Posts by oldguy

What is the earliest date that anyone here sees for the GPT being mentioned?

I cannot find it.
I seem to remember something along in Jan of Feb. But if that is the first mention
then Rossi did not keep it running (if it ever was) for 350 days after that. It would only be 90 days or so
from that "notice" - although mentioning on an obscure blog is not exactly legal notice.

It would have to before April of last year.

Anyone here find a mention of FL as a GPT anywhere before April last year?
It still would have to be agreed to but it would be a start.

SSC = about suing before the "deadline"
and what evidence do you have for the agreed upon date for the start of the GPT? So far there has been nothing to indicate that a signed dated agreement was made for a start date of the GPT.

The agreement called for the test to be started well before the research testing in FL. If there was an extension then there must be some signed agreement that the work in FL was actually was the GPT and the date agreed upon. So far nothing verifies your assumed start and end dates for the GPT:.

In short the deadline for payment was to be after the end of the GPT with signed agreement of its start date and fulfillment of other criteria COP, receipt of a report from an agreed to ERV, verification of 350 continuous days/ not parts there of, data taken by the ERV- (i.e. not Rossi) and other items.

So what proof do you have when the GPT was started when you claim because so far IH has denied they approved the research testing in FL was the GPT and the agreement specifies both parties must agree to the GPT.

All this could be avoided if Rossi produced evidence of his claim of an agreed to GPT and ERV and some verification of a start date.
As it stands there is no evidence when or if the GPT started. One could equally claim that it started at Penon's email and thus it did not fulfill the 350 within 400 days of such a start date. I am of the opinion (passed on only partial evidence) that the GPT was never agreed to by IH.
It also seems that the ERV never took the data himself but only the information Rossi told him.

"He just wants you to stop calling him 'Adb'... It's 'Abd'."

and all this time I thought his name was Dennis

ele:"If it was SO evident why was Rossi to sue IH and not IH to sue Rossi"

1) Rossi sued before the deadline for payment What was left then was for them to counter sue.
2) IH did not believe that the testing in FL was for the GPT
3) If IH did not think that the testing fulfill the requirements (as per signed document - start date agreed to, ERV approved,....)
then what was there to sue concerning the 89M?

Abd yes,
I found nothing in the public info I saw that would indicate that the research (testing) in Fl was mentioned as the GPT until many months into the "testing". There can be many things called a test that are not an agreed upon GPT. Having a claimed 1MW system is not a marker for the GPT. It could have been any magnitude as long as it had the correct COP levels and a minimum down time (50 days down in 400).
It also looks like the thing in FL was not even the right device ( six cylinder item) and could not be the GPT based on that (as well as the approved starting date). It also seems to fail as the GPT since the Rossi and not the ERV made the measurements (as required by the agreement).

I sure would be interested in why Rossi, et al think that it was the approved GPT as covered in the agreement.

I noticed that in one document Rossi requested info as to why IH thought that the research effort in FL was not the GPT. Is there some request by IH that requests Rossi to produce info as to why he things it was the GPT?
Bottom line- does Rossi have anything that shows acknowledgement and acceptance of the research in Fl was to be the GPT before the effort was started?

I am not sure why people think that Rossi's posting in his own obscure blog is some kind of notice to be used for estopple. It seems he would need to produce some kind of proof of notice and acceptance or at least proof that IH acknowledged that they accept posting in a blog as a way of official communication with Rossi.

ele- "some of which presumably experts in the field, "

not exactly so. From my understanding the ones with Darden where business types (Peter and Henry) not scientists.

The times that scientist or engineers were there, Rossi escorted them out.

Texas Tech might be an interesting alternative

Alan- I wish there was technical items here
But those are very few and far between. Most is just conjecture and pet theories.

The only reason I started visiting this forum was to see Abd's legal updates on the Rossi situation. Most of the rest of the stuff here is just idol chit chat.

Zephir- " when IH delayed its payment."
remember Rossi filed suit before the deadline for the payment.
Also the true issue is not if the device works, it is if Rossi actually transferred the technology so that IH could use it.

or 1kW/cm^2 is about what laser weapons try to achieve. sustaining 1KW/gm (almost 10KW/cc)
is hard to think about. especially inside alumina

I think that they haven't pulled a Wabbit out of the hat is because all they have is a hat full of Wabbit droppings.
I would expect at least they would produce and document something that actually said that the GPT was agreed to or
that a time extension for starting such a test was agreed to.

Just that one thing would drastically change the trajectory of the case and then the focus could be on data collection,
if it true worked or not, the reality of customer and proof of consumption of the levels claimed and so on.

And then I will be interesting when the open up that shipping container for discovery. My guess is that it has a lot of
Wabbit droppings on the floor but no Wabbits.

I find it interesting the one of the major share holders of the holding company is Ampenergo

I don't understand Rossi's strategy (or his lawyers). First it seems likely that Rossi will loose this case
(based on the requirements set forth in the agreement, not to mention the bad data, possible fraud....)

But if he did some how win, I would expect IH to just declare bankruptcy. I doubt IH has large
assets. I would not expect people like Darden, Woodford,.... would invest more into IH when it could just
declare bankruptcy. I would also expect that that 50M is not in IH but in the holding company that is not
responsible for any looses of IH.

My guess is also that Rossi will loose a lot of whatever money he has by paying the lawyers.
AND he will also be facing a lot of counter suits. I got the feeling that there will be several more of them
in the future.

you don't have a building in mind..... I would suggest a greenhouse and use the LENR to heat the water for an aquaponics system.
I think there may be an outside chance getting hot water from LENR in the reasonable future but electrical power is a different
story. Also, you could capitalize on the "green" aspect of it.

if long runs of self sustaining were possible then why not just unplug and produce power for a month or two.
That should "prove" things and get him all the attention and offers he could ever handle.

If you have a self sustaining system with even a few watts of heat then you should be able to generate electricity
with no problem (Peltiers, Stirling engines.....)
Such a demonstration would be very appealing and you would not need fake customers, or steam quality assumptions, and so on.
My guess is that he does not have such a system or he is a fool not to try such a demo.

mrSS
To be blunt, if I had been IH, I'd simply ask him to reproduce the 18 hour test witnessed by Dr. Levi in which a reactor seemed to self sustain for long periods of time. ...

I think if you check you will find that IH suggested and would have been happy with a smaller test. I think that you can even see in the agreement that they wanted something be put together in reasonable time (120 days), have a reasonable high COP (6) and proof of endurance. They did not suggest 1MW. it was Rossi that wanted the year long thing at 1MW. It was Rossi that wanted to "showboat".

I should also say, it is crazy to try for 1MW when you can do 1kW well and with less costly instruments.

To do 1MW correctly, they needed to use the correct equipment and methods. They were not close on
the instrument ranges, quality, .... and a steam separator---- and do it with multiple redundancy.

sparging - It is a good method.
Personally I use a copper coil in a large (tall) insulated tank and any gas in the water, and get the temperature increase.
You do need to mix
You also can check the water flow rate that way.