You may want to talk to David about that. The acceptances have to go through some scientific committee.
The time for acceptance notification of papers for the ICCF 21 was to be April 16, it has been delayed till April 22 since they had so many submissions......
Sounds like the field is not as dead as some think.
7 of 20 your quote of tanny_demesmaker
I don't see how they get any reference at all to Rossi from that. Dr. T (as his friends call him) mentions Celani who has a demo at NI week, Peter H who has theories, and people with a lab in their back yard (that's Letts). History shows that the next year NI had a demo by Cravens and "un invited" Defkalion to NI Week. In no way is Rossi's work implied.
I personally have a "gifted" Labview copy in my lab and a standing invite from Dr. T to demo when I think I have "solved it". But my understanding that Rossi is "persona non grata" by NI due to AR's false claims of Ni support.
don't agree the money is drying up - that only holds true of you look at the traditional sources of finance (who were never that keen anyway).
yes, notice that IH is still supporting some research in LENR. It may not be at the $M level but still they are not giving up.
to forget that the public hystory of the Ecat began in January 2011 with a very simple test setup.
I think it dates back much earlier: for example, He demoed the Energy Catalyzer in Bedford, New Hampshire, to the Department of Defense in Nov 09 and claimed on his blog (he had a public web presence) in April 2010 of running his system to heat a factory for 2 years.
I view it as a kind of "scientific brainstorming". I brainstorming you do not just attack a suggestion but try to see how it might be true. I think some "open minded" scientists do that when looking at new advancements. It is how you obtain a working hypothesis for a new phenomenon. However in a scientific experiment the opposite should be use- that is trying to falsify the hypotheses . I do not fault them for openness at the start only their not following through on the scientific method.
I also fault people who try to equate a demo with an experiment. Rossi has not done good "experiments" only demos - no controls, no redundant measures of critical items, no traces to standards, no attempts to falsify an hypothesis.....
I think most "believers" in Rossi did so because they wanted to believe more than because they were "convinced" by another. It reminds me of the scene from "the Saint":
What did Rossi do with his $11 million he scammed from IH? Did he invest it into LENR? No, he bought condos!
Oh no, don't say it is so, after Rossi promised to use half of anything he got to children's cancer causes.
Oh I should correct the record- Woodford did not visit Doral but it was Paul Lamacraft and Henry from the Woodford group that visited the various researchers and Rossi. My sources (wouldn't you like to know) said that Paul was dreading having to go there (Aug. trip not Feb) and found the American style of openness by the various researchers so much more refreshing.
Why do you so wildly assume that all money raised by IH was to go to Rossi? It is clear that the Woodward group visited many other researchers funded or to be funded by IH on the same tour that at the end included Fl. Of course IH would allow Woodford to visit Doral. Your assumptions are laughable. It sounds like Rossi who assumes he is the only "game in town" and the millions in the world only look at him.
Well, at least he was not unwilling to raise money from Woodford in Doral before turning against Rossi ... Isn't that fascinating?
I think you would find that most of the LENR community ignored Rossi just as most scientists do to those claiming alien abductions or flat earth. Most also "ignore" the claims of Randy Mills. If you do not understand that, then you might want to read through the back copies of Krivit's New Energy Times. You might want to read the early analysis (2011) by people like Ekström, Nelson, Reinberger, Cirillo, Rönnblom, Randall.......on and on..... you can find early analysis here if you wish to read..... oh I forgot, you don't read court documents or anything negative about Rossi.
Don't you think that they were sufficiently representative of the strong support that the whole LENR community was giving to the Ecat initiative?
No not at all. A few is not "the whole LENR community".
And google searches by the public is not what makes a scientific field "dead" or alive. It is the work by the researchers in the field that do that. Some clown on TV may have an interview about the earth being flat and draw lots of people to look them up but that does not mean that people now believe the earth is flat. You are confusing publicity and entertainment with real scientific work.
I think the Courts did that with Rossi and Darden.They have moved on but
the peanut gallery does not want to rest there Case.
Remember this is not the Rossi vs IH court thread but one on Rossi's blog. His blog is still there , he has not "rested".
There has been very little activity on Rossi vs. Darden aftermath discussions
MFMP-- Not sure what they are doing these days. The last I heard, they were working on the Egley systems, and Bob H was doing some things with Pd, Ni and H but "on his own nickel".
It seems to me that there may be a few doing Rossi type items but most of the LENR community is not and most got no "funding boost" from it. Mostly just more as usual. There may have been some Texas Tech work that was funded (by you know who) but it was Pd electrochemistry it seems (they are not saying publicly).
All that to say, I see very little positive Rossi effects now and significant negative effects - but that is just from my limited perspective. I may ask around in Denver what others think.
I know of people working with Ni and H but the ones I know of are doing it without outside funding. There are very few people out there that are funded for LENR.
if any of those that got a funding boost
How many and who received a funding boost? Boeing for testing a device? I know of several people who tried to make hot Ni and H work but none that got funded for that specifically. Perhaps there are some - I would love to know who and how much.
So I do take that into consideration
when judging Rossi and Darden.
Not sure what you are judging with IH. They took a risk, invested, and lost. However, they are still supporting several "main stream" LENR researchers. I see they have only helped the field with their financial support of some of the other researchers (some even still) some of which were supported prior to Rossi. I do however think Rossi has severely damaged the field and cast a shadow over it. I do not see that the net results of his actions have helped the field. I am afraid that many more people now judge the entire area of LENR as nothing but errors and a sham due to his actions. The public normally only thinks of the most recent events and now paints the entire LENR field with the same brush as the Rossi.
notice that Rossi only had something like 60 people at his last "demo" and the IVA did not like him even being there. However the ICCF meeting have held steady at around 100-300 each event for years. (although the ones in Russia were low do to travel restriction placed on Americans with security clearances).
You clearly have your understanding of acceptance backwards.
This is exactly what I don't understand. Which damages did Rossi cause to the LENR research? It was nearly dead when he arrived in 2007. Look at the following reportage of a conference held in August of that year
Three years later, millions of people around the world believed that a CF device capable of producing many kW of excess heat was almost ready to enter the market.
Where do you get such ideas? It was not "nearly dead" see: Between November 27 and December 2, 2005, 107 scientists, inventors, engineers, journalists, and students from nine countries came together, to meet, socialize, and exchange ideas about cold fusion (CF) and low-energy nuclear reactions (LENR), in Yokohama, Japan during ICCF12–the twelfth of a series of international conferences on condensed matter nuclear science. The "conference" you site in Aug of 07 was before Rossi and was not a "conference" but a local colloquium and the report you give shows "50 or so attendees "
You might find it interesting to search the LENR-CANR.org library and you will find very few papers about Rossi and most are just popular news items with no scientific merit.
Where in the world do you get millions of people believed You are just spinning tells. Try to stay with the facts.
Shane, why you are saying this? It seems unfair to me, unless you all are looking for a single and easy scapegoat to which to attribute the entire responsibility for the CF fiasco. Without the support of the whole CF field, the Ecat saga would not even be come at Doral.
Good question Ascoli. Not sure I can adequately explain being an outsider. My guess is that those who believe LENR, do the research, attend the conferences, would like to put this chapter behind them.
As one who often goes to the conferences (ICCF, this year in Denver by the way) and does experiments; I would say Rossi NEVER had the support of the whole CF field. Yes, there were a few but no where near the whole field.....by my count only about 6 CF workers (as defined by those who attend ICCF conferences) out of 2 hundred or so. And to my knowledge Rossi has never submitted even a single paper to CF conferences or journals. I don't think he would be well received there.
Does a persons word mean nothing
The point is that- shouldn't the same run apply to believing Dewey then? It seems that many of the Rossi followers demand proof of others without offering it themselves.
Thank you.However, it would have been better if they had informed Mats Lewan personally. He has no idea, and has heard nothing. I asked before posting.
Dewey has shown his "evidence" What "evidence to you have for your assertion that Mats has no idea? what is good for the goose is good for the gander.
I don't know the hystory of CETI, but, as far as I read in the article on Wired quoted above, the test you are referring to may have been the one "demonstrated in a Motorola facility, which was not the best environment to do calorimetry". Anyway I was referring to the fundings actually collected, not to the offers.
I am sorry to say, but it seems to me that LENR is closer to mythology than to science.
It should be notice http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/LonchamptGexcessheat.pdf
The point there is that Patterson gave beads for testing by others and some cases the experiments were totally carried out by others. I find G. Miley's elemental analysis via neutron activation very interesting. To bad Patterson was "greedy" till death and his grandson who ran the business died early. I often wonder why no one ever continued.
As for CETI, I found this story:
So the funding at stake were 15 M$, but above all it was tied to a properly conducted test. In any case collecting offers is not the same as collecting money.
The only suitable example is, therefore, the 30 M$ spent by Toyoda for F&P. Let us compare it with the funds raised by the Ecat. The company founded specifically to exploit its IP initially raised at least 11,5 M$, and subsequently obtained 50 M$ from an investing fund (5% of an estemated total value of 1 B$). After subtracting all the costs, there remains more than 30 M$ available for the LENR field. So, from the POV of the LENR community, the Ecat initiative was much more fruitful than the Nice initiative.
But the economic part doesn't adequately show the exceptionality of the Ecat venture, with respect to the F&P's one. We should better compare the circumstances of the two endeavors.
Let's start with F&P. In 1989, they were two esteemed academicians, unanimously recognized as true scientists. One of them had been the president of the International Society of Electrochemistry, the discipline concerning the functioning of his cell. They obtained the funding for the Nice lab in 1992, when there was still some credit that cold fusion could have been a real phenomenon, and many believed that the criticisms raised in the first months could have come by strong competitions between physicists and chemists. In addition, the two scientists claimed to have obtained only a few watts of excess heat, a range easily attributable to the instrumental errors, and their task was only to improve that gain and better explain the possible underlying phenomenon.
On the other side, Rossi had a degree in philosophy and was a complete outsider for nuclear physics or chemistry. When he joined the LENR field, his reputation was not at the highest level. Leaving aside the Italian troubles, the only research activity carried out in the US under a government contract, the TEG project, ended in failure. At the time he entered the LENR field, 20 years later of the Nice initiative, the related research was nearly dead, and its popularity was at the lowest level. The CF/LENR field was ignored by most people, the few others considered it as woodo science. Rossi made a miracle, literally resurrecting the field, and making millions of people believing that the LENR phenomena were real, and that his method was nearly ready for industrial applications. Despite having published on the web a lot of data, including the videos, of many dumb tests, he and the Ecat IP have finally attracted dozens of millions of funding for the development of his devices and for the financing of the entire LENR field.
In conclusion, there is no competition with the F&P achievements. The Rossi venture has been by large the most incredible and sensational success in the history of all the controversial sciences.
both Ceti and Rossi where tied to tests. It is just Rossi threw out IH people from the testing whereas Patterson actually ran a test at Motorola and left it with them for a while for them to run and measure. The initial verbal offer was for 30M (via Galvin) and then scaled down to a 15M written offer by at second offer when Patterson did not want to give 100% of it away. Notice a claimed 1kW system was demonstrated.
The Ceti story is a sad one. Notice also that Milley was able to get transmutation on beads and ran independent verification.
Mark, Neither the main stream media nor serious journals reported on the 1 MW plant working. For you to win all that would have to happen is that they keep quiet again. So what are you waiting for?
@ interested observer,
Can you cite any other LENR researcher whose devices have been capable to collect several dozens millions of funding?
No doubt that his venture deserves the attention of this site, and even of many MSMs.
example: CETI (Clean energy Tech) was offered 30 M by Motorola but Patterson wanted to remain in control, F&P were given 30M for their set up in Nice, France.
I didn't start with the premise skeptics were uncertain that Rossi has nothing. But as they repetitively write that he is a total fraud and has nothing, but are not prepared to wager on it without even putting any money down (except Woodworker has to as he didn't trust my check) it is easy to make that deduction.
You falsely assume failure to bet on something as a sign of uncertainty. You make too many assumptions in general.
The bottom line is that Rossi attacked IH by filing a suit against them and then bailed out of the suit when it came to trial. The result was that Rossi did not prevail and that IH lost nothing (not counting lawyer’s fees) when Rossi offered to abandon the suit he had filed against IH. Clearly if he had what some here believe he had/has, he would not have dropped the suit he filed.
Doesn't sound like a good bet to me since you stated Rossi would produce units, not sale them and how and by whom is the COP>6 established.
But no matter, I do not bet.