Rossi vs. Darden aftermath discussions

  • I once spoke to an elderly Hungarian doctor who had treated Papp, talked with him at length in his native language (Hungarian) and had decided he was a flaming nut case.

    I have heard that Papp was crazy. However, being crazy does not necessarily preclude being right about something, or being competent in your job. As it happens, I used to know several crazy people because my late aunt ran a halfway house. See:


    https://www.amazon.com/Psychia…ell-Doniger/dp/B06XQ6ZS9X


    As you see in these case studies, many of these people were smart, capable, gainfully employed, and reliable experts in what they did. You should never assume that mental illness precludes competence or the ability to contribute to society. Yes, sometimes it does, but sometimes it does not.


    I have spoken to several flaming nutcases who believe in cold fusion. The fact that some number of crazy people believe something is not evidence that it is wrong. Many crazy people believe in the conservation of energy, Special Relativity, and much else that I am confident is true.


    I suggest you have jumped to conclusions and you are judging the issue based on personality and people rather than technical details.

  • Another anecdote like the whole Rossi thing or the Mizuno bucket thing?

    I wouldn't call Mizuno's claim an anecdote. I have the analog pen recorder trace, photos of the bucket, the cell and much else. It is still sitting in Mizuno's lab, except for the cathode, which was lost to destructive testing. That is much more hard evidence than Rossi supplied up until the Penon report.

    References to something with enough details to actually evaluate the claims?

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


    As you see, we question the claim.

    Until then, I will *guess* (as with all anecdotes) that the heat to run the cold fusion cell was adequate to run the motor too

    As I said, there was no external heat input. But as you see there was some chemical heat.

  • Oh... and where is Bob Rohner now and what is he doing? I can guess what his brother is up to: This was a year ago: http://freeenergyscams.com/arr…issued-for-john-p-rohner/ Previously in contempt of court about an SEC civil fraud case.


    Important clarification for those who are not up on the history -- John and Bob Rohner are brothers who had both collaborated with Papp on a rebuilt version of his engine. John Rohner's business, Inteligentry, was raided by the FBI in 2013. As I understand it (but don't have time to double-check), Bob and John had parted ways well before that time as a result of differences between them. John Rohner's apparent misconduct cannot be an occasion for casting aspersions on Bob Rohner.

  • I do know quite a bit about Papp and his colorful history. I am not "quick to judge."

    Perhaps you do know about Papp, but neither you nor Feynmann has any idea what the electric power going to the machine was for, or whether it was motive power or for the control electronics. If it was for the control electronics then Feynmann jumped to a false conclusion, made a terrible mistake, and killed someone.


    Has it never occurred to you it might have been for control? Have you never questioned your own assumptions here?


    Knowing a lot about Papp does not mean you know anything about his machine. Granted, it is a valid reason to question the validity of the claims. His other stories about a submarine and so on were lies. But, to evaluate the machine, you have to know about the machine itself, and you have to see data you can trust. You do not trust the data -- and neither do I, in this case. But that is not a valid reason to dismiss it. Not having data means we don't know. That is all we can say for sure. Plus, as McKubre pointed out, we know the claims are impossible on the face of it, according to conventional physics. For most people that alone is enough to dismiss the whole story. This is pretty much what I have done, but since I am not God and I do not know everything, I leave open the slight possibility there is something to it. Anyway, I do not assume I know for sure what the power cord was for. That is arrogant.


    I know better than trying to judge reality by looking at who believes what, and whether crazy people do or do not believe in X, Y or Z. That metric is so bad you might as well throw darts instead. Many sane people believe in things that I consider preposterous. History is full of examples.

  • I wouldn't call Mizuno's claim an anecdote. I have the analog pen recorder trace, photos of the bucket, the cell and much else. It is still sitting in Mizuno's lab, except for the cathode, which was lost to destructive testing.


    Yeah, you failed to grasp the limitations back of spf. That's when, instead of trying to batter down your illogic, I just suggested Mizuno hadn't accounted for the mice drinking from the bucket. You of course then calculated how much that might be and decided that the idea wouldn't work. I didn't have the heart then to remind you of the cats that chased the mice, and of the rats, and the dogs chasing the cats (very thirsty after all that running), and the dog catchers chasing the dogs. And then there's the birds coming in through the holes in the windows that you mentioned. And the extra cats you have to add in that were chasing the birds, and the extra dogs, etc. etc.


    For the rest of you, a synopsis. Mizuno is a Japanese prof who did a CF experiment and decided mid-stream it might blow up. So he put it in a bucket of water and carried it across the campus to an abandoned building, where he put it in an abandoned lab hood. he then periodically checked on it and found the water was disappearing. I believe he also measured an elevated temperature for some time on it with the internal TC. He wrote about this in a book.


    When this was initially posted to sci.physics.fusion, I looked up water evaporation from swimming pools and got the equations to preduict water loss. It involves time, temperature, humidity, wind, etc. My scribbling around with the equations suggested the water loss noted might well be to evaporation, and I posted that. Jed rejected the idea without thought. So I then made my silly suggestion about the mice and was amazed to see Jed try to calculate that out. I was really ROFL.


    Morale of the story: Anecdotes aren't science.

  • @ JedRothwell,

    No, it was after they issued the report. They revised it and issued a new version. The gist of it was the same.


    This is completely in contrast with your words:


    It's way clear from your own words, and from the Krivit's article already cited, that you and others were involved in the examination of the data of the demo held on January 14, 2011, and in the preparation of the final report published on JoNP only on January 24.

    So, it seems that you are trying to fabricate a new narrative of those early facts, completely different from the real one.

    I wonder if this applies to everything you are writing here.

  • an elderly Hungarian doctor who had treated Papp, talked with him at length in his native language (Hungarian) and had decided he was a flaming nut case. Now watch Zeus get all bent out of shape again.


    Nope... And I note you've now sanitised your claims enough to ensure you won't have to delete them later.

  • For the rest of you, a synopsis. Mizuno is a Japanese prof who did a CF experiment and decided mid-stream it might blow up. So he put it in a bucket of water and carried it across the campus to an abandoned building, where he put it in an abandoned lab hood. he then periodically checked on it and found the water was disappearing. I believe he also measured an elevated temperature for some time on it with the internal TC.

    That is incorrect, except for the last sentence. The TC was there the whole time. It still is. However, it was disconnected from the pen recorder and read manually when the cell was submerged.


    Here is a description of the event, written by me:


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

  • It's way clear from your own words, and from the Krivit's article already cited, that you and others were involved in the examination of the data of the demo held on January 14, 2011, and in the preparation of the final report published on JoNP only on January 24.

    So, it seems that you are trying to fabricate a new narrative of those early facts, completely different from the real one.

    We are talking about two different tests and two different reports. The one that I was talking about, that was issued and then revised after comments by me and others, was in 2013. It is here:


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


    This is a more complete description of a Rossi test than anything published earlier. Taken on its own, I think it has merit. I have doubts about it because the follow-up report, the so-called Lugano report, had many problems.


    I now think that Rossi is a complete fraud and a criminal based on the Penon report, and the Murray and Smith reports. There is also a lot of evidence that he is a fraud in the court case docket and depositions, but I have not read them carefully and I do not understand legal terminology, so I cannot judge the situation based on them.


    It is conceivable that Rossi actually had something in 2013, described in the above report. I cannot imagine why he would turn his back on a real machine and try to put over a crude fraud such as Penon. That makes no sense. But people do strange things. Who knows what happened? I can't guess and thinking about it gives me a headache. I'll never know and I don't much care. It is a tragic fiasco and a crime and I wish they would throw Rossi in prison for it, but I don't know if that is likely or not.

  • That, and the fact that Rossi was involved in designing and choosing the major portions of the measurement method, makes in a NON-independent measurement.

    yeah, well with the benefit of hindsight, they were entirely at the mercy of Rossi who bamboozled and flummoxed them without mercy.


    As usual you taje just one line of the Lugano report and try to diffuse your FUD and insults.


    It is quite obvious that testing a prototype that it was not their own the Professors needed the Inventor to operate it.

    But that has nothing to do with the measure of it's performances.

    The measurement methods, data collection and analysis were totally under control of the Scientist involved.


    During an F1 Race pilots operate the cars and Judges measure time and velocity.

    No one would say that the measure done by the Judges is not independent !


    I see that as usual you also insult a group of Professors and PhD. For sure you have no arguments at all !

  • The usual behavior of Cherokee to promise a lot, take money and do nothing is also documented on Wikipedia


    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camden,_New_Jersey


    "In 2013, Cherokee Investment Partners had a plan to redevelop north Camden with 5,000 new homes and a shopping center on 450 acres (1.8 km2). Cherokee dropped their plans in the face of local opposition and the slumping real estate market.[175][176][177]"


    Quite interesting is the article numbered 177


    Katz, Matt. "Feds: Bryant took bribes to gentrify Camden", The Philadelphia Inquirer, September 28, 2010. Accessed April 5, 2016.


    The article is not immediately accessible but a press release can still be found on the net:

    http://www.saveardmorecoalitio…minent-domain-fail-camden


    Here is part of the long article;

    "

    For Immediate Release September 27, 2010

    United States Attorney's Office Southern District of New York

    Contact: (212) 637-2600

    Former New Jersey State Senator Wayne R. Bryant and Attorney Eric D. Wisler Indicted on Corruption Charges

    PREET BHARARA, the United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York and Acting United States Attorney for the District of New Jersey, MICHAEL B. WARD, the Special Agent in Charge for the New Jersey Office of the Federal Bureau of Investigation ("FBI"), and VICTOR W. LESSOFF, the Special Agent in Charge of the New Jersey Field Office of the Internal Revenue Service, Criminal Investigation Division ("IRS-CID"), announced today an Indictment charging former New Jersey State Senator WAYNE R. BRYANT and attorney ERIC D. WISLER with multiple counts of fraud and bribery.

    According to the Indictment filed today in Newark federal court: BRYANT was a State Senator representing New Jersey's 5th District, which included Camden, and served as Chairman of the Senate's Budget and Appropriations Committee. BRYANT also was a named, equity partner at a law firm in Cherry Hill, New Jersey. WISLER was a named, equity partner at a law firm in Teaneck, New Jersey.

    Among WISLER's clients was a private equity investment firm located in Raleigh, North Carolina, and a management firm that undertook several "brownfields," redevelopment projects in New Jersey by which contaminated land was to be made suitable for development.

    In 2004, WISLER arranged for his firm to enter into a retainer agreement with BRYANT's firm, which called for BRYANT's firm to be paid a retainer fee of $8,000 per month. The payment was purportedly to cover fees for legal work relating to land use, condemnation, and other matters for a development project in the New Jersey Meadowlands.

    In truth and in fact, however, the payments made under the retainer agreement were actually bribes paid in exchange for official action that BRYANT took in favor of the various redevelopment projects undertaken by WISLER and his clients, including a proposed $1.2 billion redevelopment of Camden's Cramer Hill neighborhood, which sat in BRYANT's legislative district.

    [.....]

    "

    Quite interesting read ! So Darden was paying a company to bribe Bryant......

    Bribe as a Service (BaaS) Interesting way to do business !

  • Also, it looks like MFMP is once again posting unverified, non-replicated, "take my word for it" results as actual science. I guess they need more donations for their international vacations.

    No need to be a twit. These are human beings taking time away from their families in the pursuit of knowledge, which is shared openly with all. They have never suggested to "take my word for it." They just happened to share some safety concerns about neutron emission emphasized by Piantelli. They have some more open live science experiments lined up for later this year.

  • No need to be a twit. These are human beings taking time away from their families in the pursuit of knowledge, which is shared openly with all. They have never suggested to "take my word for it." They just happened to share some safety concerns about neutron emission emphasized by Piantelli. They have some more open live science experiments lined up for later this year.

    Well, my definition of science and your definition of science are different. Real science is very strict and unforgiving, unlike LENR believers. And that's how it should be.

  • Well, my definition of science and your definition of science are different. Real science is very strict and unforgiving, unlike LENR believers. And that's how it should be.

    Real science doesn't carve out reputation traps for areas of research involving intriguing results, particularly when the potential upside to humanity far outweighs any potential negatives that might come about by devoting some resources to further clarify those results.

  • That does seem likely. But it was unbecoming of academic scientists. It was bad behavior.

    The Swedes didn't conduct an experiment at their University, did a test at a private premises and were partly funded by a company. In fact, in the report's acknowledgments, you can read this:

    "This paper was partially sponsored by the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, and Elforsk AB."

    It is normal for them to have privacy obligations and not to accept interviews for fear of revealing too much. There's nothing wrong with this, it's a normal practice when dealing with companies that pay you.

  • If one reads the Lugano report, and compare it with the court documents, they tell different stories as to Rossi's, and the Swede's involvement. In his report, Levi describes Rossi as an occasional participant, never mentions Fabiani, and never addresses how often the Swedes were there, leaving us to assume all the time. The documents paint a much different picture, with Rossi AND Fabiani there most, if not all the time, while the Swedes flew in on occasion.

    The authors of the Lugano report are 6, so whatever is written is not the only result of Levi's thought, and it's unbelievable that all 6 have agreed to facilitate Rossi. What they have written in the report was what they thought was useful to say: it was not a text written to reassure Rossi's detractors about his role, it was a scientific article and had to report only useful data describing the experiment performed. Have you ever read any scientific article in which the author indicated the number of hours he had been in the lab? The authors considered it useful to point out that they had control of the test and that Rossi only intervened on some occasions (though in their presence) when it was obviously impossible for them to act alone as they did not know the object they were testing. When the instruments were set up, there was no need for the Professors to stay in Lugano, since there were their ever-on instruments that measured what was going on. The fact that Rossi was present every day (if it is true) doesn't surprise me: I would also check my precious discovery continuously, I would never leave it unattended.

  • That, and the fact that Rossi was involved in designing and choosing the major portions of the measurement method, makes in a NON-independent measurement.

    Who told you that Rossi was involved in designing and selecting the major portions of the measurement method? The authors of the report do not say it, they have written and signed an article, so they are the ones who have the paternity of what they have done. They decided every aspect of the test, Rossi intervened only when they could not act alone because they did not know how to do it (was the first time they saw that reactor, why should they know how to activate it?) And always in their presence, as they specified in their text. The rest are just your inventions to discredit Rossi, as always .....


  • It's unbelievable how Darden can release interviews in which he says he is concerned about pollution and says he wants to do something concrete to save our planet. It's really a hypocritical attitude .... what a cheek! It is now well-known to everyone what Cherokee has been doing in these years, its habit of buying for small change some plots of land to be clean-up, receiving funds for that work and then not executing it. Their affiliated companies have collected a large number of Orders for such events, but for them it has never been a problem because it was enough to declare bankruptcy to close the business. And so a new company could be born, and everything could start again. I believe that Sifferkol's report is illuminating (http://www.sifferkoll.se/sifferkoll/are-tomas-darden-cherokee-simply-fake-environmentalists-in-business-only-to-defraud-the-tax-payer -investor /), and what Ele has discovered confirms Darden's fame.