Most of the involved people know it. It was very hot inside Doral except the last day, where the nice Mr. Murray visited after the system (restart) run only for 1/2 hour - in Winter!!
This was the typical attitude of IH during the process: they claimed to have overwhelming evidence but, in a deeper analysis,those were always misleading interpretations of reality. They accepted the settlement because they were perfectly aware of it .....
How do we know how many others did not invest in Rossi and Defkalion directly or indirectly because of what they read on the internet?
So your mission would be to spend hours on the internet spitting poison to Rossi to save these poor investors? Those are people who can protect themselves very well on their own and if they choose to believe in QuarkX they will probably make the deal of their life. Obviously your desire to protect others is only activated with Rossi. You have never been worried about inform anyone about Cherokee and its unhealthy habit of taking money to do remediations jobs that it does not perform, the fact that it creates affiliated companies who declare bankruptcy just after receiving a Order for what they did. These things do not disturb you at all, as I see. I recommend you however to read again what Sifferkol told us, it is an educational reading....
So if Rossi's hand-made ECAT technology would really work as he and his followers claim, Boeing and Airbus would have found out long time ago...but they are still investigating...
What would be odd? No one can know and understand better a technology than an inventor that has turned his own intuition into a real object. Boeing had a Rossi reactor in the hands that was wrongly charged and therefore unable to work, but now (according to Alan: "I hear the Boeing are carrying on with LENR research anyway") also them are working on a LENR reactor. Maybe with time their back engineering will give good results, but if this happens after Rossi's success, it will not be surprising because he is the inventor of that reactor!
After the first test and during the second test at Lugano I heard from some of the participants from time to time. They were friendly. But, after the Lugano report was published, I never heard another word from anyone.
It is very likely that the Professors were asked to keep the confidentiality about what they had seen. All they could say was definitely written in the report, the rest (if any) had to keep it for themselves, so it was not the case to issue interviews or answer specific questions. In fact, they are now making an E-Cat replication in Sweden: what they learned on that occasion they put it into practice instead of spreading it. I believe that as soon as they are ready they will describe their current work in an article where they will describe in detail the outcome of their experiments, as scientists usually do.
I heard from some of Levi's co-authors that Rossi played less of a role in Lugano. I don't know what to make of that, or whether to believe it now, after all that has happened.
What Rossi did in Lugano is described in the report that the Professors who conducted the test wrote:
"The dummy reactor was switched on at 12:20 PM of 24 February 2014 by Andrea Rossi who gradually brought it to the power level requested by us. Rossi later intervened to switch off the dummy, and in the following subsequent operations on the E-Cat: charge insertion, reactor startup, reactor shutdown and powder charge extraction. Throughout the test, no further intervention or interference on his part occurred; moreover, all phases of the test were monitored directly by the collaboration."
The authors clearly say that they have monitored his interventions and have also decided at least some of them ("... power level requested by us"), maybe all of them. Rossi's presence during the test is understandable, considering that he had to protect his discovery and legitimate secrets. No one would ever lose sight of an object that may be worth a fortune, especially if it is placed in a room that is not necessarily safe (they were in a Swiss premises .... not quite a safe deposit box). As for his interventions, it seems that they are limited to essential things, according to the Professors, who agreed to make that kind of test and signed the article. I think they would never have done it if they had felt themselves at the mercy of Rossi.
I doubt he holds any of the biking (or was it running?) records he claims. He is quite simply a second rate con man. So prepare to be disappointed. Again.
It was "running". You can contact FIDAL (acronym for the Italian Federation of Athletics,http://www.fidal.it/content/Contatti/49901) and they will reply that Rossi has set the best Italian performance (Absolute and Juniores) in the 24 hour racing on track in Brescia, 23 and 24 April 1970, with 175,144 meters
You are so foolishly disbeliever that you wouldn't even believe what you see if it is shown by Rossi. In order to carry out your war against him, you deny the most trivial things .... I hope at least that this attitude gives you some satisfaction: seen from the outside is just pathetic.
Whereas IH (after they employed Murray) were able to put together proper well controlled tests that would deliver real information. Running them long-term is then just a matter of patience. IH if anything seem to have had too much of that...
You're joking, right? Are we talking about the same people who gave interviews full of praise for Rossi at the same time (they said after) could not get the reactors running? The same people, however, who initially talked of tests where they got COP = 5? The same people who gave to the Boeing a reactor with the wrong fuel and then did not even seize the opportunity to provide another properly charged reactor? Do you think they would be an example of seriousness? Their long-term test would have convinced you, while the one made by Rossi (side by side with two people paid by IH) and certified by an ERV from the remarkable curriculum does not convince you? I think you see the world through a couple of lenses signed IH ....
Feel much better now, although, after reading SSC's comment, that it makes good business sense for Rossi to abandon the proven, certificated 1MW LT, for the QX -which is still in R/D according to Rossi, almost sent me over the edge again.
The 1 MW plant has been long tested, as you say, and during the Doral test Rossi was able to refine his technology by overcoming some of the problems that have been arose in the plant. The fruit of all of this is QuarkX, a better product than the others made before. Do not bet everything on that would be absurd.
Cheap power for the masses! Looking forward to seeing one soon.
You should wait for the QuarkX impatiently because it will be a revolutionary object. Instead, when presented, I'm sure you will dedicate all your attention to looking for possible defects or shortcomings. It seems that your interest (and that of so many others here) is just to discredit Rossi ..... who knows if in the end you will all try to get on the wagon of the winner ....
Rossi promised millions or billions for "children with cancer" -- I don't recall that he said where. Pretend philanthropism is another hallmark of free energy scammers.
What do you know about that? Do you keep an eye on Rossi's bank account? Rossi expressed a desire to make a donation to those who need it. It is a generous and noble thought. If he has already done so or if he will do it, only himself can know it, so all of your criticisms are futile, as always. Darden in his interviews launched messages as a real environmentalist and filled his mouth of beautiful words, but in the meantime his companies were getting funds to clean-up areas, putting buildings above those places and only after have been found that the remediation has never been done .... only when people started to get sick. Did you spend a few minutes reading what Sifferkol reported? Or do you only interest in the color of the socks Rossi has weared this morning? Your paladin spirit is not shocked in front of things like these? I guess in this case you turn your face on the other side not to look .... obviously in this case you don't have any interest in commenting...
Yes, it only takes 50,000 of them. And yes, Jed, I understand that may work with fuel elements in a fission reactor core or with lithium ion cells in an electric car. But perhaps not quite so easily with a pencil thin device running at 2600 degrees C.
During the demo Rossi will show some reactors connected in parallel, not a 1MW QuarkX plant. I guess that technical problems related to big numbers will be dealt with in due course, but it is not possible to create such assembly without using robots, and once you use them, the number of pieces that they have to assemble become irrelevant.
QuoteAnother consequence: the August 25, 2015 US patent that issued to Leonardo Corporation is probably invalid or is subject to equity constraints because the Settlement Agreement acknowledges that there is a secret ingredient not mentioned in the patent. Both parties are committed to maintain that secrecy.
David French
I'm not convinced about what French says. Rossi has patented a reactor and all that is needed for patent validity is that an expert can reproduce it according to the instructions described in it. If the secret ingredient serves to increase the COP or to improve the performance of the reactor, it is obvious that Rossi is concerned and has asked IH not to spread the formula, but this does not necessarily condition the patent. If the reactor also works without that ingredient, the patent is still valid. I think Rossi has filed several other patents (one for the control system, one for fuel, etc ...) that are not yet public and that, taken together, will cover every aspect of its technology. The patent already granted is probably the "skeleton" of the set, and is valid if it describes an object that works. All the additions could make this object much more powerful and commercially interesting.
Although sometimes legitimate companies have reason to generate other corporations, most often this sort of thing is done by crooks, trying to hide from the tax and licensing authorities in a maze of different entities. Having once worked for a regulating agency, I can tell you it really does complicate the work or bringing criminals like Rossi (and probably his attorney is one also) to justice.
Here is a perfect example of how you want to pass for a paladin of justice only when things concern Rossi. Cherokee has created a myriad of companies ready to implode as soon as there is some danger so that the Mother of all can always remain immaculate, and this has never caused you the slightest disturbance. Were you so impartial even when working with the regulating agency? 
Do you mean the data Penon deleted? Or something else no-one has ever seen?
I just mean to say that Rossi did not spend a year in Doral smoothing his nails. He has had to intervene on several occasions to make parts replacement or repairs and I think he has noted these operations. Anyway, the point from which we started was that a long-term test is indispensable (for me) to understanding how reliable a product is and what its behavior is over time. You can't market something that has not been tested in this way. You say that IH should have done the long-term test ..... but when Rossi started to do it, he was still in business with Darden and worked alongside people paid by IH (like Fulvio and Barry), and still I don't understand why if the long-term test had been done by IH it could be fine for you, whereas since Rossi did that test you say it was useless ..... I'm not an engineer (as you said), but you're not objective.
The Rossi 1MW test was useless for this purpose since it was not properly documented. Rossi was there tinkering with things, mending non-working reactors, etc, etc the whole time.
For commercial reliability measures you need to document failures, and investigate failure modes. All of which IH could do (and had ample time to do) in-house. None of which was done in the long-term test.
Rossi has certainly collected a great deal of data during the test. Most likely he made measurements and took several notes. We don't know if he shared this data with IH at the beginning, but it is likely to be, since Barry was always present and was an IH man (how hide to him any problems or system failures?). Then, when Rossi began to be distrustful of IH because of the investments made on the competition, perhaps he even began to hold much information for himself. However, if the relationship between the two parties remained good until the end, it would have been IH to start the production of the reactors and therefore could certainly take advantage of all the data collected by Rossi because it would be a common interest sharing them.
Those 2 statements are internally inconsistent.
First of all, I don't think Rossi would want to sell his IP, [....] Now that the relationship is closed, Rossi has the chance to sell it to whoever wants it, [ and maybe he will do it after finishing his study]
Not at all, I was not referring to the IP! Read back again:
"As for the 1MW plant, Rossi had shown it years ago to IH (in its first version) and had started to make an agreement with them, which obviously provided the exclusivity for IH. Now that the relationship is closed, Rossi has the chance to sell it to whoever wants it
I agree. I am telling prospective buyers of my patented and powerful pink invisible flying unicorns (PIFU's™)the exact same thing.
You also organize a demo and show off your wonderful invention, then you may be able to seriously talk about prospective buyers. Until then you're just fu**ing about.
Suppose no-one has ever used a smartphone. None exist. No-one knows how to make them.
Now consider an investor given a demo of an i-phone 5 - fully tested, with long-term test showing reliability (so Rossi and I guess you would claim) available for commercialisation NOW.
or...
i-phone 6. Still under development. Sort of works but only in lab and Rossi cannot say how long it will be before he has a proper demo for investors, let alone a commervial product.
Now - which of those two is more attractive? And why, for God's sake, would you care about the difference between i-phone 5 and 6 when introducing an i-phone to a world that had never had smart phones before?
If you're comparing the I-Phone 5 to the 1MW I think you should not have to use the term "available for commercialization". One-year test was over and the plant worked overall, but Rossi have had to intervene often to do various maintenance, repairing leaks and malfunctions. Moreover some reactors in the plant have never worked and Rossi is still trying to figure out why. The test life has allowed Rossi to understand what the weaknesses of the plant are, and now he will have to intervene to apply the improvements if he finds it useful. And with regard to I-Phone 6 (QuarkX) you could consider it a laboratory prototype in 2015, when Rossi first mentioned it, while now it is a product that is going to be presented and is therefore in a much more advanced state. Anyway, most people who want to buy a technological innovation are more interested in the number 6 model than those with lower numbers, even if we talk about a new technology. It is a psychological attitude on which market law is based.
Did they need the long-term test to attract money? Not at all if Rossi's stuff works in-house. They can easily get signed and sealed definitive third part evidence that will cause investors to gather as bees to a honey-pot. No good engineer would view the long-term test as indicating reliability or validation.
Perhaps the engineers don't care that a plant works for a long time, but it certainly concerns an industrialist who buys it to put it in his own company. Anyone wishing to buy the 1MW plant would surely pay it a lot of money, he should adapt his company so that he can exploit it and then have to base his future production on the certainty that that plant supplies the necessary energy with continuity and safety. Would you do this for an object that was only tested for a few days or a few months? Or would you like to make sure that what you are buying will work for at least a year? And this guarantee, who can give it to you, if no one ever did a long-term test on that product? These are basic concepts, don't you really realize it?
Oh, right! I forgot about that. So Rossi is going to sell his megawatt and IP just as he did for the six years he's had them BEFORE the deal with IH.
First of all, I don't think Rossi would want to sell his IP, since he accepted the settlement just to be able to get it back. As for the 1MW plant, Rossi had shown it years ago to IH (in its first version) and had started to make an agreement with them, which obviously provided the exclusivity for IH. Now that the relationship is closed, Rossi has the chance to sell it to whoever wants it, and maybe he will do it after finishing his study (he is dealing with the analysis of each reactors of the plant, some of which did not work as it was expected to do).
