Rossi vs. Darden aftermath discussions

  • Quote

    That explains a lot. It fits well with a mantra to stifle innovation.

    Hardly. Encouraging innovation (especially relevant automation) and preventing fraud and abuse of medical billing systems. Is inane paranoia a requirement for believing in Rossi or what?


    Rends Thanks! Interesting. Makes one wonder what the next scam is going to be.

  • @MY,


    Good on you for preventing medical billing fraud--there is certainly plenty of that going around.


    But as an aside, governments are better known for slowing things down rather than speeding things up, on the innovation front. They often justify their heavy handedness by crying safety concerns. But usually the concerns are uncalled for, and most often, it is a way to bolster somebody's taxpayer-funded paycheck or government career position.

  • Last chance for betting (quatloos only) on the Prominent Gamma L flow test.

    Prominent Gamma/L 0232 Flow Rate Test et seq.

    I'll post details just before the run -- the suction height starts at about 18 inches (-0.04 bar) below the pump center-line (and is NOT kept level during the run) , and the discharge head will be about 60 inches (0.15 bar).

    The volume will be measured between a low-mark (100 or 200ml) and high-mark (900ml) of a graduated liter cylinder. Time will be read from the video recording.

    Place your quatloo bet for flow rate l/hr in this configuration.

    I will calculate the winnings using two methods :


    a) Fixed bets of 1 gazillion quatloos : closest takes the pot (shared if multiple winners).

    b) Variable bets of 1 gazillion quatloos per abs(predicted-actual) l/hr (shared if multiple winners).

    (Minor edits for clarification)

  • But as an aside, governments are better known for slowing things down rather than speeding things up, on the innovation front.

    Sometimes not, look at the tremendously rapid culmination of nuclear weaponry over a four year period up to August 1945. Many examples show the influence of war (hot or cold) initiating and/or accelerating developments in technology.


    While patents are a "governmental function" that can enhance technological innovation, if properly applied-- We may rightly observe a telling example of government, through patentability constraints, likely slowing progress, that is in LENR, CANR, LANR, AHE or broadly "CF".


    Of course there is a substantial history of "patentability" being withheld for reasons of "national defense" (e.g. Gould laser patents). I suspect we cannot confidently exclude such influences today, in the CF area.


  • Alan Fletcher ,


    I'll bet one cl/h more than sigmoidal .


    Fantastic that you are doing this!


    Cheers,


    JB

  • Although sometimes legitimate companies have reason to generate other corporations, most often this sort of thing is done by crooks, trying to hide from the tax and licensing authorities in a maze of different entities.

    In fact seems that you are describing Darden behavior. He generate new companies and them let them die after he has collected money from private and public subjects.

    Sifferkol is always a nice reading and a good starting point for Internet search.

  • Place your quatloo bet for flow rate l/hr in this configuration.

    Betting is not quite scientific and we have no guarantee that the measure has been done in the same operating condition of the reactor.

    Tell me if your measure will go on the IH side of the strret what you will do ? what IH should do in your opinion ?


    Is quite strange because if a measure was necessary was much better done, asked by IH, on the very same Doral reactor.

  • I don't care a flying F*** whether the results support Rossi or IH or LENR in general or ...

    I just want to KNOW. (But I guess science is too old fashioned.)

    Here's an idea. If anybody has contacts with Rossi, ask him to send me one of the 24 Gamma/L's from the 1MW. Preferably the one Smith photographed. Shipping address in my profile.

    The quatloo betting is just for fun. AND betting has a long history.

    If you go to PGL thread you'll find I quoted Fermi. Who (jokingly) offered to bet on the Trinity test :

    Quote


    https://blogs.scientificameric…ity-and-the-end-of-earth/


    Dark humor: Shortly before the first detonation of a nuclear device, the Trinity test, July 16, 1945, Enrico Fermi jokingly took bets on “whether the atmosphere will be set on fire,” according to physicist Hans Bethe. Fermi was mocking concerns raised by Edward Teller that the fission explosion might trigger runaway fusion. Photo of Trinity courtesy of National Nuclear Security Administration/Nevada Site Office.

    Quote

    The observers set up a betting pool on the results of the test. Edward Teller was the most optimistic, predicting 45 kilotons of TNT (190 TJ).

  • Excellent email summary from Patent Lawyer David French and close follower of the Rossi story for several years, reposted wi


    "

    David French writes:

    Here is an interview with Andrea Rossi on the topic of the Florida Court case, settled on July 5, 2017:

    https://animpossibleinvention.com/blog/

    Rossi is pictured repeatedly, sporting a generous silver wig designed to protect the skin on his vulnerable, formerly bald, head.

    The important content is the copy of the actual Settlement agreement at the end:

    https://animpossibleinvention.…/settlement-agreement.pdf

    It was not quite a walkway. Everybody releases everybody and Industrial Heat reconvenes to Rossi and Leonardo Corp the rights that it acquired to ECAT technology under the original 2012 agreement. No money exchanges hands in the settlement, but Leonardo Corp gets to keep the $11.5 million it received from Industrial Heat and gets the return of the 1 megawatt heat generation unit.

    What do these terms tell us?

    Rossi gave up his claim to $89 million but has reacquired the rights he held before. This allows him to argue that those rights are worth more than $89 million. Industrial Heat is liberated from the costs of trial both in terms of risk and lawyer's fees, plus the not inconsiderable benefit of freeing-up management time to return to corporate activities.

    Another consequence: the August 25, 2015 US patent that issued to Leonardo Corporation is probably invalid or is subject to equity constraints because the Settlement Agreement acknowledges that there is a secret ingredient not mentioned in the patent. Both parties are committed to maintain that secrecy.

    David French

  • I am quite disappointed the case resolved in a settlement. While the US civil practice wouldn't have set in stone the validity of the Doral test (because of lack of court 3rd party ordered tests on the plant), I would have been interested in reading the transcript of the deposition of the following people:

    - De Giovanni: who is? What is this American Platinum Trust? What are his interests in the matter?


    I have recently discovered this thread, and can't help but notice that your questions (post #3 in the thread) have gone unaddressed.


    Henry Johnson's deposition answers part of your question. American Platinum Trust (APT) was formed on 14 June 2014 by Johnson, with Johnson as trustee and DiGiovanni as beneficiary. DiGiovanni, during the visit to Johnson, was accompanied by Rossi. Despite the beneficiary/trustee relationship, Johnson had no contact of any sort with DiGiovanni until ca November 2016, after the suit had been filed.


    JM Chemical Products, Inc, was formed on 27 June 2014.


    The purpose of the trust was specifically to hide the ownership of JM Chemical Products, Inc. ""The concept was to keep the ultimate beneficial ownership private."


    DiGiovanni did not produce a deposition, but there has been no evidence produced (in court or online) to indicate that DiGiovanni had any relationship at all with Johnson Matthey.

  • Quote

    This allows him to argue that those rights are worth more than $89 million. Industrial Heat is liberated from the costs of trial both in terms of risk and lawyer's fees, plus the not inconsiderable benefit of freeing-up management time to return to corporate activities.


    More to the point, IH clearly knew, after a year of opportunities to test it, that the invention was not worth $89M. In fact, in their estimation, it seems to have been non-working and worthless. Hence, the countersuit.


    I am not sure why you find it so easy to dismiss this part of it, Allan.


    BTW: Lewan is now in full believer mode including full tight censorship of his blog. He does not permit dissenting replies any more. So much for being a "journalist" -- not that he ever really was. And isn't this so-called interview several weeks old now? Didn't we discuss it before?

  • Do you mean the data Penon deleted? Or something else no-one has ever seen?

    I just mean to say that Rossi did not spend a year in Doral smoothing his nails. He has had to intervene on several occasions to make parts replacement or repairs and I think he has noted these operations. Anyway, the point from which we started was that a long-term test is indispensable (for me) to understanding how reliable a product is and what its behavior is over time. You can't market something that has not been tested in this way. You say that IH should have done the long-term test ..... but when Rossi started to do it, he was still in business with Darden and worked alongside people paid by IH (like Fulvio and Barry), and still I don't understand why if the long-term test had been done by IH it could be fine for you, whereas since Rossi did that test you say it was useless ..... I'm not an engineer (as you said), but you're not objective.

  • Although sometimes legitimate companies have reason to generate other corporations, most often this sort of thing is done by crooks, trying to hide from the tax and licensing authorities in a maze of different entities. Having once worked for a regulating agency, I can tell you it really does complicate the work or bringing criminals like Rossi (and probably his attorney is one also) to justice.

    Here is a perfect example of how you want to pass for a paladin of justice only when things concern Rossi. Cherokee has created a myriad of companies ready to implode as soon as there is some danger so that the Mother of all can always remain immaculate, and this has never caused you the slightest disturbance. Were you so impartial even when working with the regulating agency? :)

  • Quote

    Another consequence: the August 25, 2015 US patent that issued to Leonardo Corporation is probably invalid or is subject to equity constraints because the Settlement Agreement acknowledges that there is a secret ingredient not mentioned in the patent. Both parties are committed to maintain that secrecy.

    David French

    I'm not convinced about what French says. Rossi has patented a reactor and all that is needed for patent validity is that an expert can reproduce it according to the instructions described in it. If the secret ingredient serves to increase the COP or to improve the performance of the reactor, it is obvious that Rossi is concerned and has asked IH not to spread the formula, but this does not necessarily condition the patent. If the reactor also works without that ingredient, the patent is still valid. I think Rossi has filed several other patents (one for the control system, one for fuel, etc ...) that are not yet public and that, taken together, will cover every aspect of its technology. The patent already granted is probably the "skeleton" of the set, and is valid if it describes an object that works. All the additions could make this object much more powerful and commercially interesting.

  • ALan Smith,

    "the August 25, 2015 US patent that issued to Leonardo Corporation is probably invalid"


    I read a comment somewhere suggesting that the patent was still valid because the device would still work without the secret ingredient. This element was an improvement that added to th reactor's efficiency.

  • I just mean to say that Rossi did not spend a year in Doral smoothing his nails. He has had to intervene on several occasions to make parts replacement or repairs and I think he has noted these operations. Anyway, the point from which we started was that a long-term test is indispensable (for me) to understanding how reliable a product is and what its behavior is over time. You can't market something that has not been tested in this way. You say that IH should have done the long-term test ..... but when Rossi started to do it, he was still in business with Darden and worked alongside people paid by IH (like Fulvio and Barry), and still I don't understand why if the long-term test had been done by IH it could be fine for you, whereas since Rossi did that test you say it was useless ..... I'm not an engineer (as you said), but you're not objective.


    That is easy to answer. Rossi does not go by normal rules when running tests. He uses equipment out of spec, miscalculates input power and output power, etc. (I can give you precise references to all these things which have been discussed here).


    With so much uncertainty it is not possible to obtain high quality engineering information - like for example whether the device is actually doing anything other than operating as an electric heater.


    Whereas IH (after they employed Murray) were able to put together proper well controlled tests that would deliver real information. Running them long-term is then just a matter of patience. IH if anything seem to have had too much of that...

  • I read a comment somewhere suggesting that the patent was still valid because the device would still work without the secret ingredient.

    That is incorrect. Patent Office rules say you have to describe the best, most effective implementation you know of at the time you file the patent. You cannot hold back information that will improve the invention. If you do this, and they find out, your patent will be ruled invalid.


    See p. R86:


    https://www.uspto.gov/web/offi…ep/consolidated_rules.pdf


    ". . . best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out the invention is required by 35 U.S.C. 112(a) . . ."

  • Regarding: "And then there was b) which was an “Additional Element”, and there was no mention of this in the patent. So what does this mean for your patent if you do not include that Additional Element?"


    IMHO, Rossi and R, Mills are working with the same plasma based reaction. Mills says he is using a secret oxygen carrying metallic oxide compound to ignite the plasma in his reaction. Springing from the same basic reaction modality, Rossi says the same thing. So it goes to reason that the Rossi secret additive is an oxygen based compound. The compound that Mills is using might be vanadium oxide.


    Vanadium(II) oxide, has a vaporization point ( Boiling point - 2,627 °C (4,761 °F; 2,900 K) that fits very well into the reported plasma temperature range that the QuarkX is running at.


    This temperature of vaporization might be a regulating factor in keeping the reaction temperature of the plasma reaction at about 3000K.


    How many 3000K plasma reactions requiring a catalyst can there be?


    I suggest that BrLP's latest patent defining the SunCell reaction would be a good place to get insight about what the Rossi secret ingredient is.


    The problem that Rossi will face is that this oxygen based additive and its various alternatives have been patented by R.Mills, so Rossi might have some IP problems ahead.

  • I suggest that BrLP's latest patent defining the SunCell reaction would be a good place to get insight about what the Rossi secret ingredient is.


    The problem that Rossi will face is that this oxygen based additive and its various alternatives have been patented by R.Mills, so Rossi might have some IP problems ahead.

    Again, you misunderstand. If there is a secret ingredient, Rossi's patent is invalid. He has no IP in that case. He doesn't have "problems" -- he has nothing. The Patent Office rules are quite clear about this. You cannot withhold any "secrets" in a patent.

  • You cannot patent a well known industrial chemical anymore than Heinz could take out a generic patent on Ketchup.

    No patents or copyrights are allowed for food recipes, so that comparison fails somewhat. However, if Rossi knew that a well-know industrial chemical is needed to make his device work best, he would have to list that chemical in the patent. He would not get a patent for that chemical, but he would still have to name it.

  • Ha, ha!


    (That is a joke, right? Poe's law?? I mean, Axil and others here apparently think you can write that in a patent.)

    I have seen the process of catalyst formation defined in an awarded patent as follows"


    Nano-skeletal catalyst

    US 9023754 B2


    http://google.com/patents/US9023754


    Specifically


    Quote

    In another aspect of the present invention, a method of producing a catalyst material with nano-scale structure from nickel and aluminum is disclosed. The method comprises providing a catalyst powder and a filler powder into a nano-powder production reactor. The catalyst powder comprises nickel, while the filler powder comprises aluminum. Next, a plasma flow is generated within the nano-powder production reactor and applied to the catalyst powder and the filler powder within the nano-powder production reactor, thereby nano-sizing the catalyst powder and the filler powder. As a result of this nano-sizing, a nano-powder is formed, which is defined by a plurality of nano-particles, wherein each nano-particle comprises nickel and aluminum. A catalyst precursor material is then formed from the nano-powder, wherein the catalyst precursor material is a densified bulk porous structure comprising the plurality of nano-particles.