LFH Sam Member
  • Male
  • Member since Apr 9th 2016
  • Last Activity:

Posts by LFH Sam

    It sounds very dramatic claiming that Fulvio fled to Uppsala but I do not think that is the case. It's a very nice city in the summer and I'm sure he enjoy very much working and spending time over there. I do not find it intimidating at all if a bunch of scientists takes a second look at this. Relax.

    Alan it would be very interesting to have a comment from you here.

    I find your reactor very interesting but needs improvements on the waveform on my opinion

    The SD card and cores was sent over with courier because of the Asti conference next week. It's premature to speak about data received so recently, but if there is anything out of the normal in the data I'm sure Alan can have the others look at it in Italy to share their opinion as well.

    LFH has worked discretely with several researchers and advised on their data before it blew out of proportions. Was it not for LFH there would have been more work discussed as intensively as Parkhomov or Me356. It's a smart way to go about things, actually working and collaborating with others before huge investments and development of commercial technology etc. (Sanity check)

    At the moment LFH moves forward at 2% capacity, should a researcher have something with value and potential LFH can initiate everything from test and analysis to marketing and help with funding raising (not necessarily asking anything very substantial directly in return). There are much more capability and value that can indirectly be made available than people realise, including (professional) valuable social media marketing. I'll make a bold statement, if the situation was ideal LFH could help to allocate more manpower than ENEA or IH to work on a project, swiftly.

    For example: LFH has contact with a Hollywood celebrity with millions of followers on his social media accounts, one short post from him would be seen by hundreds of thousands, basically that little post would make more impact and drive more attention than years worth of pr outreach from the whole community, including TD's Financial Times article. But it would have to be justifiable, otherwise it's a no-go.

    LFH together with MFMP could be a very a very good launchpad, if there is/was prospective technology. Worst case scenario, if the technology does not work, we can sell it to Dewey for 11.5 million dollars.

    There is somewhat credible evidence, from Mills and Thermacore, Piantelli, and in recent years from Kitamura. However, these studies have not been independently repeated, so the second part of your sentence is correct.

    There are also many failed Ni-H studies. I think as of now we should put Parkhamov and me356 in that category. If they come up with better evidence we can move them to another category.

    I would maybe add Brillouin Energy Technologies and the Chinese researchers to the list of somewhat credible Ni-H researchers.

    In terms of Parkhomov and Me356 I'd have to agree, if they come up with better evidence we can move them to another category.

    There are as well three wild cards teams in Nickel Hydrogen that does not communicate openly I would add to (my) list of somewhat credible or interesting to follow, but they are not all reputable as those you listed.

    Wild card 1: A larger team that has operated a very long time without the knowledge of the LENR or beyond communities. Their claims are in the "to good to be true category" and they struggle with the credibility needed to raise larger funding.

    Wild card 2: An anonymous researcher LookingForHeat is collaborating with. They have just a little bit of data, so far, it's been extended to experts, some deemed it very interesting, others said with certainty it had no significant value at all. Alan Smith is receiving new data as we speak from a three day test-run that will be analysed by him in the days to follow, possible others.

    Wild card 3: Make yourselves some popcorn

    the single best business decision Rossi could make at this point would be to let the MFMP do a black box test. Even those who are most supportive of Rossi here and at ECW harbor doubts about the e-Cat. If rossi can get the LENR+ community firmly in its corner, its a done deal. He will have hundreds of evangelists spreading the news far and wide for him. He wouldn't be able to buy that kind of PR--not even close.

    IH Fanboy I agree that more public tests could potentially raise his credibility, in the LENR community and beyond but you are assuming ongoing tests and demos are not taken place and that huge amounts are not already waiting in escrow accounts. If that would be the case he might not see much to gain from public black-box testing, unfortunately.

    I personally hoped the litigation would lead to those types of tests and disclosures you refer to, but so far it has not.
    Because it hasn't one could be led to think there might possible be things going on that we are not being communicated here in this forum...

    The evolution of reactors - First video showing the new design

    External Content www.youtube.com
    Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.
    Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.

    Since 2014 I've been on the CMNS list, a private mailing list of LENR researchers and other interested parties. The discussions there are confidential, so I cannot provide details. I do recall one or more researchers speaking positively of IH coming onto the scene, but this is at best a vague impression at this point. I also know from the Marianne Macy Infinite Energy article and from other hearsay that several well-known researchers such as Peter Hagelstein and Yeong Kim have collaborated with IH, and there was a possibility that IH were going to host an ICCF conference (not sure what the status of that is). So on balance I see IH's influence as being a positive one.

    Eric thank you for sharing that piece of information.

    In regards to the heat camera it seems like the standards for the measurements are very differently when the data of the Lugano team is assessed compared with the data of Dewey Weaver. While these discussions are far above my expertise i just note that it seems a bit unfair how Lugano data is so harshly questioned while no one has made any attempts to objects to Dewey Weaver's measurement.

    In regards to Eric statement that other teams that work with IH are very happy about the IH relationship and have no problems, I'm happy if that statement is correct. Would you care to tell a bit more what you've heard. My guess would be that some of the teams has written so strict NDA's that they are not able to say anything else than the typical "the outcome could be positive but it could also be negative". When IH signed a lot of these teams they shut of a lot of the communication to the outside world so if you can shed some more light on this, that would be most welcome. I hope it's not positive in the sense that "no one publicly complained"?

    Even if IH wins the lawsuit on all important points they might be slightly crippled moving forward, and it makes sense not to put all eggs in one basket, also because competition is something positive, not negative, the more professional and promising researchers and teams out there should consider there is alternative routes and investors for their continued development. There is alternatives routes where they do not have to work under very harsh NDA's, or, where they can have the same privileges as IH provides but working with other investors. I'm always happy to forward an email or two ... just putting it out there.

    It's been stated that TD never indicated there would be any problems with Rossi's technology
    During the speech in Padua TD actually made a few hints and pointers which could be interpreted as everything was not all well with Rossi.

    "I had just installed seat belts in my air plane" (TD speaking in code referring to Dr Bob)

    "Thank you, we will not give up" (when asked about AR's technology)

    In private discussions TD expressed concerns about explosions and also concerns about their ability to cooperate with Rossi.
    I've not heard that Darden expressed concerns about the COP.

    As for the IH Due Diligence part -
    IH did not stop at just paying the 11.5 millions (in batches) they pursued the licenses of other territories as well, they wanted the whole world.

    Indeed. Yet, the profs did not answer even this simple question from Jed. Based on the evidence from the alternative calculations and empirical evidence, the visible color is consistent with the operation at the high temp range (800s).

    Maybe they felt it was not in their interest and the best possible PR.
    Any way, I'm sure there are established channels for communication and feedback between them and the IH camp.

    The idea of managing expectations, both in regards to MFMP and Me356, sounds like a terrific idea.
    As most others i welcome the idea of MFMP to perform measurements, I welcome the idea of them doing so, acting professional and objective.

    Personally I do not longer see Me356 as a MFMP researcher, because he is (no longer) working openly. He does not have as much credibility capital as he would have if we was (as any company who stands to profit), so this is where objective testing comes in.

    As for the tests, if they are performed and the results seem positive or inconclusive, it makes sense to wait for the onslaught of the test performance and method, then based on that constructive criticism and feedback run a similar series of test where the criticism is taken into account.

    It seems already the reactor type is less than optimal for the most simplistic measurements, so there might be room for criticism. At the end of the tests, if the result should still be inconclusive, it's not the end of the world, it will still make for a great exercise in open science methodology. The concept of open science holds great value, should it turn out the reactor is not as great as the hype, at least the concept of open science can still advance and MFMP can continue strengthened building and improving their concept.

    MFMP needs to prove they can do their job just as professional, or actually better adding more value, than any other typical 3rd party validator / observer. I believe they have it in them to stretch and do just that.
    In regards to MFMP moving forward and their methodology, while balancing the need and adding a value for the researcher they're working with, it's still in their best interest to act sceptically.

    Note also that IH has not disclosed Murray's CV as they are required to do for expert witnesses. This is one of Rossi's complaints in his motion to dismiss Murray's expert witness testimony. Although it's true that Murray worked for IH for a number of months, he was laid off in late 2016, so he's no longer an employee and was not working as such (as far as we know) during the lawsuit. Why are they so reluctant to provide information on his work background and scientific expertise? What are they trying to hide?

    Mr Huxley,

    I have noticed considerable changes in your grammar and writing so I would then like to know if you have ventured into an agreement where you are paid or if you have any other incentive for writing. The reason why I ask is because among various things I have noted that you started to use the connotation "we" a lot.

    I would really appreciate if you answer these questions with yes / no / none of your business.

    It seems that Murrays calculations of the conditions in the Doral facility was based on the assumption there was no heat exchanger. His simulation might not either have taken in consideration the possibility to dissipate heat by opening a door, and air conditioned working areas.

    What I would have done in the past with a production facility with lots of pumps and other equipment if needed to control very carefully time and flow, was to use timers. It takes just a few seconds to reconfigure one timer. The equipment are divided into segments controlled by one timer each, the timer controls the power sockets which then connects to the subsets of equipment. Setting up automation that way just comes so natural that it has never occurred to me anyone would do things any other way.

    Downtime are often scheduled in industrial settings, now I would not say this was an industrial scale setting, however because it was all considered a test it's probable they were simulating an industrial situation.

    However, if the reason for the subset downtime was other than scheduled maintenance and repair, it might be harder to explain the flow-rates.

    You are mistaken. These reactors did not produce any excess heat. If they had, there would not have been a 1-year test. They would have paid Rossi, and they would be developing the gadget into a commercial device. They had a brilliant staff and tons of money lined up to do that.

    I think it makes more sense to first make a long-term endurance test and then after that pay the 100 millions and develop the commercial device.
    That's probably why the 3rd payment was the largest chuck, it's not enough to have a working technology, it also needs to be safe and commercially viable. The IP might not have been worth 100 millions if the technology was not commercially viable, but by testing +50 reactors for a whole year they would derive 50 years worth of operating data. It's just due diligence.

    I was not aware of that, thank you for posting that information.

    Quite interesting though if a gifted philanthropist gets invited to the president and then fail to mention that his family is raising hundreds of millions for a new clean extraordinary energy technology that if further developed can change the planet for the better, and that his father then flies to china to pitch it to their government.

    The Bill Gates rumors obviously also had to be false, and then it turned out that it was partly true.

    Flamboyant rumors about Brillouin said they had a Google Executive in their board - not quite sure if that is a 100% correct representation of truth but I am willing to settle for having the brother of Larry Page in their board.

    Would I bet against the rumors of Obama having been briefed on the E-cat? After rumors on the internet that Obama would be briefed on Cold Fusion(e-cat), out of the hundreds of millions of people living in America, the son of the person who started the worlds biggest investment fund for Cold Fusion and licensed the e-cat gets invited to meet the president. I think it's more probable that e-cat has been pitched to Obama, and I would be willing to make a harmless little bet. I'd be willing to bet you a pizza dinner and a cold drink.

LENR Partners