News about Woodford and Industrial Heat

  • Not sure it is connected to this story, but as Alan said, there are some rumblings in the LENR aether about something good happening. Could be chest beating, or maybe something of substance. You never know until you know.


    Well lets hope they take great care and make strenuous efforts to support any claims this time. Cold Fusion really does not need another false dawn.

  • Nice find Ahlfors. So what we have is that Gregory Powell recently become an IH Director. He is the brother of Laurene Powell, who is Steve Job's widow. Laurene started the "Laurene Powell Jobs Trust" which has a lot of money in it. The Trust invested some of that money in IH. Gregory looks to be working for the Trust, as they share the same Palo Alto address, and representing it in his capacity as IH Director.


    Adding this to Gates/Texas Tech, Larry Page/Google, Karl Page/Anthropocene, Darden/IH...it looks to me like the uber wealthy philanthropists are talking to each other about LENR, and discretely getting in on the action.

  • Apparently, Gate's involvement has been verified by everyone.


    ... except Gates or any Gates foundation.


    I'm not saying it's not true, just a) that the evidence is sketchy and b) Gates must not have much confidence if he is funding LENR and doesn't mention it anywhere.

  • Perhaps but https://www.gatesfoundation.or…mation/Open-Access-Policy


    Maybe keep it quiet if it's just a shot in the dark, I suppose, with exceedingly low confidence. But why in the world choose to keep LENR research confidential and secret if Gates has any hopes it will bear fruit? And of course, if it's the former, it doesn't or shouldn't bolster confidence in the reality and value of LENR as a technology which can become practical. And I think that is the way presumed Gates involvement is being used here.


    IMO, overoptimism like Shane D. frequently exhibits here, isn't helpful. It causes lots of dashed hopes and lost confidence. My prediction for next loss of confidence: Brillouin, GEC, Swartz, Miley. Who did I forget? Oh yeah... Mizuno. Pessimism gives me no pleasure. As I and other skeptics said many times, it would be a lot more fun if LENR were proven real.

  • As I and other skeptics said many times, it would be a lot more fun if LENR were proven real.

    LENR has been proven real. It's been replicated

    dozens of times in more than 153 peer reviewed journals by the top ~100 electrochemists of the day.

    How many times has the Pons-Fleischmann Anomalous Heating Event been replicated in peer reviewed journals?


    The dividing line between those who accept these standard scientific results and those who try to move the goal posts is the same dividing line between honest skeptics and skeptopaths.

  • Maybe so. Maybe not. But none of that is much fun because it doesn't do anything. It won't self run. It doesn't consistently make enough power long enough at a large enough "COP." Renown independent trusted labs have not tested it. Except to the aficionados, AKA "usual suspects," it is not impressive.


    ETA: I've always advocated for research. What I object to are the constant predictions that boilers and power plants are around the corner (Brillouin, GEC) also everything from room heaters to space power systems(Miley and others). After thirty years of that, everyone should know better. Overoptimism leads to scammers.

  • But none of that is much fun because it doesn't do anything. It won't self run. It doesn't consistently make enough power long enough at a large enough "COP." Renown independent trusted labs have not tested it. Except to the aficionados, AKA "usual suspects," it is not impressive.


    Goal posts duly moved.

    So LENR must be proven with replication, and also self run, and also FUN!

    So if Brillouin have provided the replication via SRI.

    Rossi provides the FUN.

    So just need the self run bit. Watch this space.

  • Goal posts duly moved.

    So LENR must be proved with replication, and also self run, and also FUN!

    This is the M. C. Escher "Relativity" model of research and development. The goal must be achieved before work is funded. You must arrive before you depart. The same method applied in the building trades ensures that no funding is wasted, and schedules are always met. It is simple. Before the architect is allowed to draft a blueprint; before the ground is excavated or concrete is poured, and before the carpenters and electricians begin their work, the entire building must be completed.


    Escher illustrated such buildings in his print "Relativity:"


    https://www.mcescher.com/gallery/back-in-holland/relativity/


    ETA: I've always advocated for research.

    Yes, well the problem is your method of advocating. You know nothing, you read nothing, and you post a steady stream of bullshit about the research. For example you recently said that experiments should exceed the limits of chemistry by a large factor, ignoring the fact that they exceeded it by 10,000 or more. Cells that would only run for a few minutes before exhausting chemical fuel have run for weeks or months. In the same message you claimed that isoperibolic calorimetry is "suspect" even though it has been in use since the 1840s in countless experiments and in industry. And you said other methods of calorimetry should be used, ignoring the fact that other methods have been used.


    If this is "advocating" what would opposition look like? You advocate for cold fusion in the same sense anti-vaccination people advocate for public health.

  • JedRothwell wrote:

    Quote

    Yes, well the problem is your method of advocating.

    No it's not. The problem is your continuing unsubstantiated claims taken and combined from various places to make it seem as though robust LENR is a proven fact. If it were, the world, at least the world of scientific research, would be a very different place. Fortunately, there are now apparently enough rich people with interest to put the issue to rest in the next few years. Although I doubt you will believe negative results no matter who coughs them up. On the other hands, skeptics make simple, straightforward and reasonable demands which are met from you with obfuscation and accusations.


    Quote

    Standard Skeptopathic GoalPost Moving

    Usual meaningless blustering instead of performing