Posts by David Brady

Peter Ekstrom wrote: "And Widom-Larsen theory is not an accepted theory."

While the WL theory of the LENR phenomenon has not been accepted, it is, nonetheless, consistent with accepted theories of QM and the nuclear reaction channels in question here. Incidentally, the reaction channels involving "ultra-low momentum neutrons" (ULMNs) of the WL theory would not necessarily generate the "lethal" radiation levels that you cited. The ULMNs are confined to the LENR reactors and any stray gammas (γ) could be easily shielded by Lead.

The Li reaction channels essentially breed more Li7 while depleting Li6. There are at least four Li reaction channels that produce He6 that decays to LI6. So starting with natural compliments of Lithium isotopes Li6 and Li7 (Lugano) the Li7 isotope is enriched from the LENR phenomenon. This is based on the evidence from the Lugano report, well understood Li reaction channels, and an application of the Widom-Larsen theory. This may qualify as a 'mundane" QM explanation of the skewed Li isotope ratio in the Lugano ash, it's more like the view of the ant hill from earth orbit.

Andrea, What is your view of the Widom-Larsen (WL) theory of the LENR phenomenon.

To: Thomas Clarke
Re: Leonardo v Cherokee
Thanks for your thoughtful response to my earlier post. In view of the extraordinary number of issues to be litigated in this case, Rossi may need the services of more than one law firm if only to make sure that every conceivable aspect of all the issues are thoroughly covered. Rossi probably already has adequate Patent attorneys and is now represented by a Florida civil litigation firm, but he may need the services of nationally known and highly rated litigation firm such as Boies, Schiller & Flexner LLP. [ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boies,_Schiller_%26_Flexner ] This firm could probably supervise and co-ordinate all aspect of the litigation and best anything the Cherokee gang could come up with. The stakes in this litigation are too high to leave anything to chance or something overlooked or underestimated by only one law firm's staff. I'm a firm believer in the tactical mobility strategy and if ever there was a case demanding the full commitment of several law firms at once; it's this case.
You would be a better judge of this matter as to whether or not a suggestion of this nature should be forwarded to A. Rossi at this time. Thanks, again, for you earlier response.
DDB Far Rockaway, NYC

Thomas,

There is an excellent story on Veterans Today http://www.veteranstoday.com/2…mp-will-bust-out-the-usa/ about an organized crime tactic of taking control of a business with the intent of looting it and finally actually torching it or busing it. The relevant text from Ian Greenhalgh's article on April 8, 2016 is copied here:

“It’s one of the classic tactics of organized crime. You exploit it as far as you can and when you have essentially squeezed every possible bit of value out of it, you burn it. In organized crime’s case, I mean that literally, whereas with private equity, it’s planned bankruptcy. But essentially you dispose of it in as convenient a way as
possible, and then you walk away.” Mark Galeotti, NYU Organized Crime Expert

Darden et al at Cherokee were attempting to steal Rossi's IP, tie him up in a shipping container for a year while developing-marketing his IP all over the world, then deliberately try to set fire figuratively to Rossi's E-Cats, "bust" the licensing agreement, and finally walk away with the benefit of his IP. It's a classic organized crime hit job.

There might be a criminal RICO referral in the case if there is any evidence of criminal intent on the part of criminal Cherokee "investors?" Tom Darden reminds me of Mitt Romney and Bain Capital Management which specialized in looting or 'busting' distressed companies for profit.

The burden of proof that the COP of the 350-day E-Cat run was less than 6 now rests with the Defendants. They will have to convince a jury by a preponderance of evidence that the COP was less than 6 or work out a settlement with Rossi to avoid a trial. It is apparent that Cherokee et al. were attempting to capitalize on Rossi's IP in more ways than one; licensing it, promoting his IP around the world (China, England, etc.) while attempting to patent an unlicensed variation of the same IP.. Furthermore, it is apparent that all parties to the test run have known for a year that Rossi's technology has been performing satisfactorily otherwise it is doubtful that
[lexicon]IH[/lexicon] could have convinced Woodford would invest $50M.

At least, an executive summary of the ERV report has been released in the form of a United State District Court Civil Complaint and Demand for Jury Trial. This may prove to be the first court battle in the Energy Wars of the 21st Century.

I think I can see in the distance Rossi riding on a Black Swan.

Since there has been no official results reported for the E-Cat during the entire twelve-month Performance Acceptance Test (PAT) run, it is doubtful that the final report will be anything but ambiguous or disputable. This latest [lexicon]Industrial Heat[/lexicon] ([lexicon]IH[/lexicon]) press release, which fails to even mention the immanent release of the E-Cat results is nothing more than a "nontheless-onward-and-upward" statement for prospective investors. O yea, and Rossi has yet another new and improved reactor model requiring another year long PAT. Be assured that if there had been any definitive COP > 1 over the last twelve months, there would have been monthy reports to that effect every month. Why Not? One should know by now!

Not only that, But all AR had to do was read his utility bill for the E-Cat plant and do the E-Cat Joules/ Meter Joules math to get a running monthly COP. Come on troops, how stupid does AR think everyone is anyway -- "Positive or Negative?" AR would have everyone believe that even he does not know what the COP is in fact!. It is nowhere near anything he has suggested in the past if anything at all.