Ascoli65 Member
  • from Italy
  • Member since May 28th 2016
  • Last Activity:

Posts by Ascoli65

  • Jed Rothwell on an Unpublished E-Cat Test Report that “Looks Like it Worked”

    Quote from andrea.s

    Jed fell for it. so what.


    Andrea, what do you mean with "Jed fell for it"? Do you mean, that he believed in the Ecat results?


    You should leave apart for a while the wires of the hotcat and look with more attention to the upstream facts happened in 2011, and may be even before, to understand this saga and the possible role of its protagonists. And if you do that, you will see that JR looks much more like a protagonist rather than a simple very special commenter.


    Have you understood the historical importance of the demo held in Bologna, on January 14, 2011, at the presence of a dozen of members (or ex-members) of the local Department of Physics? They took publicly the responsibility to measure the possible excess heat produced by a presumed revolutionary device and to properly report it to the public opinion.


    Do you think it is normal that all the main calorimetric data of that test has been communicated within hours to someone at the other side of the ocean (1)? Who did establish the wrong data reported by Levi in his calorimetric report? It's really hard to believe that JR was not aware since the beginning that those data were wrong.


    Quote

    We all did, for a time ranging from hours to years, ...


    You don't need Google Translate to read my first comment on EnergeticAmbiente (2). JR had much more information and occasions to raise the same questions. Why he didn't?


    (1) Jed Rothwell on an Unpublished E-Cat Test Report that “Looks Like it Worked”
    (2) http://www.energeticambiente.i…fala-9.html#post119167978

  • Jed Rothwell on an Unpublished E-Cat Test Report that “Looks Like it Worked”

    Quote from Mary Yugo

    And don't forget that Jed has maintained that Rossi had to be right about some of the anomalous measurements "on first principles" and ...


    You forget that in the Ecat saga Rossi plays the role of the inventor/entrepreneur. As entrepreneur he can justify a lot of apparently weird behaviors. As inventor, an edisonian inventor as JR has always defined him, he said that he has found the recipe of his effect by chance and did get the confirmation of the efficacy of all his devices by someone else, many people, mostly professors. You cannot criticize his position, he owes nothing to anybody. Did you ever trust him?


    I tell you one more time. You are too much obsessed by Rossi. He is not the key to understand the Ecat affair.

  • Jed Rothwell on an Unpublished E-Cat Test Report that “Looks Like it Worked”

    Quote from JedRothwell

    You mean he took statements out of context, making it look as if my statements were glowing. As I showed by quoting the rest of a message, they are wrapped in layers of caution with statements such as "this may not be true" "we cannot be sure" and "we must see independent replication."


    If you take things out of context, you can make a day look like night.


    I did put date and link before each single quote of you, so that anybody can easily look at the context and at the rest of your comments. I had prepared a much longer list, but I had to reduce it to only 20 citations in order to remain within the maximum limit of 10,500 characters for each comment.


    As I have explained in the introductory lines (1), these quotes are mainly those in which you undoubtedly sustained the credibility of the professors, who, in turn, reported to have undoubtedly measured excess heat. I know, as I admitted, you've often advanced some cautions about Rossi, but not about the professors, and you always knew that the whole credibility in the performance of its devices rests on the scientific authority of these lasts (2): "The fact that Levi and other established professors took part in the experiment is about 4 orders of magnitude more significant than what Rossi may have done, or the unexplained fires, or his criminal record (if he has one)."


    You were right: "4 orders of magnitude more significant". It means that the people had trusted the professors, not Rossi, and their trust has been betrayed by the professors, not by Rossi.


    (1) Jed Rothwell on an Unpublished E-Cat Test Report that “Looks Like it Worked”
    (2) "http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l%40eskimo.com/msg41324.html"

  • Jed Rothwell on an Unpublished E-Cat Test Report that “Looks Like it Worked”

    Quote from cam

    It was offered to convince JR that the E-Cat is an interesting invention.


    The Lugano report was released on October 8, 2014, as a pdf linked in a post on Sifferkol blog (1). From what is written in the accompanying text, it seems to have been a second-best solution. The authors had requested the publication on arXiv, as had happened for the first TPR concerning the Ferrara's tests, but have not obtained it, or at least not in a timely manner. In fact the day after, Rossi himself would have to be a guest of the famous night radio show "Coast to Coast AM" (2), just one voice in the large chorus which started immediately to praise the Lugano results on the web and some major media.


    At that time, JR was still expressing all his convincement for the Ecat reality (3), and did it on the basis of calorimetric results of tests held in 2011, which have nothing to do with the HotCat described in the Lugano report.


    Quote

    It took 5 years to change his mind.


    It's difficult to say if JR has really changed his mind, because it's difficult to understand what he think exactly. Most of his sentences on the Ecat affirm its reality, others shed some doubts and precautions. Sometimes this contradictory sentences alternate in the same comment. I got the impression that he replied in the most convinced and vehement way when he had to confute some well founded criticisms, especially those able to definitively compromise the credibility of the Ecat. Vice versa, he pours a lot of doubts when some enthusiasts express their belief in a rapid commercialization of the device.


    It is as if the CF/LENR technology should remain forever a mirage in the desert, something that should go away as you approach it. People should see it and be convinced of its existence, but they must never touch it, nor get too close.


    Quote

    Ascribing all the responsibility to Rossi sounds unconvincing to me.


    The same for me. It's simply impossible. This thread is in fact dedicated to a test held in the USA when Rossi was in Europe, whose results have been reported as credible by JR.


    A similar situation happened in the demo held on January 14, 2011. Rossi was present at the test, but he was abroad until the day before, and therefore there is no way in which he could be considered the only source of all the absurd errors contained in the Levi's report.


    (1) http://www.sifferkoll.se/sifferkoll/?p=386
    (2) Tonight we listen to Sterling, Lewan and Andrea Rossi.
    (3) Jed Rothwell on an Unpublished E-Cat Test Report that “Looks Like it Worked”

  • Jed Rothwell on an Unpublished E-Cat Test Report that “Looks Like it Worked”

    Quote from andrea.s

    Ascoli you may be right but I am passionate about the hotcat because I wasn't following closely in 2011.


    Yes, I know, but the hotcat is OT with respect to the title of this thread. Moreover, as you can easily see, its results are raised into the debate mainly by those who want to support, against any evidence, that the Ecat could work. In fact, they tend to shift the discussion toward the more complicated and less documented tests, such as the hotcat's ones, because there are more disputable aspects to deal with and they can more easily find some arguments, which allows them to keep a minimum level of doubt about the generation of some excess heat.


    On the contrary, this thread deals with the low temperature Ecat, more precisely with an unpublished test that JR considers the only one whose positive results (ie presumed excess heat) could be believed. I think, it is interesting to know something more about this test. The hotcat results have already been lengthily discussed in other threads, which are still available if someone wishes to continue the debate on them.


    I would extend this appeal also to Paradigmnoia.

  • Jed Rothwell on an Unpublished E-Cat Test Report that “Looks Like it Worked”

    Quote from andrea.s

    you are concentrating on a marginal aspect to state a minimal COP of 2 and yet you tend to dismiss the Lugano report and hotcat as no big deal. It is no big deal because the COP is one, and will remain such until a proper test (or better, credible data) shows otherwise.


    No, Andrea, the Lugano test is no big deal because Levi, the main author of the relative report, had already reported wrong data in his first (January 2011) report which allowed him to overestimate the actual COP of a factor 15 at least (*), so that whichever Lugano datum is not credible until Levi will not explain the reasons why he divulged wrong data for the previous tests held in Bologna.


    Until then, every Ecat test results (which is in contrast with the known physics) has no credibility, and there is no reason for asking any further better test.


    Does it have any sense taking consideration a report which claims a COP of 3-4, when you know for sure that his author has calculated and supported for years a wrong COP of 12?


    (*) Jed Rothwell on an Unpublished E-Cat Test Report that “Looks Like it Worked”

  • Jed Rothwell on an Unpublished E-Cat Test Report that “Looks Like it Worked”

    Quote from JedRothwell

    Does that sound unequivocal? I think I expressed the requisite number of doubts and reservations appropriate to academia. "Assuming there was no mistake" and assuming "the thing can be replicated." Those are assumptions, not assertions. When I say "my guess is that . . ." that really is a guess, not an assertion.


    You wrote the above cited mail to Vortex (1) the day after the January 14, 2011, demo. The phrases you quoted were the minimal precaution at that time, nevertheless your mail finished in one of the most assertive, unequivocal, and explosive way we can imagine: "There is no way you could fool the professors involved in this, and I am sure they are not all engaged in a conspiracy to fool the rest of us. Sometimes, a single test in isolation is so convincing it reduces or eliminates the need for independent replication. The most dramatic example in history was the Trinity atomic bomb test. This test is not quite as convincing as that, but in my opinion it is far more compelling than any other cold fusion test in history." (bold is mine)


    However, I do fully agree with your statement that "There is no way you could fool the professors involved in this". As you had already said in a previous mail to Vortex (2): "various professors at the university have been involved for some time, and they designed and implemented the calorimetry. I do not think there is any way Rossi could "fool" these people. I think that would be physically impossible." Exactly! It was "physically impossible", because, according to his words, Rossi was abroad in the weeks preceding the demo and went back to Italy only the day before the test.


    So, what's happened? Who did fake the experiment and the calorimetric data?


    Maybe you know the answer, Jed. In (1), you also revealed one of the most astonishingly fact about that demo. After only a few hours from the conclusion of the test, you "spoke with one of the people in the project about the calorimetry".


    How has it been possible? This is outside of any imaginable academic behavior. In fact, in a press release from the Department of Physics, issued on January 11, we can read (English translation by Krivit): "The test will be held by a researcher of the Physics Department of the University of Bologna, and will take place before a selected public of researchers and professors of the same Department. A confirmation of the amount of energy produced and of its origin would imply that we are dealing with new source of energy."


    So, the responsibility to announce to the world the existence and availability of a "new source of energy" was publicly assumed by the University. Moreover, as you reported in a subsequent mail to Vortex (3): "There were several people from Physics Department from Bologna University, Director included. Moreover, also the Director of Bologna Section of National Institute of Nuclear Physics attended, in almost official way, the demonstration. [...] All the measurements were made, INDEPENDENTLY, from a Researcher (and Technicians) of Bologna University. Rossi made only supervision about key safety aspects "


    How was it possible that "one of the people of the project" spoke with you after so short time revealing to you all the most important information "about the calorimetry"? Of course, I'm not going to ask you an answer, I know that you would reply that these are your businesses, but I'd invite all the readers here to pose themselves this question.


    Why the hell the physicists of the most ancient University of the western world should have felt the necessity to share the most sensible data of what could have been the most important experiment in the history of the physics, as well of the humankind, with an expert in programming and Japanese literature who lives on the other side of the Atlantic?


    (1) "http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-[email protected]/msg41364.html"
    (2) "http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-[email protected]/msg41324.html"
    (3) "http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-[email protected]/msg41536.html"

  • Jed Rothwell on an Unpublished E-Cat Test Report that “Looks Like it Worked”

    Quote from cam

    me: Therefore the LENR subject affects everyone's life, including the future generations.
    you: Do you think I am unfair if I consider this phrase bombastic, considering that LENR doesn't belong to GANS?


    More or less bombastic than this phrase (1)?


    FUSION: UNLIMITED ENERGY, FOR EVERYONE, FOREVER.


    (1) Jed Rothwell on an Unpublished E-Cat Test Report that “Looks Like it Worked”


    -------------------
    Edited, after the following JR comment:
    - corrected FOR EVER, thank you Jed,
    - of course Jed Rothwell has nothing to do with the phrase. It appears on the TIME Magazine cover shown in the linked comment (1) of this same thread, whose title contains his name.

  • Jed Rothwell on an Unpublished E-Cat Test Report that “Looks Like it Worked”

    Quote from Wyttenbach

    You "niers" have no prove (in the physical way..) as we have none too.., thus we walk on.


    No, the situation is not as balanced as you say. For the Ecat tests there is a plenty of evidences that the experimental data were wrong, deliberately wrong. If you want to see them, please, go to Jed Rothwell on an Unpublished E-Cat Test Report that “Looks Like it Worked”, follow the links and look at the pictures. No rocket science needed.


    Quote

    Physics is a path of error and correction.


    I agree, but the Ecat's testers did stop halfway.


    Quote

    Of Lugano we know that ...


    The only thing we know of this test is that each datum contained in its report can be wrong. The lead author of the Lugano report was Levi, who also signed the January 2011 report, with all the wrong data mentioned above. Until he doesn't explain the reasons of these wrong data, there is no reason to give credit to any value contained in the Lugano report.


    Quote

    We all know and agree about the fact that there is , up to now, no certified prove of a claimend COP for any Ecat!


    Yes, we all agree, but I don't expect that this situation will change.

  • Jed Rothwell on an Unpublished E-Cat Test Report that “Looks Like it Worked”

    Quote from JedRothwell

    I did not state that. Perhaps you have confused me with someone else. If you review my comments over the years you will see that I wrapped them in a layers of academic deniability. "It seems . . ." or "evidence indicates . . ." The passive voice is your friend! My worst misjudgment was quoted by Mats in his book, and even there I said "“I admit I could be wrong about all of this. . . ."


    Oh, I know, you are a master in wrapping your comments with some doubts, especially on the personal credibility of Rossi, just in case, but you didn't at all make any appeal to academic deniability. On the contrary, you supported without any doubt the generation of many kW of excess heat, just appealing to the academic credibility. At the end of this comment, you find a long list of quotes extracted from a very tiny fraction of your posts in supporting to the credibility of the Ecat results. Basing on my English knowledge, I highlighted in bold the most assertive wordings. It doesn't seem to me that you used precautionary wording with respect of the results claimed by professors and other experts from reputable scientific institutions.


    Your wording has been absolutely assertive for at least 3 years, since the January 14, 2011, demo. Of course, you only reported impressions by others, because you didn't test the Ecat by yourself, but you expressed the maximum confidence in the positive assessment of these people, and you also let us know that you were in close contact with them.

    ----ooOoo----


    Jan15, 2011 - "http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l%40eskimo.com/msg41322.html"
    "I am confident that you cannot fake boiling water, and there is no way a power supply can draw 10 kW, so Rossi's credibility is irrelevant."


    Jan15, 2011 - "http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l%40eskimo.com/msg41324.html"
    "This tells us that various professors at the university have been involved for some time, and they designed and implemented the calorimetry. I do not think there is any way Rossi could "fool" these people. I think that would be physically impossible. Rossi may be a crook but he could not persuade Levi to destroy his career. The fact that Levi and other established professors took part in the experiment is about 4 orders of magnitude more significant than what Rossi may have done, ..."


    Jan15, 2011 - "http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-[email protected]/msg41364.html"
    "I think the likelihood of fraud is vanishingly small. There is no way you could fool the professors involved in this, and I am sure they are not all engaged in a conspiracy to fool the rest of us."


    Apr27, 2011 - "https://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l%40eskimo.com/msg45587.html"
    "In my opinion, the Rossi demonstrations are closer to engineering than basic science, so there is little reason to doubt they are real. The only way they could be fraudulent would be if Levi and E&K and the others have agreed to go along with the scam. Or, as I said, if it turns out they are incredibly stupid people."


    Jun7, 2012 – "http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-[email protected]/msg66507.html"
    "His experiments plus independent tests of his device prove that he has found the holy grail."


    Jun7, 2012 - "http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-[email protected]/msg66517.html"
    "Not a chance. As I have pointed out many times, it burned a person hours after the power was turned off. If the COP had been 1.1 it would have been room temperature. There is no doubt it self sustained for hours, producing kilowatts with no chemical fuel and not electric power input. To question that is puerile and technically illiterate. Plus independent tests with proper instruments have confirmed the claims."


    Jan2, 2013 – "http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-[email protected]/msg75081.html"
    "A fake system would be reliable! It is not difficult to make a fake system. It is impossible to make one that E&K, Focardi or Levi would not instantly see is fake."


    Feb7, 2013 - "http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-[email protected]/msg76434.html"
    "Rossi and the people who have tested his device independently use conventional, off-the-shelve HVAC tools, such as a shielded thermocouple and the kind of mechanical flow meter in millions of houses worldwide. Because Rossi gets so much heat, with such small input power, these instruments and techniques are perfect."


    (The next one has been cited many times, also in the Lewan's book.)
    Mar25, 2013 - "http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-[email protected]/msg78278.html"
    " It really is a third party evaluation. Rossi often exaggerates about his business and other personal things, but as I have often said, when it comes to technical claims, he tells the truth."


    Apr8, 2013 - "http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-[email protected]/msg78711.html"
    "Furthermore, despite all the blather on the Internet, I have not seen any sign of fraud or error in any test by Rossi. His tests are unforgettably sloppy, but not in error as far as I know, or as far as anyone else knows. In my opinion, no plausible method of fraud has been proposed."


    May4, 2013 - "http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-[email protected]/msg79516.html"
    "The experts from U. Bologna would be as hard to fool as the people from NASA. He worked with them for months with what appear to be real systems. Besides, people of this caliber would see through a fake in no time."


    Jul8, 2013 - "http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-[email protected]/msg84089.html"
    "On WHAT basis?!? That's irrational. You do not have a scintilla of technical evidence that the claims are wrong. The skeptics have not come up with a single reason to doubt these results.
    [...]
    Many scientists have spent weeks or months working side by side with him in the lab, such as the late Focardi. Not one of these people has reported any reason to doubt the claims. Do you think they are all in cahoots with him? Or do you think they are all so stupid they do not recognize what has to be a blatant, easily discovered fraud?"


    Oct7, 2013 – "http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-[email protected]/msg86575.html"
    "You are mistaken. Rossi ran his device in public for ~4 hours without input, far beyond the limits of chemistry. He has run in that mode many times in private tests, according to people I know who witnessed these tests."


    Apr14, 2014 - "http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-[email protected]/msg92823.html"
    "This is why I do not trust Rossi's evaluations of his own work. I only trust independent verification. Fortunately, there have been some good independent verification test, by Ampenergo, Elforsk, and others."


    Jun3, 2014 – "http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-[email protected]/msg94033.html"
    "Swedish Professors Chomping at the Bit
    [...]
    "I do not think they would hesitate to announce a negative result when it comes time to publish. I doubt they would hesitate to hint at one now, just as they have hinted the results are positive. I do not get the impression these people are close friends of Rossi, or that they would go out on a limb for him. I have had enough contact with them to say that with confidence."


    Oct11, 2014 – "http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l%40eskimo.com/msg98362.html"
    "First, Levi knows what is in the cell. Second, this can be considered a black box test. It makes no difference what is in the cell. The calorimetry proves that whatever it is, it produces orders of magnitude more energy than any chemical fuel, and it works at a high temperature, and high power. So, if the effect can be controlled, it will not only be a practical source of energy, it will be far better than any other sources. That is what matters."


    Oct12, 2014 - "http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l%40eskimo.com/msg98468.html"
    "In that case he should address these issues. Until he does, I consider the matter closed. It is unfounded blather like the concerns about about wet steam were. Levi eliminated them by turning up the flow rate. (At least, that is what he told Lewan and me. Perhaps he is part of the conspiracy, in which case none of this is true.)"


    Oct12, 2014 – "http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l%40eskimo.com/msg98465.html"
    "The same is true of all the blather about steam and hot water from 2011. As Jack Cole pointed out, Levi said he increased the flow rate and measured the heat with liquid water only. That's what Levi told Lewan, and me. I have a photo of the flowmeter he used. It is a commercial unit easily capable of measuring the fast flow rate. I assume he was telling the truth. There has been a lot of blather about how friendly Levi and Rossi are, which supposedly makes Levi "compromised." They do not seem friendly to me."


    Oct12, 2014 - "http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l%40eskimo.com/msg98463.html"
    "People do indeed dislike novelty. [...] The hysterical opposition and half-baked critiques being posted here in opposition to the latest Levi test are good examples of this dynamic at work."


    Oct13, 2014 - "http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l%40eskimo.com/msg98642.html"
    "I meant that libel here is bad form. A million people on the Internet attack Rossi and Levi with unfounded BS. But we are not supposed to do that here. Especially not when you have zero evidence he has done anything wrong, and no reason to think he would do anything wrong -- other than your own private scientific theory that his results are impossible."


    Dec8, 2014 - "http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l%40eskimo.com/msg100074.html"
    "If there were mistakes, I think Levi et al. made them. I do not think we can blame Rossi, and I do not see how he might have masterminded the experiment."

  • Jed Rothwell on an Unpublished E-Cat Test Report that “Looks Like it Worked”

    Quote from JedRothwell

    Quote from Ascoli65: “When you say "experimental evidence", are you talking about excess heat? Including that one allegedly produced by the Ecat in the kW-MW range?”
    No. Rossi has never published anything, not in the peer-reviewed academic literature…


    But, I didn't talk about Rossi, nor I referred to the peer-reviewed academic literature. I just asked IH Fanboy, which were the "vast troves of confirmatory experimental evidence spanning a quarter of a century" that I should have considered, and if they included the Ecat results, in whichever way they are documented.


    Anyway, on which basis do you have stated for years, by means of thousands of comments posted in every web site containing any smallest doubt on the reality of its claimed performances, that the Ecat had for sure generated many kW of excess heat?

  • Jed Rothwell on an Unpublished E-Cat Test Report that “Looks Like it Worked”

    Quote from IH Fanboy

    It is perhaps the most meaningful example of outright refusal of human beings to associate with or even consider vast troves of confirmatory experimental evidence spanning a quarter of a century. (*)


    When you say "experimental evidence", are you talking about excess heat? Including that one allegedly produced by the Ecat in the kW-MW range? For what I saw, no "experimental evidence" confirms any excess heat. On the contrary, the tests for which we have sufficient and objective information confirm that the data are wrong, and, in many case, deliberately wrong. Being these results considered real for years by the more informed and attentive followers of CF/LENR, we can be quite sure that all the other anomalous heat claims, ranging at most up to the 10 W level, are all but illusory. Can't we?


    Quote

    It is a study in the aversion of people like you to the topic, and the lengths to which you will go to attempt to "save" us from our supposed delusions.


    If "us" means "you (pl.)", ie the LENR supporters, you are wrong. I don't have such an ambition. For me, everyone can believe what he wants, and it wasn't my intention to jump into a forum to convince its users that they are wrong. It would have been unfair, to say the least.


    On the contrary, if "us" means "us", ie all the people whatever they believe, you are partly right. In the sense that the illusory, but widely spread, belief that it will be possible to harness (in any way, at high or low temperature) the fusion energy has heavily affected the global economic choices of the last decades, and is going to influence those of the coming years. Therefore the LENR subject affects everyone's life, including the future generations. So, made clear that is out of anyone's possibility to "save" anyone else, I find anyway interesting to know what is really happening in this field, and this forum is the most suitable place in the www for asking about.


    (*) PS: Just now (Jed Rothwell on an Unpublished E-Cat Test Report that “Looks Like it Worked”), you confirmed your opinion that the briefing of the head of DoD to the US Committee could contain false information. Let me better understand your position. You here claimed "vast troves of confirmatory experimental evidence spanning a quarter of a century", but a big part of these troves comes from initiatives directly performed, funded, sponsored or followed by some DoD units. How can you exclude that also these troves are wrong or even deliberately false?

  • Jed Rothwell on an Unpublished E-Cat Test Report that “Looks Like it Worked”

    Quote from IH Fanboy

    The official position will be something along the lines of "we looked into it but have ceased all further funding or research into this phenomena" aka SPAWAR style. (But then secretly carry on research.)


    Are you saying that the Secretary of Defense is going to lie to the Representatives of the US people? In an official briefing to the US House? On a subject, the energy, which is vital for the US (as well for the rest of the world)? About the status of a technology, the LENR, which is considered by you, and by many other people here and elsewhere, capable to solve the major problems of the world, and that many DoD units have studied and supported for more than 27 years?


    It seems really impossible to me.


    It would be a huge responsibility, also from an historical point of view. By coincidence, Mr. Carter received also a B.A. in Medieval History from Yale University, summa cum laude, in 1976. He knows that historians look at the documents kept in a few archives. I don't know how long our civilization will survive, but I'm quite sure that one of the last archives to be lost will be the one which contains the acts and the other official documents of the US Congress.

  • Jed Rothwell on an Unpublished E-Cat Test Report that “Looks Like it Worked”

    Ciao GinoB,

    Quote from GinoB

    I'm sorry I can not support your effort, also because of the language barrier; Google Translator helps but that's not enough.


    No problem, there is no effort to support. I only took the occasion, thanks to the kind hospitality of this site, to share my point of view with the members of the widest LENR community. I find that the CF/LENR is the most interesting socio-psychological phenomenon. IMO, it is the most meaningful example of self-deceiving of the human being, and, ironically, it's happening at the apex of its scientific progress. There are also many concrete reasons for this to happen, and I guess they are well known by those who decided to support it. But, of course, we can't influence those choices. At most, we can show to a few people another way to interpret what is happening around.


    As for the linguistic problem, I mostly rely on the patience of the readers. :)


    Quote

    The precedent of the parliamentary question from Mr Realacci in Italy (about two years with no response to date, IIRC) is not encouraging for such an initiative; perhaps Parliaments in general do not wish to take a public stand on certain issues.


    For the sake of precision, Mr. Realacci submitted his questions to the Minister of Education in October 2013, almost three years ago. And, as we know, others previous parliamentary questions on the same subject remained unanswered. However, these omissions are not due to the Parliament, but to the Government. Usually, the Representatives like to deal with the most popular side of the problems. If they hear that an accredited scientist claims to have found a miraculous method to produce energy, they immediately urge the charged Ministers to fund the research, because, in the short-term, this fulfills the expectancies widely spread among the consumers/voters. Also the Ministers like to increase the budget of theirs Department, but they have more external constraints, so they cannot satisfy all the funding requests, and rather than reject, prefer to ignore them. This is the situation in Italy, and probably in many other countries.


    Quote

    Or, not answering could also be a diplomatic way to make it clear that the question is meaningless in the view of the respondents.


    From what has been said in a previous comment (Jed Rothwell on an Unpublished E-Cat Test Report that “Looks Like it Worked”), the US situation is similar to ours, but the specific case of the next briefing on LENR is different. Firstly, it has been required by a Parliamentary Committee and not by some single Representatives. Secondly, it has been addressed to the Secretary of Defense, and the US military know better of any other institutional organization what is at stake with the LENR.


    Moreover, I see quite difficult for the Secretary of Defense to ignore the Committee's request. Cold fusion is a well known popular story and is well described on Wikipedia. The present version of the "cold fusion" page already reports (1): In May 2016, the United States House Committee on Armed Services, in its report on the 2017 National Defense Authorization Act, states that it is "aware of recent positive developments in developing low-energy nuclear reactions", and directed the Secretary of Defense to "provide a briefing on the military utility of recent U.S. industrial base LENR advancements to the House Committee on Armed Services by September 22, 2016."


    How will end that Wikipedia section in October? The Secretary of Defense "ignored the request", or "refused to answer", or "said that he didn't know the answers"? This last option sounds quite impracticable, because exactly one year before, on September 23, 2015, a well trained physicist of his Department got the approval to publicly release a presentation which contains nearly all the answers to the Committee questions (2), and ends with (3): "Low Energy Nuclear Reactions appear to be real; are probably attributable to something like nuclear fusion" and many other optimistic assessments on the Ecat.


    Is Mr. Carter, which is also a physicist (4), going to confirm these conclusions?


    (1) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_fusion#United_States
    (2) http://ieeeboston.org/event/le…d-potential-applications/
    (3) www.lenr-forum.com/forum/index…rief-DeChiaro-9-2015-pdf/
    (4) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ash_Carter

  • Jed Rothwell on an Unpublished E-Cat Test Report that “Looks Like it Worked”

    Quote from IH Fanboy

    You seem to have little understanding of the way things work in the states. The executive branch, and particularly career military officials, [...] They view congress members almost as pests.


    I don't know how the things go in the US, but all you said sounds quite realistic and plausible to me.


    Quote

    To think that a committee of congressional representatives hold influence over military men to divulge their LENR knowledge and secrets is laughable.


    This is not as much plausible, and not at all laughable. The request has been presented in an official way in a foremost seat of a democracy. The texts of both the query and the briefing will be archived and kept for future evaluations. It's a damn serious circumstance.


    We should also take into account, that the request has been formally presented to the Secretary of Defense (SoD), not to the military. He represents the US Gov, the executive political power voted by the citizens. The subject is of utmost importance for everyone and for each single aspect of the federal administration, it deals with energy and a presumed way to substitute the present sources. The SoD can't underestimate its importance, and, I presume, it is his duty to gather all the possible and truthful information from his Department.


    Moreover, in preparing the briefing, he cannot ignore to be in front of one of the most important myths of the present civilization: the possibility to harness the nuclear fusion for civil scope. He and his advisers know which are the relationships between modern myths and the present situation of the world economy and equilibrium. He, and the military, are also in the best position to be aware of the consequences of keeping this myth alive, or dismantle it. Both consequences are painful, sooner or later. It's a tough choice. But the House Committee on Armed Service has chosen a date for this to happen, and there will be no other opportunities like this.


    Quote

    They will simply refuse to answer questions under the guise of national security.


    Of course the SoD, after having gathered the required information, can later decide which ones, if any, should be kept secret, but this will be done in front of the public opinion, and will raise much more questions than the original ones. In particular, such secrecy would appear quite unjustified being most of the request based on an old "unclassified" document (1), so that one could wonder why in 2009 it was decided to divulge worldwide some information that look to be very sensitive for the national security, and 7 years later, after the appearance on the web of so many facts and rumors about the possible involvement of some military in the Ecat affair, the same subject is kept secret.


    Quote

    In fact, I would be very surprised if anything useful came of these hearings.


    I am, instead, very surprised by your behavior. I'd have thought that anyone really convinced that LENR is real, and able to solve the energetic problems of the planet, and that the US military know how to exploit it, should held his breath waiting the briefing. I also believed that many users of this forum would have taken this historic and unique occasion to express what they would like to know from the briefing of the US Secretary of Defense, and would have prepared a list of wishful questions, just in case, or, at least, to see how far the actual answers would have matched the expected ones.


    On the contrary, at almost two months from the event, no one here manifests any interest in it. It's really strange.


    (1) http://newenergytimes.com/v2/n…9/2009DIA-08-0911-003.pdf

  • Jed Rothwell on an Unpublished E-Cat Test Report that “Looks Like it Worked”

    Quote from IH Fanboy

    I expect very little from this. [...] Why would the U.S. military have any desire to reveal what they know about LENR to the general public?


    Because they have been invited by the Representatives of the US people to provide a briefing on LENR. Whatever they will (or won't) answer, it will be very important and meaningful, especially for those that have still some hope in this field.


    Quote

    I expect the U.S. military to use this opportunity to deny LENR ...


    It is probably their right to oppose a motivated refusal to reveal what they know on this subject, but, I suppose, it's not allowed to lie in this official occasion.


    Quote

    ... and to label Rossi a conman.


    In such a case, it should also be explained why a functionary of DoD appears since March 2010 in the Board of Advisers of the web journal used by Rossi to divulge worldwide the performances of the Ecat and all the other related initiatives.

  • Jed Rothwell on an Unpublished E-Cat Test Report that “Looks Like it Worked”

    Quote from cam


    me: The acronym appears many times in the request of the US House to the Secretary of Defense (1). That suffices.


    you: That suffices only to the believers. For the GANS it is as if they were requesting information about the Holy Graal. Lenr and canr are acronyms you can only find in the cf literature, not in GANS. I would be glad being contradicted.


    You segregated yourself on top of the crystal tower of science and obscured all the windows with paper sheets filled of nuclear data, so that you are no more able to look outside, at the real world around you.


    LENR belongs to the set of socio-psychological myths which sustain the economy of our present world. Our future and the fate of the humankind are not decided by the GANS, but by the Governments and in particular by their economic Departments, including those dealing with the military affairs. The DoD is one of the major protagonist of the economics of the last century. They pioneered 3 out of 4 possible forms in which nuclear energy can be exploited: uncontrolled fission and fusion, and controlled fission. Unfortunately they, as all the other military and civil scientific Institutions in the world, have not be able to exploit the fourth and more useful form of nuclear energy: the controlled fusion, the Holy Grail of our society.


    Now, thanks to the democratic mechanisms, the Representatives of the US people asked a member of US Government to provide information about the status of LENR research, because they heard about "recent positive developments in developing low-energy nuclear reactions (LENR), which produce ultra- clean, low-cost renewable energy". Their request cites also the "recent U.S. industrial base LENR advancements", therefore it clearly alludes to the Ecat. The members of the House Committee addressed their request to the Secretary of Defense because they have reasons to think that he knows, or can easily gather, all the answers on these subjects.


    Presently, this is the real state of the LENR/Ecat issues. Nothing to do with the GANS!


    If Mr Ashton B. Carter will be allowed to report what is known at his Department, and if the members of the Committee will be allowed to inform their voters, everybody will know the truth about these issues within next September, otherwise, independently from the GANS, this last version of the myth of Holy Grail is meant to accompany and to comfort humanity up to the end of his golden age.

  • Jed Rothwell on an Unpublished E-Cat Test Report that “Looks Like it Worked”

    Quote from cam

    In the end popular science will disappear, even if it seems to be conditioning strategic political choices.


    If the strategic political choices will continue to be based on the illusion to be able to substitute the fossil energy source with some miraculous alternative, the popular science will disappear at the same time of the people who believe in it.


    Quote

    Don't forget that the acronym LENR is unknown in the Generally Agreed Nuclear Science; it has been invented by some cold fusionist (who? who knows).


    The acronym appears many times in the request of the US House to the Secretary of Defense (1). That suffices.


    Quote

    As you know, I am only interested in Italian side of cold fusion.


    So, why do you write here on LENR-forum?


    (1) http://www.e-catworld.com/2016…armed-services-committee/

  • Jed Rothwell on an Unpublished E-Cat Test Report that “Looks Like it Worked”

    Quote from cam

    If so, you are saying that less than a hundred people in the world are interested in cold fusion. Among them very few physicists and chemists.


    Actually, the members of this forum are around 1700, but this is not the point. The real point is that the CF has attracted enough attention from important sectors in the US to be the subject of a specific query to the Secretary of Defense. This forum, independently from the number and qualification of its users, is presently the MOST important open space hosting a public debate on this subject. So it could be a source of possible inspiration for all the parties involved in the next briefing of September 22.


    Quote

    DoD or whichever should ask DoE or BNL, which is the acknowledged US archive of nuclear science.


    O yeah, great idea! Maybe at DoD, they are not aware of the existence of the nuclear archives. Perhaps, till now, their nuclear equipment and devices have been designed on a "try and see" basis.


    Quote

    Science is not a matter of democracy or public mood. Cold fusion must only be settled among scientists as any other scientific question.


    This is valid for the real science, but not for the popular science, which very often coincides with wishful science. This last is a matter of politic, because the decision makers take into consideration the public sentiment and expectancies, and these last can be heavily influenced by news and slogans proposed by the media, which in turn are controlled by the economic powers, which finally have interests on the decisions taken by the politics, especially if they affect the energetic policy. Loop closed. The two magazine covers already shown (Jed Rothwell on an Unpublished E-Cat Test Report that “Looks Like it Worked”) are just two meaningful examples of this reality.


    Quote

    Science is able to choose its targets without any external help or lobbying, isn't it.


    As I told you many times, it's impossible to judge the CF affair on the basis of the usual scientific criteria.