November Demo predictions

  • @IHFB


    2018 prediction:


    The identity of at least one customer will be revealed before the end of 2018. The customer will not be Rossi in disguised form.


    Let's drill down into that prediction. Will this customer (identity revealed) be an independent entity, no fan of Rossi, no relationship with Rossi, and willing to say whether the supplied product works in a real application?


    Rossi no doubt has many fans who would just love to be customers, and who would accept Rossi-given testing as evidence that the supplied device works.

  • "Let's drill down into that prediction. Will this customer (identity revealed) be an independent entity [YES], no fan of Rossi [NO, Rossi-haters will not have an opportunity], no relationship with Rossi [NO, there will be a business relationship of some sort, such as a lease agreement, otherwise how would they have a QuarkX?], and willing to say whether the supplied product works in a real application [YES]?"

  • Will this customer (identity revealed) be an independent entity [YES], no fan of Rossi [NO, Rossi-haters will not have an opportunity], no relationship with Rossi [NO, there will be a business relationship of some sort, such as a lease agreement, otherwise how would they have a QuarkX?],

    Where did you get this information? Who told you this? Do you know who the customer is?


    I suspect you made up those answers.

  • "Let's drill down into that prediction. Will this customer (identity revealed) be an independent entity [YES], no fan of Rossi [NO, Rossi-haters will not have an opportunity], no relationship with Rossi [NO, there will be a business relationship of some sort, such as a lease agreement, otherwise how would they have a QuarkX?], and willing to say whether the supplied product works in a real application [YES]?"


    Good. So I confidently predict you will be proven wrong (since lack of clarity from Rossi - as is typical - means you are wrong - and chances of Rossi's stuff working are effectively zero).


    Time will determine which of these projections is correct.

  • Quote
    Rossi will produce a demo that will show what he wants to show. The job of the cynics is to come up with an explanation of the deceptions that Rossi has invented. Rossi will not show anything that his competition can used to move their research forward.


    I'm with Axil in this matter. This is precisely my opinion too: Rossi is overly secretive and he will not show anything what could convince skeptics. If he abandoned ECat already, he could show something more about this technology rather than Quark-X reactor. The people just want to see, if he is able to demonstrate something.

  • A collection of nonsense. The first paragraph is meaningless. As for the "Rossi effect," what it has done is made investors extremely cautious and reluctant to invest in LENR research lest they suffer the same fate as Darden, Vaughn and IH -- you seem to forget, Max, that they were rudely cheated out of $11 million in up front cash and perhaps another $5 million or more in legal bills. For all of that, they got tons of aggravation, time lost from other projects, and then they ended up having to let go qualified staff scientists and engineers. That was truly a Rossi success, wasn't it, Max? And the only thing they learned about LENR was that it seems to be a good vehicle for launching scams. They should have gotten an advance lesson out of Defkalion on that score.

    I don't normally reply to trolls, but this raises several common errors that need to be addressed.


    1. you say IH was cheated out of $10 + million but fail to notice Rossi allowed them to pick up $50 million from Woodford.


    2. Do you think Forcardi was stupid? He worked with Rossi and believed the effect was real. Levi's original experiments with just water (not steam) showed huge amounts of excess heat beyond any possible experimental error. Later demos showed mixed results. I think the one with a heat exchanger wasn't that bad and even if one thermocouple was a bit too close to the hot side, how do you explain the heat after death going on for so long?


    Because of the criticisms raised it was indeed difficult for Rossi to get funding. So it is clear his reactors were looked at very carefully. Woodford said they spent two years doing due diligence. Because it was so difficult to replicate LENR in the early days I would not be surprised if some of the demos failed, but enough of then worked to prove the point. You can be sure that his current investor has done due diligence.


    3. The self styled experts who predict what will happen in November, both date and results, remind me of AGW fanatics who cherry pick data to try and support their starting position and disregard conflicting data. You are clueless with your "scientific" predictions.

  • another prediction -any demo (when ever that might be- the original Oct date seems to be out of the question now) will not be "un-plugged" from the wall even if it is claimed to be self sustaining or with a COP that could easily be high enough to be self sustaining.


    also, anyone bringing their own meters will not be allowed in or will not be allowed to use them and there will be at least one side or area not accessible to third parties.


    also, the audience will be carefully selected by Rossi.

  • My predictions:

    1) oldguy will be shown to be wrong in his prediction. The November demo will happen.

    I hope that you are right and I am wrong, but history seems to say the probability is low.

    If there is one, it will likely not be accessible to independent investigators and not a

    "real demo" to the public.

  • I hope that you are right and I am wrong, but history seems to say the probability is low.

    If there is one, it will likely not be accessible to independent investigators and not a

    "real demo" to the public.


    I agree it will likely not be accessible to independent investigators. That isn't the purpose of this demo. Rossi is simply looking to raise his profile, I would suspect, in preparation for things to come in 2018 and beyond.

  • That isn't the purpose of this demo. Rossi is simply looking to raise his profile, I would suspect, in preparation for things to come in 2018 and beyond.


    IHFB,


    If he is looking to raise his profile and lay the groundwork for 2018, misrepresenting Gullstrom's involvement is not the way to do it. Lewan's comment yesterday on ECW:


    "I have been talking to Gullström and will provide a post on that when I have time. He has no detailed verification of the measurements. He's not working on his PhD at the moment, for private reasons. Bo Höistad is not his supervisor. But my impression is that he's is intelligent and has a profound theoretic understanding of quantum mechanics, and that he is using all his knowledge and intellectual capacity to investigate the very borders of our understanding of some crucial elementary particles. Yet, what he is lacking are more experimental data."

  • Quote

    I don't normally reply to trolls, but this raises several common errors that need to be addressed.



    Well, how about that? Aren't you lucky that sometimes, I do?


    Quote

    1. you say IH was cheated out of $10 + million but fail to notice Rossi allowed them to pick up $50 million from Woodford.


    I've seen no evidence that they got this because of Rossi. If they did, they may now have to return it because Rossi bombed. In any case, I doubt that Woodford is pleased with their "investment."



    Quote

    2. Do you think Forcardi was stupid? He worked with Rossi and believed the effect was real. Levi's original experiments with just water (not steam) showed huge amounts of excess heat beyond any possible experimental error. Later demos showed mixed results. I think the one with a heat exchanger wasn't that bad and even if one thermocouple was a bit too close to the hot side, how do you explain the heat after death going on for so long?


    What a crock of nonsense. Focardi wasn't stupid. He was old, sick, tired and extremely desirous of seeing his theories vindicated. Obviously and I mean VERY obviously, he and EVERYONE associated early on with Rossi was careless. They did not demand proper examination of Rossi's gear, and they did not require calibration. Neither happened. Levi's experiments are anecdotes which, absent calibration, showed absolutely nothing. Rossi could have and probably did misplace the thermocouple in that test as well. After all, the whole so-called ecat consists mostly of two huge heaters! Including the one which can only heat the cooling water! And of course, Levi never did that test again even though the purported results, I agree, were the best ever for an ecat type device, hot or steam or liquid cooled. On the heat exchanger device, the so-called heat after death (a foul, dumb, ridiculous terminology) -- the apparent sustained high temperature after power shut off was almost certainly caused by a thermal mass and some insulation within the device. It was thermal inertia if you will. The thermocouple was "a bit too close"? It was directly in contact with the hot side of the counter current heat exchanger. There could not be a more obvious fake. Another example of Rossi wanting to weed out the smart people.


    Quote

    Because of the criticisms raised it was indeed difficult for Rossi to get funding. So it is clear his reactors were looked at very carefully. Woodford said they spent two years doing due diligence. Because it was so difficult to replicate LENR in the early days I would not be surprised if some of the demos failed, but enough of then worked to prove the point. You can be sure that his current investor has done due diligence.


    Woodford would not say on their forum what vetting they had done and when pressed, they shut off discussion. I never heard that they said two years of "due diligence". if they did, they sure screwed the pooch, didn't they? Current investor? WHAT current investor? For all the dozens and dozens of supposed investors and customers (as Rossi likes to call them), the only organization that actually received a device to test from Rossi was IH and you saw how that ended up.



    Quote

    3. The self styled experts who predict what will happen in November, both date and results, remind me of AGW fanatics who cherry pick data to try and support their starting position and disregard conflicting data. You are clueless with your "scientific" predictions.


    Rossi's history could not be more dismal and there is absolutely nothing to suggest, from his outrageous claims, that he is doing anything other than searching for a terminally dumb and inept investor this time around. I won't say he won't find one. A lot of people are rich and dumb or at least, they may be good at business and accumulating or inheriting money but that does not mean they can evaluate (or obtain proper evaluation) of claims like Rossi's.

  • Rossi has true grit.


    We have a number of validated occasions (Mats, NASA, multiple IH) where when presented with clear (and friendly) evidence of a technical problem Rossi has stormed off, refusing to engage with the truth, blaming others.


    There is a word for such behavior - it is not grit.


    EDIT - oldguy reminded me of NASA - egregious behaviour. And he has many many other examples!

  • We have a number of validated occasions (Mats, multiple IH) where when presented with clear (and friendly) evidence of a technical problem Rossi has stormed off, refusing to engage with the truth, blaming others.


    There is a word for such behavior - it is not grit.

    and cases where people used IR gun to check his thermocouple reading and he would not accept it,

    and cases where Celani was not allowed to use a gamma meter,

    and people who had their invitation removed after travel was arranged when he learned they wanted to bring simple meters,

    and Nasa employees thrown out,

    and cases where Rossi through a computer holding data out into the parking lot.

    and........


    My question is where and when is this promised October demo that is now a November demo and how do we attend.