Posts by DNI

Quote from Zephir_AWT

Well, this is perfectly my stance too - where's the difference? If IH will not pay 89 million dollars, he would violate the contract agreement - so he cannot get the license.

If the Guaranteed Performance was achieved IH must pay. Otherwise they viloate the agreement and lose the license.

But if the Guaranteed Performance was not achieved. IH don't have to pay and still have the license.

It's at the end of §5 in the agreement "lf neither the foregoing standard nor the Guaranteed Performance is achieved, the Company shall not be required to pay any amount pursuant to section 3(c) above and the total purchase price set fort in section 3.1 shall be reduced accordingly".

Quote from sigmoidal

There was a third part of the agreement, which involved a license (or permission given by Rossi to IH ) for IH to sell E-Cats. This license depended on Rossi completing a GPT for 350 days at certain power levels. Rossi claims he met that requirement and should be paid the $89 million. If Rossi is right and did in fact meet that requirement, IH was supposed to pay the 89 million dollars and they then would have a license (permission) to sell E-Cats in North America and other countries agreed to in the contract. If that is the case, since IH did not pay, they have violated the license agreement.

Nice conclusions. I agree with most of it but I disagree a bit about the part quoted above. I can't find in the agreement that the license depended on Rossi completing a GPT. In my opinion only the payment of $89,000,000 depends on the GPT.

In §3.1 it say "The total price for the grant of the License and the purchase of the Plant is $100,500,000."

But at the end of §5 it say "lf neither the foregoing standard nor the Guaranteed Performance is achieved, the Company shall not be required to pay any amount pursuant to section 3(c) above and the total purchase price set fort in section 3.1 shall be reduced accordingly".

I would say that if Guaranteed Performance was not achieved IH owns the license after paying $11.500.000.

Quote from Zephir_AWT

If the ECat technology doesn't work, Industrial Heat shouldn't issue another patents around it and he should return the license back to Rossi (AmpEnergo company).

But IH doesn't wants to do it despite the offer of Andrea Rossi - it wants to embrace this technology despite it doesn't work. In addition, as MrSelfSustain also noted,

we have multiple indicia, that A. Rossi has working technology in hands.

So we still have problem here - the similar controversy, like with Pat Corbett, who just wants the know-how of McCarthy from Steorn, despite it allegedly doesn't work.

We do not know if IH would return the license to Rossi if Rossi was willing to return the money he received. We only have Rossi say on this. If everything Rossi say is to be considered the truth then of course the e-cat works. The aleged offer from Rossi is not confirmed in any way. And I think you are biased to continue to repeat it after it has been pointed out to you that it is unconfirmed.

Quote from Zephir_AWT

My point was, that no-matter how the actual yield of Lugano heat has been underestimated or overestimated, the yield should change with rising temperature monotonously - i.e. increase or decrease.

Once another artificial source of heat or heat loss would be involved, then this simple rule would be broken - which is what we can observe in data.

That means, I don't object the possibility of various systematical errors in evaluation of Lugano test - but after then these errors should also behave systematically.

And you don't need any Python code and original data available for such an conclusion.

Zephir, read this quote from THHyxley again:

Quote from THHuxleyNew

The key to understanding this is that total emissivity in Al2O3, changes rapidly over the range of temperatures calculated in Lugano here. The report uses this change in total emissivity (because they feed it into the Optris device) to calculate temperature. That gives an error because ove rthe same range band emissivity does not change and stas close to 1. Therefore the inflation of temperature their wrong method generates depends strongly (and nonlinearly) on the temperature - because it comes from the difference between total and band emissivity which is much larger at higher temperatures than low.

The error in calculations in the Lugano report is strongly dependent on the temperature. That is why the COP seems to increase when the temperature gets higher.

And the really interesting part is that when Tomas Clarce analyzed the temperature dependency of this error it almost exactly match the results in your grafs.

Quote from Zephir_AWT

Siferkoll and another sources say, Rossi offered to buy the license back for $11M, but IH refused. So I can be quite sure about what A. Rossi wants.

I can be also quite sure, that ECat device works, because otherwise IH wouldn't want to keep the license so obstinately, if it would be useless.

At the very end, Rossi was offered a couple of millions to stop the test. It wouldn't happen if the test wouldn't work as intended - on the contrary...

Now we have kremlin propagandist here in Weaver troll. These trolls operate in typical modus vivendi: they attempt to create an enemy by repeating dishonesting labels and name calling ad nauseum.
They usually recall to deep history in their fallacies (USA/Hitler/Nero DID lynch negroes too, so that everything is possible by now, Russia can do it too, etc...).
At third, they're trying to doubt everything in an effort to confuse the readers at least if they cannot convince them about the opposite.

Display More

You can't expect to be taken seriously if you claim Sifferkoll as your source.

The claim that Rossi offered to bay back the license comes from Lewans blog https://animpossibleinvention.com/blog/. But the only source for this is Rossi. So if you believe everything Rossi say then fine, no more to discuss. But if you don't think Rossi always tells the truth then you can't make any deductions at all from this claim from him.

SSC I can agree with you that neither side presented much evidence. But have you actually read the mail from Rossi about the installation in Doral? It doesn't seem like you have read it when you argument as you do.

Quote from Engineer48

The list shows both steam temp and steam pressure instruments.
With those instruments, steam quality / dryness can be calculated.

Can those instrument detect if water overflow?

I find I quite interesting that after Mats Lewan revealed the massive overflow of water in september 2011 Rossi stopped using this method. Where he calculate output power by assuming all water has evaporated. To my knowledge he has not used it again before the one year test. Where this method seems to have been used again.

Quote from Abd Ul-Rahman Lomax

However, Rossi could always claim that this reactor wasn't set properly and was overflowing.

This is of course correct. But I find it quite telling that the only time this was checked in public there was a massive overflow.

A little bit like when SP was the first to test the input power with true RMS and found COP=1. But then of course the e-cat wasn't running correctly.

But I agree this is not proof that the e-cat is a fraud. It's just very strong indications.

Quote from JedRothwell

Quote from Rossi.: “Mr Andrea Rossi,
1- did the circuit of the steam of the 1 MW plant have a “steam trap”?
2- did the test protocol foresee the installation of a steam trap?
3- has IH ever complained the lack of a steam trap during the test? . .…

As far as I know the statement from Rossi that all water is evaporated in his demos has only been checked publically once in all those years with Rossi and the e-cat. It was Mats Lewan who in september 2011 made a T-connection on the steam outlet and showed us that there where a lot of water in what should have been only steam. It is shown in this video at 4:10 http://www.nyteknik.se/play/ny…t-i-italien-del-2-6352943.

I can't understand how the e-cat could survive this. In my eyes Rossis fraud was revealed in this video. Mats tries to belittle it with a text in the video "this water might be condensed steam from inside the e-cat" but I find that statement very weird. If it was condensed inside the e-cat the energy from the condesation would also be released inside the e-cat.

Quote from Rends

Quote from THHuxley: “And the language you use is misleading. IH, according to the reading above, have done nothing reprehensible, and have certainly not stolen Rossi technology.”

Honest, what is documented here:

<a href="https://thenewfire.wordpress.com/lenr-ecat-the-fog-of-british-and-american-energy-companies/" class="externalURL" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"></a>…

The linked document shows that Darden has a lot of connections to other business men. But I really can't see what's strange or suspicious about that. To me thenewfire is just a lot of stupid conspiracy theories with no proof at all of wrongdoing from IH.

Quote from axil

An example of quality as applied to a LENR reactor.

Rossi has said that his QuarkX has a lifetime of 20 years. <i>I</i>f a batch of 100 units were tested and one of the 100 only lasted 10 years then the total years of service for that batch would be calculated…

And we thought a one year test was a long time to wait.

Quote from IH Fanboy

Quote from oldguy: “Rossi et al have yet to show some proof of GPT acceptance. It seems if they don't do that one simple thing then the game is over. ”

At the least, IH accepted the GPT by their actions. It is called estoppel in legal terms.

What action has IH performed that shows it was the GPT and not just a sale of power, demonstration and a way to achieve government aprovals as Rossi described it in his mail to IH.

Quote from Keieueue

Was the Lugano test a test in calorimetry?

Dont understand the question.

Quote from Keieueue

Was remote viewed calorimetry the only way to assess excess heat?

Yes

Quote from Keieueue

Were the people who wrote the report present at Lugano, or not?

Yes. But I don't understand the purpose of the question. Has anyone said anything else? Or are you claiming that no one not present are allowed to criticize there findings. A very weird opinion of how science is conducted if this is your opinion.

Quote from Keieueue

Was the Lugano test an experience in calorimetry?

Or was it an experience in the "Rossi effect", whose excess heat was witnessed by the various people present (who are all in the scam, and mind-controlled by Rossi ofc!)?

This calorimetry meme is the only straw skeptopaths and paid shills can cling to, because the measuring protocol is extremely granular and serves as a good vessel for all the FUD a wholesome fellow like TC can cram into

I'm sorry but I can honestly don't understand what you mean. Maybe it's because englisch is not my native language.

STDM claimed that anyone whom criticizise the Lugano Report have to be a known expert in infrared thermographic calorimetry. I was only wondering why he didn't require the same from the authors of the report.

Quote from STDM

One can assume that at least one member has the right experience.

I think your answers shows that you are biased in this matter. Why do you require people whom critizise the report should be known expert in infrared thermographic calorimetry. When you don't have the same requirements for the authors.

Quote from STDM

That just shows that alot of people here don't really care about the truth. It's all about endless trolling. Most sceptics here can't even explain how the Rossi scam just works. There is only one scenario that makes sense and that it just works.

I can only speak for myself. But I know that I care about the truth and I have come to the conclusion that Rossi is a fake. That is the only scenario that make any sense in my world.

Quote from STDM

TC is a self described expert, he is not an known expert in infrared thermographic calorimetry. It's strange that he asked for an answer while he doesn't have any professional or practical experience. He could always send an email to his colleagues at ICL to check out his findings. But then he could embarrass himself for making basic mistakes.

If you don't have the right scientific qualifications, your findings doesn't matter.

To my knowledge none of the authors of the Lugano Report where known expert in infrared thermographic calorimetry. Does this mean that their findings doesn't matter?

Quote from STDM

I didn't see that email where Tom Darden stated to Rossi that the 1 year long test is not the GPT. You?

Have you seen any email where Rossi state to Darden that the 1 year long test is the GPT? Have you seen any document at all that state the test in Florida is the GPT?

I have only seen two document about the one year test. The first is an email (exhibit 16, https://drive.google.com/drive…Ktdce19-wyb1RxOTF6c2NtZkk) from Rossi to Darden where Rossi describe it as a sale of power to a customer, a showcase for investors and customers and a way to achieve authorization. Not a word about GPT in that email. The second document is a signed term sheet (exhibit 17). Not a word about GPT in that either.

Don't you think it's a bit biased to request a document from Darden stating it's not a GPT before you have seen a document that state it is the GPT?

Quote from IH Fanboy

IH likely had no intention of ever paying the $89 million irrespective of what happened after the second installment. Once they had the information from Rossi, there was absolutely zero incentive for them to pay, ever, whether they replicated "Rossi's" reactor, or not. That is Rossi's fault for failing to negotiate a better deal, and failing to insist that the $89 million be escrowed. But it also exposes character flaws on the part of those behind IH.

IH are clearly not telling you the whole story. In every instance of their "never substantiated" misdirection, the language of which extends into the Answer (albeit in a more wordy fashion), they left an escape hatch. The escape hatch is that they have a high-COP reactor, that they feel is no longer "Rossi's" technology, because they themselves did something to improve it. Every time they project the message that the "Rossi" technology does not work, they have left this escape hatch. It takes the form of words such as unable to replicate technology "directly" received from Rossi, or unable to replicate "using" Rossi's technology, and so forth. The fact that they filed their own national and international patent applications, with a co-inventor of their own, underscores this sneaky position.

And yes, they are sneaky. They word their messages in one way to misdirect the public into thinking one thing, while attempting to hide behind the curtain their true intentions. Their actions have the effect of damaging reputations of members of the LENR+ community, while they simultaneously pursue LENR+ for themselves. They have no love for the LENR (non LENR+ community). Whatever love you feel from them is a disingenuous.

I'm not sure I understand what you mean. Do you mean that IH where able to get Rossi's e-cat to work. And now lies in their answer to the court. Or do you mean that they tell the truth and couldn't get Rossi's stuff to work but then made their own improvements and suddenly it started to work.

Quote from IH Fanboy

Quote from Eric Walker: “. . . perhaps we'll be seeing IH-Cats soon, and their game will be unmasked. ”

That is one of the most interesting dynamics, I must admit. On the one hand, they have an improved version, we know it, they have filed patent…

But if IH can't start selling their improved version and start making billions because of the court case. Then in hindsight it must have been a mistake not to pay the 89 millions won't you agree?