Posts by Steve Albers

    I have a simple question for the Rossi supporters / wait for more "evidence" folks. I assume, and please feel free to correct me, that it would be fairly straightforward (by which I mean it would not require any technological or other breakthroughs) to measure the energy input and output of Rossi's widget without looking behind the curtain of his IP. So, if my assumption is correct, why doesn't Rossi simply allow an independent third party to take such measurements? Instead he refuses to allow anyone independent to even measure the energy input/output. If he had something, this would be the easiest way to prove it without revealing any IP. His absolute refusal to allow such a measurement, and his ridiculous excuses for avoiding it, tell me has nothing,


    I suppose he doesn't care that much about this type of validation. It seems sufficient for him that we hear about such measurements from the purported customers. There have been certain types of validation that lend some support to things even if there are incomplete aspects to them. We can revisit them as summarized here: https://e-catworld.com/may-2013-3rd-party-test/

    I have seen virtually this same post innumerable times for the past 7 years and expect to see it again and again for years to come. Some people just never get it.


    Sorry, but the more public advertising and two week delivery seems new, unless you can show me otherwise. I also like the scientific details he's offering.

    Steve,


    All Rossi discussions are free-for-all zones. There is just no peaceful middle ground when it comes to talking about the man, his methods, actions, and history. So those who chose to participate, should know they enter at their own risk...those are the rules :)


    That said, I did not see what comment you were referring to, when you say you were "labeled"?


    Thanks Shane for the info. If you want maximum participation here I'd point out that my netiquette is that one shouldn't classify people as "Rossi-ite" or any other type of label.


    FWIW - I'd venture to say that ECW does allow skeptical polite posts so civil discussion is possible. I'm also posting here to ensure I'm seeing the most diversity of opinions.

    This time is different in the sense that we should be ramping up to see multiple customers in the relatively near future, rather than just one shot customers who are doing long-term testing. We might assume he migrated away from the MW plant to develop the new versions. 5-10 years for a new technology isn't much in the big picture. I'd like ask the moderator to censure you for trying to label me or others, simply for wanting to see more evidence before drawing a conclusion. Isn't that the scientific method?


    In the event he is a con man he's a scientifically more intelligent one than most. We could try the exercise of putting probabilities on this. Even if it's 10-50% of being real it's worth the time to follow it based on the benefit. More of the edge things in science and technology should be given every opportunity to show their worth. There's enough internet bandwidth (and venture capital) to get the information out and a reasonable debate about new ideas.

    Not quite right. Refereed journals will reject manuscripts if the findings are not novel. But then they will also reject works that are so novel that the evidence does not back up the claims. It is a line that has to be walked.


    I think sometimes with very novel things the reviewers aren't familiar enough with the topic to render a good judgement so there is some bias to reject new ideas or ways of doing things. Science is after all a human enterprise. Thus for learning about more radical ideas we have to look beyond what is (so far) formally published if we want to be on top of new developments.

    Quote

    What, exactly, would prove to you it's a scam?


    Good question - perhaps the lack of a customer who can verify the device within a year or so. This is hard to say exactly since Leonardo is still purportedly kind of a slow start-up company that isn't quite yet claimed to be ready for high volume production. Also a good question as to what the rationale would be for customers to keep this a secret, except for not wanting attention. We should ask Rossi how long this process of "discovery" will take, he did say it will "resolve itself".


    I doubt waiting longer to see is really destructive to my legacy (if that even matters) or even to cold fusion in general. I'm at least I'm willing to give my full name. I'm open minded enough to realize it may be a scam, yet I like to hope just a bit on this (since it hasn't been proven to be a scam) and other LENR efforts. We know that the history of science has eccentric inventors and paths to realization. I hope this forum will have a good natured exchange of facts and opinions on both sides until more info comes to light.

    You don't get it do you? Rossi has never had a real customer for anything he has ever made. He's had investors and distributors and while a few lucked out and got refunds, most ended up screwed out of varying amounts of money including millions of dollars in return for absolutely nothing-- or in IH's case, in return for a merit-less and very expensive lawsuit. Rossi has claimed "customers" since 2011 and never produced one. You seriously think he is going to start now?


    I appreciate that the lack of information with a private entity and IP rights, and Rossi's history can allow for skepticism. Still it doesn't take too much effort for me to wait a little longer and see. There's a limit to how much all of this can progress without things becoming more public, as Rossi himself recently acknowledged.


    At a minimum he has some interesting scientific rationale in his recent paper. I can sympathize with the notion that refereed journals tend to reject new things.

    See around 6:25.



    Rossi says the heated fluid connections come in/out of that done thing at the top. They presumably go off to a heat exchanger in the ducts of the office being heated.

    My calculation is with just a liquid water heat exchanger and a temperature change of 50C, the amount of water needed would be about 0.1 kg/s. This would comfortably fit into the samovar/piping.


    Rossi actually mentions it uses steam at 600C, so this would call for a heat enthalpy calcuation, and allow for about a factor of 10 lesser rate of water usage.

    Greetings - Any comments on this from the Rossi Blog today?


    ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................


    Dr Rossi,IH has applied on June 1 2016 for a patent that is the photocopy of your former patents and of the Lugano report.They have put T Barker Dameron as the inventor ( the inventor of the Rossi Effect !!!). How can the investors of Cherokee Funds and of Woodford accept to be fooled with a so blatant fraud, made by these guys ? How can they hope that a patent application that is a copycat of your prior art and of the Lugano Report made by the third independent party professors can be taken seriously by the patent office ? The more they act, the more they talk, the more we understand that they are just fraudsters. What really baffles me is Woodford: how is possible that they do not understand that this patent of Industrial Heat is a fraud against you and that you will destroy what they are doing ? Are they so stupid or there is something very bad about Woodford in all this situation ?