto.gov/RDMS/MP…rent#/current/d0e405.html

    Quote from Ahlfors

    Friends and IP protection ...

    Quote: "AR is a convicted fraudster"

    This seems FUD.

    Can you explain us why you posted a text regarding RU-486 abortion pill and a guy called PIKE in this forum ?

    This has nothing to do with Andrea Rossi...... may be with another AR......

    And just to refresh Andrea Rossi was cleared by all accusation in Italy and refunded by the State.

    Your last jpg seem a list of companies related to IH .

    This thread seems to oppose entropy. It gets bigger, consuming and destroying information, while otherwise time circles around on itself, doing a sort of Groundhog Day where we Know nothing more than the start of the previous day, not withstanding the increase in size of the thread and the volume of information poured into it. Where hot air fails to add heat to the cold, and cold facts linger in the hot air, immune to their surroundings.


    Cheers from the only internet in town, almost in the middle of nowhere. Another place where time almost stands still. (Heading there next).

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.