Rossi vs. Darden aftermath discussions

Quote from zorud

It would be interesting to see and understand your reasoning for this assumption. Do you really believe that Rossi found a a nice and smart way to handle in a power station or whatever kind of battery thousands of his tiny magic 20W sticks (30mm long and 1mm in diameter, IIRC), each of them running at temperature of 2600°C (!) and creating excess power (light, electricity, heat, probably, thrust and Axil only knows whatever kind of other unknown alien particles) lighting up the room with an amazingly blue aura?

I would not risk to run into trouble with such incredible new stuff, but would make millions and billions with my good old ECat. There are so many satisfied customers already.... BTW - will all of them apply for an upgrade to Quack technology? Guess, yes, since Rossi himself dropped his old one for the new toy...and will probably no longer support his old cats...

So , next epiphany of ECW's LENR messiah will happen by end of October 2017 - a "demo" to whom? Maybe E48? Looking forward to read what'll happen...

I don't know what the features of QuarkX are, but I think the demo will show us an extraordinary and very different object from the reactors that other members of the IH portfolio claim to have. But if you had a revolutionary object in your hands, would you really dedicate time and resources to something else? Rossi tried to make improvements to his old type of reactors and succeeded in his intent, inventing something he said was much superior. I do not see why he should be fond of what probably is for him a technology already outdated.

Quote from axil

Why do think that Rossi was on site 20 hours a day for 7 days a week...because he had to be. Rossi was hands on to control the reactor. A automatic control system was not up to the task of keeping the plant stable and well controlled. Rossi even has to be on site as he was recovering from surgery. The reactor was not passively stable. Rossi could not sell a reactor that a numb brained operator could not mess up

I agree. The Doral test was one-year R&D, Rossi (as far as I know) never did such a test on a 1MW plant and will probably have learned a lot about the features, performance and duration of his creation. For me it is obvious that no new technology can be marketed without first making a test of such a type and duration, otherwise it is likely to make flops from which it is difficult to recover.

Quote from maryyugo

If you're going to be angry, you should be angry with Rossi, who probably set LENR work back decades

Set LENR work back decades ?? I doesn't seem to me that in this forum (and in so many other blogs and forums) we talk about much more than Rossi ... Rossi and his E-Cat are those who have brought interest and attention in a field that otherwise would be even more dying than not already.

Hi we_cat_global ,

Quote from we_cat_global

I find it rather arrogant to state that "those of you watching the case" could help a JD fixing their work. The settlement means that, as Dewey Weaver said so nicely in post where he also kindly advised me to insert something in my rectum, "Rossi is free to roam".

My point was about whether Dewey Weaver was posting here at the request of IH, namely that there was another possibility, and a plausible one at that, that he was here on his own initiative. Does your document show otherwise?

Quote from we_cat_global

I find it rather arrogant to state that "those of you watching the case" could help a JD fixing their work.

More to the point, it was a rebuttal of your suggestion about the existence of a settlement establishing the factuality of statements made.

Quote from we_cat_global

"Financial predator" is an uncalled-for term. Even from a "Rossi predator" (or E-Cat predator as you wish). The guy is trying to save the world. Give him some room to operate in.

I have gone back and toned down the language a little.

Quote from Eric Walker

Hi we_cat_global ,

My point was about whether Dewey Weaver was posting here at the request of IH, namely that there was another possibility, and a plausible one at that, that he was here on his own initiative. Does your document show otherwise?

Not arrogant in the slightest. There is a lot of information to comb through, especially when one is first coming up to speed. More to the point, it was a rebuttal of your suggestion that the settlement showed that there were no blatant lies.

I guess perhaps? I personally find the documentation now available shows otherwise. But if this case has demonstrated anything, it is that each onlooker will interpret events in light of his own attachments and predispositions.

Display More

Hi Eric Walker,

In my opinion, if a company let's somebody post for them favourable posts on a website, and they give this person a bonus in the form of shares, they not only agree with these posts, they indirectly pay that person for the posts.

Cheers,

JB

I think my favorite thing about this place is the hyperbolic opinion of its importance. I can just envision the CEOs of major energy companies sitting in their boardrooms saying to their teams of scientists and engineers "well, according to IHFanboy, this e-cat is going to revolutionize the global energy industry."

But then their Nobel-prize-winning consultant answers "But Maryyugo says it is all a scam."

"We have access to experts around the world. Who should we call? Cal-Tech? NREL? Los Alamos?"

"What do any of them know? Call Axil."

Gotta love delusions of grandeur.

Quote from Eric Walker

It is only through Rossi's transmogrification of the facts that the Doral show became in his contention later on the GPT. Even IHFB will agree with me on this.

Not so fast E.W.

The term sheet did not repeat the terms of the GPT because that had already been settled in the amendment to the agreement (albeit without Ampenergo's signature, although due possibly from pressure by Darden, but... I digress). Vaughn and others referred to Doral as the "test." Everyone acted like it was the "test."

As you pointed out, IH accepted the ERV, paid half of the ERV's fee, accepted (or at least did not object to initially) the quarterly reports, and even raised tens of millions of dollars on the back of them. Even IH's attorneys did not press the notion of there not being a GPT very hard. Only the most hardened IH fans on this forum (e.g., Abd and then THH picking up the slack after Abd departed) argued vociferously that it wasn't.

Quote from interested observer

"We have access to experts around the world. Who should we call? Cal-Tech?

Please, no. Of all places, they've done the most damage. Underhanded (well-documented) tactics hostile to cold fusion dating back to 1989.

Quote

NREL?

Nope. LENR would put them out of business. Not going to touch it with a ten foot pole.

Quote

Los Alamos?"

You would think, right? But no. National labs dabbled in cold fusion early on. Ed Storms was involved with one of those early efforts, and became prominent in LENR. But for the most part, once the pathological science label was slapped onto it by some miscreants, the national labs wouldn't touch it for political reasons.

For the most part, with a few notable exceptions, scientists and universities are fraidy-cats when it comes to LENR.

"For the most part, with some notable exceptions, scientists and universities are fraidy-cats when it comes to LENR."

Yeah, and they demand actual evidence and things that make sense. The scientifically ignorant are far better suited to make real progress on LENR and evaluate the results of experiments. But even they may be handicapped by powers of reasoning that are too advanced. Have you considered an army of 5-year-olds as your ultimate strategy? That could be just what is needed.

Quote from IH Fanboy

...the most hardened IH fans on this forum (e.g., Abd and then THH...

Shouldn't you be the most hardened IH fan here? - Why else would you have selected the nickname IH Fanboy?

Same as many "sceptics", I was never a fan of IH - because it was always beyond me, why anyone would believe that some rusty pipes and a electrical heater coil assembled by a former jailbird forms a nuclear reactor, and waste money (OPM) for such junk.

When did you become IH Fanboy, and when did you change your opinion about IH?

Quote from LDM

If you for these very low ohmic heater wires calculate the needed wire diameters from the resistivity for heater wires which can handle these temperatures (For example Kantal) and even for copper (low ohmic), then you will see that the number of turns will not fit on the area because the needed wire diameter becomes too large
One possible solution to this problem would be that the "average current" mentioned in the report is not the average RMS current but the average of the peak currents. This has the following consequences :

1. Since the peak current is for small pulses, the RMS current is much lower.

2. As a consequence the calculated Joule heating power in the Lugano report is too high (About a factor 10)

But if the "average current" is indeed the the average peak current, then for the dummy run it results in resistance of each of the three heater wires of about 25 Ohm. For Kantal A1 type wire the diameter will then be small enough to properly fit on the tube and to have enough spacing between the windings.

I was able to work out the Lugano windings exactly matching the specifications. I even wound one up (in both 14 and 16 Ga: 15 Ga is hard to find).

I posted a link with the calculation boxes filled in a long time ago, using steamengine.com (used normally for vape winding calcs, but works perfectly for larger heaters).

The twisted windings are important.

@IH

... "National labs dabbled in cold fusion early on."

Not exactly.

Quote from IH Fanboy

Not so fast E.W.

The term sheet did not repeat the terms of the GPT because that had already been settled in the amendment to the agreement (albeit without Ampenergo's signature, although due possibly from pressure by Darden, but... I digress). Vaughn and others referred to Doral as the "test." Everyone acted like it was the "test."

As you pointed out, IH accepted the ERV, paid half of the ERV's fee, accepted (or at least did not object to initially) the quarterly reports, and even raised tens of millions of dollars on the back of them. Even IH's attorneys did not press the notion of there not being a GPT very hard. Only the most hardened IH fans on this forum (e.g., Abd and then THH picking up the slack after Abd departed) argued vociferously that it wasn't.

I'm not commenting much now because nothing new is being said, nor is there anything to discuss. If I was really bored I'd do a full analysis of how to build the vanishing heat exchanger with what Wong got wrong, and could it be weasled out of, so that at least on theory a 1MW heat exchanger could be built as specified by Wong. It is more interesting than you might think.

Other than that I see no new tech stuff, and my interest in: how good is the Rossi PR is limited.

But IHFB has incorrectly represented my views above, which were and are more nuanced. If you look at the documents it is clear that literally the test was not the GPT. Ampenergo ensured that (and IH and Rossi knew it). Legally that does not wash, due to estoppel, if all parties behaved as though it was the GPT.

What seems to have happened is that in his initial e-mail begging to be allowed to set up the test (Rossi used the word desperate in his deposition referring to his wish to do this) Rossi made no mention of GPT and instead said that he wanted a test for a real customer and in the real ciustomer's factory.

That is important, because from IH POV a GPT test on their premises could be properly checked and monitored by them, whereas one on Rossi's (or the customer's) premises could not. They knew from past experience that Rossi control + test = nonsense results, and the ERV as a once per month flying visitor does not (we know) prevent Rossi changing the test setup even if Penon is an impartial ERV.

So at its inception this test was a non-GPT customer sale of power, as the Term sheet makes clear. The license agreement test had timed out. But it includes an ERV and therefore has some similarity with a GPT

What happened then (and it was predictable) is that Rossi morphed this into something that looks like a GPT. Rossi described it to everyone, including those on his blog, as the GPT. IH did not directly contradict this. It seems strange, but here is what I think they thought.

(1) They reckoned that if Rossi's stuff worked (for them) they were happy for this to be taken as a GPT and to pay Rossi off (the Casserino notes). They are in that case talking about $B so they would have to be really stupid to cavil about giving Rossi $89M to keep him happy. Important to note the very generous (to both sides) terms of the license. IH can do what they like in the US. Rossi can do what he likes in Europe. Everyone is happy.

(2) They reckoned if Rossi's stuff was dud that they would not pay (obviously). The license terms were not formally met, and anyway it would be beyond chutzpah for Rossi to try to sue them for $89M for obviously non-working product. Here they made a very bad miscalculation.

(3) They allowed Rossi's implicit idea that this was the GPT to go unchallenged. I'm not sure whether this was because they just did not worry about Rossi's GPT-like noises - he never explicitly told them it was the GPT and they had clearly (but alas not via e-mail) explained that it was not the GPT. Or, perhaps, they were well aware of how Rossi was twisting it and did not want to make him go off in a huff (which he undoubtedly would have done) by telling him clearly it was not the GPT. Both ways are possible, and both ways they made a bad miscalculation.

So: was the test the GPT? Legally? We will never know. Morally? I'd say about 10%. The 10% comes from the fact that maybe IH were, by allowing Rossi to act as though it was the GPT and not correcting him, trying to have their cake and eat it. Remember that at the start of the GPT they still felt there was a good chance they would have near-term working LENR. They would put up with anything to get that. At some point (remember that famous we must test carefully PR) they realised that internal tests that had seemed positive were in fact rubbish, and their confidence dropped to near zero. I'd guess they could not work out why what worked for the Swedes and Fulvio did not work in other tests till they got proper technical expertise in (Murray). Till they did this they would have been very highly motivated to obtain investment of $100s of millions - Cassarino had written $200M in his notes conditional on them being able to prove themselves that the devices worked. In that case it would be easy to get proper positive external lab testing done and convince any partner anywhere. Many (including I'm sure Woodford) would happily promise money to order on that condition.

As Eric says, I see IH as being highly generous to Rossi, knowing they were dealing with a snake, willing to do this for the greater good, insufficiently careful of said snake's fangs.

ECW are right to rejoice - their guy won. In a sense. It is interesting to speculate whether overall Rossi is now in a better position (though financially worse off) than he would be with IH saying (politely) that his device could not be commercialised and dropping him. I think that, in PR terms, would have hurt him a lot more than the battle, even though 100% evidence of Rossi's deceit comes out from Discovery. After all, those backing Rossi like Mats already knew that he tries to rig tests (the RMS vs average metering issue). No such knowledge hurts his fan base, it seems.

Quote from IH Fanboy

Please, no. Of all places, they've done the most damage. Underhanded (well-documented) tactics hostile to cold fusion dating back to 1989.

Nope. LENR would put them out of business. Not going to touch it with a ten foot pole.

You would think, right? But no. National labs dabbled in cold fusion early on. Ed Storms was involved with one of those early efforts, and became prominent in LENR. But for the most part, once the pathological science label was slapped onto it by some miscreants, the national labs wouldn't touch it for political reasons.

For the most part, with a few notable exceptions, scientists and universities are fraidy-cats when it comes to LENR.

Display More

@IHFB. You start from a premise - LENR obviously works at commercial levels - that few hold. You then try to make subsequent facts fit this premise. To do so you need to brand pretty well everyone in the world as either stupid or part of a conspiracy to suppress LENR.

Given your contempt for so many people and institutions you can maintain your views. After all, there can never be evidence of absence, and the lack of expected progress and big player involvement can be explained by your views. Contrary technical argument will either be from uncredentialled players, or people you have already dismissed as stupid or in a conspiracy. Realist Pro-LENR guys like Jed are dismissed by you as unable correctly to see the conspiracy, or as part of it (I'm not sure which).

I can't see, given this, that there is any possible evidence that would make you change your mind. You have a more coherently worked through position than most, and argue it more logically, but it is inherently both unlikely and very very contemptuous of pretty well the whole world except a few internet fans.

Quote from Alan Smith

THHuxleynew That there has been hostility toward publication of LENR studies resulting in pretty broad denial, dismissal of positive results and sabotage of funding applications and scientific careers by many actors cannot be denied. If you don't know that you maybe need to read more of the history of this dismal science.

This continues, with regard to the recent publication of a report into the current state of LENR research commissioned by the US government one of those whose work was dismissed said in an email (which I have redacted due to privacy concerns) my own additions to improve clarity after redaction are emboldened.

" They (the presenters) are very slick - largely irrelevant - and when they are finally relevant (slide 20 and on) they contain terrible errors. Either someone ......completely unfamiliar with the field or some spin agent was tasked to prepare this briefing. They mis-understand things .....said, and things that 'X' has said. And lie about things (Slide 22: "Predicts excess heat should be 23.8 MeV/He atom, which is not observed in experiments” and an equally disingenuous critique of Takahashi’s model). The job seems still to be (as it is in Italy) to conceal the possibility of a perhaps practical, and potentially cheaper alternative to hot fusion energy that might challenge $research.

I was not talking about science. Nor is Rossi! Rossi has (he claims) an invention which is obviously highly commercialisable, and disruptive. Rossi is somehwat ambiguous about science - he enjoys publishing papers in his pretend journal - but his scientific record is appalling so that even supporters have to frame his claimed achievements as those of a practical inventor interested only in working commercial product but not in careful scientific tests of same.

Even the hostility to LENR science, understandable after so many years of crying wolf, would disappear in a flash with even one reproducible lab rat experiment that showed secure anomalous power and total heat well above possible artifact or chemical.

Quote from Ahlfors

... "National labs dabbled in cold fusion early on."

National laboratories did not "dabble" in cold fusion. Groups of researchers in National labs in the U.S., India, Japan, Italy and Russia spent years studying the effect, and they published peer-reviewed, replicated papers with definitive proof that the excess heat, tritium, and helium is real. The most important labs in the U.S. were Los Alamos and China Lake. In India, the research was conducted by several groups at BARC, India's leading nuclear laboratory, and led by the later chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission. See:

http://lenr-canr.org/wordpress/?page_id=463

No "skeptical" paper challenging any of these findings has been published, except for Shanhan's crackpot theories.

Quote from THHuxleynew

Even the hostility to LENR science, understandable after so many years of crying wolf, would disappear in a flash with even one reproducible lab rat experiment that showed secure anomalous power and total heat well above possible artifact or chemical.

Do you also require a lab rat version of the Top Quark finding before you accept it? Do you insist than anyone should be able to send a remote robot to Mars before you believe NASA's data, or that any amateur should be able to perform open heart surgery? I submit that you apply this standard to cold fusion, and cold fusion alone. No other finding in science or technology has been rejected because it is difficult to achieve or the success rate is low. The success rate for some types of transistors in the 1950s and for the Vanguard rocket in the late 1950s was lower than it is for cold fusion, yet no one claimed that transistors and rockets do not exist.

There are ~17,000 tests in the literature from over 180 major laboratories showing anomalous power and total heat far above any possible artifact or chemical effect. There are over 100 reports of tritium, which cannot be a chemical effect. Power exceeds the lowest detectable level by factors ranging from ~10 to ~1,000 (100 W detected in a calorimeter that measures 0.1 W). The total heat energy exceeds chemical energy by factors ranging from 10 to 100,000. If you disagree then you are ignoring the literature and making up your own version of history.

Since no skeptic (other than Shanahan *) has ever published a paper or letter showing an error in any major experiment, and since the methods go back to the 1840s, obviously the methods are "secure." The skeptics have not even tried to find an error. Their entire argument is that the results violate textbook nuclear physics, and therefore an undetected error must exist somewhere. The "undiscovered error" hypothesis is not falsifiable. It applies equally well to Newton and Ohm's laws.

* Shanahan's theories are also not falsifiable. The violate common sense and many textbook laws of physics. And they were thoroughly disproved by Marwan et al., which was more attention than they deserved.