Clearance Items

  • I apologize to all for my intemperate language, both on this thread and the others.


    Just remove the "fucking" and you are in the temperate zone. I see nothing intemperate about the rest.



    (I do not like that word, and I wish people would stop using it. I especially don't like it in the original sense of "sexual intercourse," because it derives from the German meaning "hit." I don't like that nuance. The word has a harsh Teutonic metallic crashing sound, a bit like "Hitler.")

  • Thanks.

    Nice work.

    IHFB will not accede to this strong evidence.


    He will go for days about an imagined missing pane of glass to great extent because he thinks it supports Rossi.


    Yet when THH post factual math showing the Rossi provided exchanger parameters could not dissipate the heat, IHFB ignored that but still pursued the missing pane.


    He will not answer about your video, or if he does, it "will seem to him" that Rossi's steam is adequate. Just like he propsed the silly claim the pumps were sufficient, regardless of the evidence that 18 were shut down.


    He is as biased as AA is, but hypocritical in that he states he only looks at the facts. Hah! Only if his percieved facts support Rossi.


    It is OK for Rossi to cheat and lie. It is OK to present unlikely scenarios to support Rossi. But IH is evil, you must have black and white proof for them and you cannot excuse them for anything.


    I am still waiting on him to respond on the number of known Rossi lies to known IH lies and the serious nature of the lies.


    He will not because he cannot. Yet ge still "seems to think IH is the devil in this story"


    Poor,poor Boeing engineer. Those evil IH dudes! 😖

  • This is my last post here on Lenr Forum. I have found it too much trouble with the trolls and malcontents who frequent here to bother with. I have gained benefit from discovering friends and colleagues, people of good will and good intentions, and even kindred spirits, here but the positives have been far outweighed by the negatives. I will from now on only share details on my work and exchange ideas via my Atom-Ecology blog and a new Atom-Ecology Google Group that I have set up today... The group is open to all who are willing to fully identify themselves in a verifiable fashion it will absolutely prevent the nere do wells from access. Here's the link https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!forum/atom-ecology


    I'd suggest you have everyone sign a lifetime NDA before they join your google group. You can't protect that technology enough, you know?

  • We rehash Rossi because he is still an ongoing story. We don't need to rehash FP's, because that is settled science.


    Rossi took inspiration from F&P. His ongoing story is just the natural continuation of that of F&P. IMO, you avoid rehashing F&P because you have no argument to rebut the criticisms on their claims.


    Sorry to say, Shane, but by preventing any discussion on this topic, L-F resembles the ECW of F&P.


    Quote

    If you want to take on another challenge for the upcoming 30th anniversary, you might try and help us convince IHFB, and Steppenwolf/JTomas that the mezzanine heat exchanger did not exist.


    I'm not going to waste time convincing people that Rossi was wrong. No need to do that. He had no credibility since his first appearance in the field. All the credibility for the Ecat results was provided by some European professors and by most of the experts in the LENR field. I only spent my time in debunking those Ecat tests in which UniBo was somehow officially involved, that is, until the end of 2011. After that date, the Ecat affair remained only a business and political issue.


    In any case, the upcoming 30th anniversary deals with F&P, not Rossi and his farces. The only challenge that makes sense in this weeks is to reach a deeper understanding of their experimental results and possibly a broader agreement on the reality of their claims.

  • This is my last post here on Lenr Forum.


    I once heard someone say, "I have been in five car accidents in the last year, and not a single one was my fault!" I thought, "that's statistically impossible."


    When your business arrangements end in a shambles; you leave discussion groups in a huff; and when your friends become enemies, it is probably your fault, not theirs.

  • In any case, the upcoming 30th anniversary deals with F&P, not Rossi and his farces. The only challenge that makes sense in this weeks is to reach a deeper understanding of their experimental results and possibly a broader agreement on the reality of their claims.


    There is broad agreement that their results are sound. You are one of a select band of F&P deniers, and on the wrong side of a very poor argument.

  • There is broad agreement that their results are sound.


    As always, with the caveat: there is broad agreement among people who have read the literature and who understand the experiments. There is no broad agreement in the larger scientific community, but their views do not count, because they have not read the literature.


    That is true of all scientific claims, but in other fields you don't have to add this caveat. People take it for granted that a particle physicist cannot write a professional critique of neural network artificial intelligence, or vice versa. I do not understand why the DoE and Scientific American assume that plasma physicists are qualified to critique calorimetry and electrochemistry. I get that the claim is fusion, and plasma physicists do fusion. But it is not the same kind of fusion, with the same rules, investigated with the same instruments.

  • Just remove the "fucking" and you are in the temperate zone. I see nothing intemperate about the rest.



    (I do not like that word, and I wish people would stop using it. I especially don't like it in the original sense of "sexual intercourse," because it derives from the German meaning "hit." I don't like that nuance. The word has a harsh Teutonic metallic crashing sound, a bit like "Hitler.")

    will do going forward. My bad.

  • I have known Russ for 2 years, worked alongside him every day for 13 months. He's a pussycat, but with a serious allergy to things he considers bullshit. Which makes two of us. You would be surprised at how many LENR people I meet who say 'give my best wishes to Russ' and really mean it. He has enemies for sure (another thing we share) but he has many friends too, and never hesitates to heap praise on many people in the field whose work, brains and skills he admires.

  • You would be surprised at how many LENR people I meet who say 'give my best wishes to Russ' and really mean it.


    I have said that, and I really mean it. I have given him money and support, and recommended him to others. I do not regret it. He is self-destructive and his ventures often end in a shambles, but that was also true of William Shockley, and others.


    His insults directed at me are water off a duck's back. He is just being silly. It has nothing to do with me. As I said, he eventually gets around to insulting everyone he has worked with, and everyone who has done him a good turn. You, Alan Smith, are next in line. A person at war with everyone is actually fighting his own internal demons.



    He has enemies for sure (another thing we share) but he has many friends too, and never hesitates to heap praise on many people in the field whose work, brains and skills he admires.



    So I have heard, but he has seldom published anything, so I cannot judge.


    No one admires his work, brains or skills more than he himself. That's the problem. It makes it awkward to work with him. He often takes credit for his co-worker's accomplishments, which upsets them. Since I have no technical accomplishments, it wouldn't upset me.


    I don't see why it matters to you whether he is a nice fellow or a jerk. You are working with him to accomplish a technical task. You are not married to him. So what difference does would it make if he rubs you the wrong way? Or if he takes credit for your work. Why would you care, as long as your name is also on the patent application? You would collaborate with William Shockley, I am sure. There is nothing wrong with collaborating with people you dislike, or making use of them. You should only be careful of people you do not trust.

  • There is broad agreement that their results are sound. You are one of a select band of F&P deniers, and on the wrong side of a very poor argument.


    As insistently asked by Rothwell (1), I looked at the F&P documents and found serious errors which invalidate both the conclusions of their major paper. I illustrated these errors to the LENR community without receiving any response on the merits. The discussion was then closed, maybe for the first time in the L-F history, probably because nobody was able to rebut my factual and specific criticisms.


    Therefore, after the closure of the F&P thread, you, Rothwell or any other LENR supporter can no longer complain that people deny the validity of the F&P results just because they refuse to read the literature. On the contrary, it is now possible to affirm that the residual agreement on the F&P claims depends on the fact that the select band of their supporters didn't look at their documents with the attention necessary to fully understand how their results were obtained.


    (1) How many times has the Pons-Fleischmann Anomalous Heating Event been replicated in peer reviewed journals?

  • As insistently asked by Rothwell (1), I looked at the F&P documents and found serious errors which invalidate both the conclusions of their major paper.

    No, you did not. You are mistaken. I am sure you honestly believe you did, but so did Morrison and Shanahan. As you see from their papers, they were mistaken. Or perhaps you don't see it. Anyway, Morrison does not understand the difference between power and energy, and he got the arithmetic wrong by 5 orders of magnitude. Those are the worst mistakes I have ever seen in a journal paper.