Mats Lewan: Here is the Settlement

  • Hi Adrian,


    Do you think the E-Cat QX exists? (Jed doesn't)

    What COP will the E-Cat QX produce?


    I think there is something that made that blue light that was captured in that photograph. I will not bet any quatloos that it has a COP above 1.


    To Shane's excellent question, though: what are we to make of the claim that there is no market demand for the E-Cat? (Hopefully I have understood the context and gist of the response.)

  • Adrian Ashfield

    Adrian, what would you do with a QuarkQX? It would require fifty thousand of them for a megawatt source, each requiring control, a source of input power, cooling and coordination. Not to mention that just sitting there, they run at 2600 degree C. Please tell me you understand how preposterous this claim is!


    @everyone

    It is the frequent way of choosing marks for con men to make claims so preposterous that anyone smart enough to require proper testing will not even bother to pay attention. This is one of the reasons Nigerian scams in email are so badly done. It's on purpose. Nigerian scammers do not try to appeal to smart people-- it's a waste of effort. Free energy scammers do something similar and that is exactly what Rossi has done with his QuarkQX claims.

  • Adrian Ashfield


    OK. But you will end up disappointed. You didn't seem to learn much from Steorn and Defkalion so I imagine, when Rossi finally has fled the scene, you will still have learned nothing and will move on to the next silly scam. With your proven abilities, that is a shame. I have trouble understanding the logic-tight compartments some people, even very smart and accomplished and educated people, have in their brains within which evidence and past history seems to make absolutely no difference.


    Quote

    It seems to me that you base all of your opinions about the QuarkX on people you know nothing about and things that you know nothing about (by your own admission).


    I have no idea what that means, any of it. I base my opinions about the QuarkX on what Rossi has done in the past and on how he has described. I also use my considerable experience in the physical sciences and my knowledge of scientific methods and technology. Perhaps you rely on what Rossi says but then you are relying on a proven liar.


    The things I supposedly said I know nothing about are low power cold fusion experiments involving electrolytic cells and isoperibolic calorimeters. In my opinion, which could certainly be wrong, these are not worth my time currently. That does not mean I have never looked into them, as Rothwell is fond of saying. In fact, I have read some papers and browsed others and I found it tough slogging. On the other hand, I had no problems following Rossi (and Steorn and Defkalion) claims over the years. For one thing, they were pitched very low and intended for lay people and not well informed or technical savvy lay people at that. I have looked at Rossi experiments and I've exchanged comments with both pro and con people since early 2011. So it is certainly not true that I know little about the man and his "work".

  • It is the frequent way of choosing marks for con men to make claims so preposterous that anyone smart enough to require proper testing will not even bother to pay attention. This is one of the reasons Nigerian scams in email are so badly done. It's on purpose. Nigerian scammers do not try to appeal to smart people-- it's a waste of effort. Free energy scammers do something similar and that is exactly what Rossi has done with his QuarkQX claims.


    Hey, I hadn't thought of that before! Thanks! That actually also explains why Rossi never repeats anything. He's going for flash to impress dummies, and replication is just not very flashy...I will remember that!

  • Quote

    Hey, I hadn't thought of that before! Thanks!


    There is actually research on the issue of why Nigerian scams are worded so badly and are, like Rossi, so blatantly obvious to analytical readers. See:


    link to Microsoft article (note you can download or read the entire article as a PDF)


    Washington Post:

    https://www.washingtonpost.com…s/?utm_term=.a50c2efed5c8



    Quote

    That actually also explains why Rossi never repeats anything. He's going for flash to impress dummies, and replication is just not very flashy...I will remember that!


    That actually has a different explanation. It is usual for magicians/sleight of hand types not to repeat illusions in front of the same audience. This is because a lot of illusions rely on speed of motion and misdirection and with repeated viewings, perceptive people can see the tricks or guess them. Rossi did not repeat his illusions because with passage of time, people theorized about what the tricks were and challenged him to repeat the demonstrations with those problems repaired. Obviously, Rossi could not do that. For example, he could not allow a proper calibration of his steam ecats because then, his error in assuming wet steam was dry and/or his misplacement of thermocouples and/or his screwing around with the input power measurements would all become obvious. So instead, he said stuff like "well, never mind about that. It's irrelevant now that I have this new improved shiny object." And he would do a new demo with a new kludge with mostly new methods of deceptions-- deceptions which I am pretty sure he tested systematically and comprehensively during those 16 hour days he said he worked for all those years.


    With the QuarkQX. he is combining the two methods -- a) appealing to the lowest common denominator-- anybody with an inkling of good sense won't believe a 20kW pencil size reactor running at 2600 degrees C but Rossi acolytes and possibly potential investors will. And b) it's a new set of tricks, should it ever get as far as an actual demo which is hard to predict but at least possible.

  • MY: why did you take umbridge at my comment directed at AA? I was pointing out to him that his positive expectations about the QuarkX were baseless. Of course your (and my) negative expections of it are based on Rossi's track record and on using even a 7th grade-level knowledge of science, much less anything more sophisticated. My whole point was that his optimism was based on hero worship and nothing else. He refers to Rossi's group, whatever that means and the fact that he knows nothing whatsoever about the QuarkX. This is a reason to think it is real? So what it is you didn't understand about what I said?

    • Official Post

    Is this thing about the pumps true? That the IH side saw it as the rated maximum output, but Rossisays it is the minimum. Hard to believe it could be so simple and obvious as Rossisays...but it would be nice for some others here to address it. If you are wrong, you are wrong...unless you are Rossi that is. So man up guys, if need be.


    Not that it matters as Doral is dead and buried -although I see the Rossi forces trying to dig it back up, put some lipstick on it, and call it a beauty of a success, but in the pursuit of the truth, let us leave no stone unturned.

  • Adrian Ashfield: what do you know about "Rossi's group"? It seems to me that you base all of your opinions about the QuarkX on people you know nothing about and things that you know nothing about (by your own admission). Other than that, I can see why you would have high expectations.

    From Rossi's theory paper, we can get an idea about the physicist that works for Rossi: Carl-Oscar Gullström just from the content of that paper. He is a high caliber guy with an open mind. His take on the LENR reaction is on point for as far as it goes. I doubt that Rossi could have come up with the ideas in that paper without the help of Carl-Oscar Gullström.

  • there is no evidences of anything working

    Wrong. The ERV was highly qualified and experienced. He was hired by both sides to give an unbiased, scientific evaluation of the 1 MW plant test, using his choice of sealed instrumentation. You may dispute it but your bias is showing if you claim it was not evidence.


    What has now come out is that IH's experts made mistakes. For example saying the pump output was a maximum when the brochures says it was a minimum. Rossi said he was familiar enough with the pump and the brochure to see the mistake instantly but decided to keep quiet about it until the trial started.

    There are other examples but the get-Rossi crowd are not yet willing to admit their mistakes and keep insulting the man. Eric Walker's libelous comments were what got me posting on this forum. I think most of it is a waste of time as it mainly consists of peoples unsupported opinions and little fact. I keep repeating - wait until the facts are in to no avail.

    • Official Post

    It was never a long term test, as IH never accepted.

    ERV is clearly either incompetent far more than an IT engineer with some culture, or far more incompetent in fraud than a kid of 7 or Enron CEO.


    I'm tired of seeing so many people swallow the story of the clown.

    I defended the plausible deniability behind the clouds and red herrings, despite many red flags, expecting things to be cleared later.

    they are clear, there is nothing with Rossi about LENR. End, we should take our losses like Darden and go on. We have been fooled, this happen, and this is not tragic as long as we dump the corpse in the hole.


    let us go back to the lab, or at least to the lobby room to get some funding to competent scientist.


    this story maybe killed one of the only coherent plant to develop LENR, and I hat not only the crook, but also the one who help him.


    I'm afraid Darden is too small to do the job, even if he continues, and until we clean our attic nobody serious will dare to enter this mess.

  • Eric Walker,

    Forgive me but I don't want to waste the time rereading this blog.

    It was my impression, and probably that you called Rossi a crook or a fraud or or scammer, or things similar. Many others do too with impunity. As a moderator I think you should discourage that.

  • It was my impression, and probably that you called Rossi a crook or a fraud or or scammer, or things similar.


    I have said some strong things on a rare occasion, or implied something to that effect, but I've consciously tried to avoid that kind of language. I do not think that kind of language conduces to mutual understanding or the search for truth. I've said something to this effect several times in the past.

  • You are so bitter, Sir.

    I am not bitter. As I wrote here, I was relieved that the trial ended with a settlement, because I feared that rogue jury might award Rossi $267 million. There wasn't much for I.H. to win, because Rossi must have spent much of the $10 million on lawyers. I hope he spent most of it.


    It is possible law enforcement authorities will now take the case, and arrest and eventually imprison Rossi for fraud. I do not know how likely that is, but he deserves it, and I hope it happens.