axil: I guess such negative feedback on the plant performance would have been kind of hard to reconcile with IH simultanously raising >100 million dollars in investment money using the said 1MW plant...
I don't get what you mean. What does contractually required cooperation have to do with raising money?
The IH contract states that the E-Cat must produce a COP equal to or greater than 4 for 350 non sequential days out of a testing period of 400 days. Rossi must therefore meet performance specs on a day by day basis.
This contractual condition begs for a daily reconciliation of each days performance results between Rossi, the ERV and IH. If IH does not agree with the ERV on a day by day basis, IH should have registered a complaint to the ERV in writing that the E-Cat performance spec was not met for that given day.
I am not aware of any daily reconciliation performed between the ERV, Rossi, and IH. Yet the performance spec was verified to be meet for a period of 352 nonsensical days without one exception or protest being registered by IH to the ERV.
This seems illogical to me. How can IH reject the accumulated daily performance results of 352 days without protesting any of those individual daily performance results while the test was being run?
There was a cooperation clause in the licence agreement. It states that Rossi and IH will both do their best to work together to overcome any problems encountered in the 400 day test.
I seems to me, that the lack of feedback from IH about the performance problems that the E-Cat may have perceived by IH requires that IH provide at least a daily rejection of the day's performance results. This lack of feedback from IH to Rossi on E-Cat performance problems is a violation of the cooperation clause as stated in the license agreement.
Display MoreAx said:
There are not going to be hundreds of companies. At present, other than those related to Rossi, there are Brillouin and George Miley and maybe a couple of more in Italy and Scandinavia. And when Rossi crashes, which is certain, those will be in doubt as well.
Nobody can "disprove" LENR. You can't prove something does NOT exist. All you can do is test stuff and see if it works or not. And so far, there is NO proven high power LENR which can be sustained and which has been properly tested and replicated and published. So there are only claims. Like Rossi's and Defkalion's.
See Leif Holmlid
I am not familiar, Ax. What's the power, the COP if relevant, the duration of the test and the link to the publication please?
How did you get all that information that you site about Rossi... you do research. The field of LENR development is expanding greatly. The amount of work required to combat the commercialization of LENR systems will also grow exponentially, so be prepared to increase your workload substantially. You will not have to fight the battle along, however. There will be hundreds of new professional FUD spinners coming out of the sponsorship of and funding by LENR energy competitors so your status in the fight will be greatly deluded by many others.
But it would be simpler and more direct to strike at the root of LENR itself and show that LENR is impossible as a natural process. Rather than debunking a hundred LENR companies one by one, just disprove LENR itself.
Any proposed method of LENR needs clean, clear objective and independent evidence, not disciples. Religions need disciples, not scientific claims. Clean, clear evidence for *any* high power claim to LENR is simply lacking. And by now, we know or should know how the claims of Defkalion and Rossi should be viewed.
Dr. Leif Holmlid provides the claims and he is peer reviewed.
If Me356 can get the LENR reaction going with just nickel powder and hydrogen, his activation method is something special and powerful.
Or grabber -Li6 -> Li7.
This is counter the the transmutation reported in the Lugano test where most Li7 became Li6.
Big news out of brilliant light power June 28
looks good
Please post any links that his event produces here on this forum.
I suppose if they are still friends it follows that they respect him. But I know many people who dealt with Rossi, gave him money, and thought they were his friends. He betrayed them. He defrauded them, or used them as pawns to defraud others, the way he uses Lewan. The way he uses his supporters here from "planet Rossi" who think he always tells the truth and can do no wrong. He lies, manipulates, and does terrible experiments. He has destroyed many lives. His victims despise Rossi, to the point where some of them hope he again ends up in jail. I think it is likely he will go back to jail.
I hope that someone manages to stop him before he defrauds more people.
The ends justify the means...
Consequentialism is the class of normative ethical theories holding that the consequences of one's conduct are the ultimate basis for any judgment about the rightness or wrongness of that conduct. Thus, from a consequentialist standpoint, a morally right act (or omission from acting) is one that will produce a good outcome, or consequence. In an extreme form, the idea of consequentialism is commonly encapsulated in the English saying, "the end justifies the means",meaning that if a goal is morally important enough, any method of achieving it is acceptable.
The development of LENR is so important to the continued existence of the world, human society, and the great improvement in the welfare of people worldwide, the reduction in poverty, increase in health, any level of bad behavior is acceptable to reach that goal.
/* Matches are not regulated by the NRC but neutrons are. */
The usage of fire is also regulated, but you can still build neutron sources, like the fusor legally. In Germany, as probably is for most other EU countries, the legal limit is a dose of 20 uSv/h, if the load is at most 250 hours per year.
I am only guessing here but most people do not want a neutron source in their basement. They also might not want their property neutron activated and producing gamma radiation especially if their basement is also used as a rec room. But this is only a guess.
Display MoreThe testimony of a witness is presumed true unless controverted. The question is not "truth." "Problem" is a story, an interpretation, and is neither true nor false. It's a problem for you. So fix your problem, I would suggest.
However, Alan, you imagine you know my purposes and motives. I'm not writing for you, obviously, except for a brief comment like this. In my long posts, I'm writing for myself, as I research and reflect, and for anyone who cares to watch over my shoulder.
There have always been those who protest, but .... I didn't ask them to read the stuff. Yes, moderators may feel that they need to skim over, at least, but that would not likely create understanding. In some cases, I'm a world-class expert, and I became that way by writing as I do and observing responses. There are people who catch and correct my errors! But there are others who would really prefer that I go away. These often seize on length as an excuse for complaining. People like Joshua Cude. Who then writes plenty when it suits him.
Let me put it this way: the people whom I most respect like what I write. There are people who appreciate depth. And there are those who want it all boiled down and pre-digested. It takes all kinds. I write polemic for the latter group, and I'm not bothering to do that here -- it's a lot more work! -- because I have no critical interest here, other than study of the related topics.
So, I have some long posts here. And then there are large numbers of posts here that are pure time-wasters. Which one is more of a "problem"?
I have advised you to write a one paragraph abstract as a writeup forward for those who don't have the time or strength to get into the depth. Writing a summary will also teach you how to condense the important items and points into a compact writing style.
How to write an abstract
https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/656/1/
Obviously ME356 is going to continue to this odd charade of answering safe questions while holding back any real information after promises made. I think it is time for everyone to just stop giving him attention as he has suggested for those who are skeptical of him. I think he is feeding off the attention...sometimes it's best to stop feeding the trolls...
Making good progress in LENR experimentation is a thankless job. It only engenders jealousy, hate and bad manners. The LENR believers are the worst. Their attitudes remind me of the nursery school case were three and four years olders are being potty trained. Some precious kids learn how to use the potty early and they smell good. Others cannot figure out how to make the smell go away, so they become jealous of the sweet smelling kids and begin to hate them. The smelly kid begin to hate themselves because they cannot figure out how to smell good. This flaw of jealousy and hate in human nature lasts for a lifetime even into their nineties
Display MoreMe356 wrote "It is really beautiful phenomenon, that reflects how far mankind is."
And he will tell no one, how he got it!
This approach just shows, that the mankind is still driven with animal attitudes.
/* Would you want a 16 year old kid and a pack of his friends setting up a lab in his basement and exposing his family to a near lethal dose of neutron radiation */
You could burn yourself and whole your home with box of matches, but it's still available in every store and kitchen.
Matches are not regulated by the NRC but neutrons are. If matches were regulated by the NRC, the NRC would take your matches away. impose a heavy fine on you for their use and if you resist them, put you into prison.
There is simpleton thinking where plain language cannot make an impression. Sometimes experience becomes the best or the only teacher.
There does not look like there is any Q pulse like EMF stimulation, just heat. THere is no triac input power like the original experiments. Could this lack of EMF stimulation be the reason for the lower COP?
TMP500
http://www.weiku.com/products/…_THERMOMETER_TPM_500.html
Rossi states that his activator(mouse) has a COP of 1.2
But in the QuarkX there is no SSM but with a very high COP. Is the difference between the two type reactors that there EMF stimulation used in the quark and none in the Mouse ?
Andrea Rossi
June 23, 2016 at 5:05 PM
Ruby Shale:
As usually, the guys of Industrial Heat are ready to sell what they do not own: now they are offering us to buy back our license, the license that they do not have anymore ( see the press release made few weeks ago from our Attorney John Annesser). I wonder if they will try to sell the Colosseum of Rome as well.
IH has no more any license related to out IP and whomever is interested to us in North America, Central America, South America, Russia, China, Saudi Arabia and Emirates must contact exclusively:
http://www.leonardocorporation.com
[email protected]
I have received other comments asking me what I think of the proposal made today by IH and this comments answers to all the others. I will not comment further issues to be discussed in Court.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Because I do not like to see people defrauded. Swedish people, in this case.
Jed Rothwell has developed hatred for two LENR developers: J.Hadjichristos and A.Rossi. R Mills has produced less results for far more capital invested yet remains unhated. Mills has gone through about 100 million in capital in 20 some years, Rossi 11.5 in a dozen years and J.Hadjichristos was salaried and left LENR research destitute. Emotional thinking holds no quarter to logic.
Every magician has a props man, and I guess Fulvio was good at his job.
If that is part of IH's legal strategy, IH might have to show a conspiracy existed between Fabiani and Rossi to deprive IH of Rossi's IP.
Axil - spell this slowly with me.....C O N T R A C T O R. Next, delete "employment" from any associative cogitation of FF with IH. Now type this ten times: "Fulvio Fabiani was an IH contractor for a limted time who reported to Andrea Rossi".
Read that 10 times then let me know if you get it.
Since Fabiani was just as likely to deprive IH of the Rossi IP, can Rossi be held liable for IH failure to substantiate that IP. In general, wither from incompetence or malice from others, Rossi might not have intentionally deprived his IP from IH. IH must show proof that Rossi expressly and intentionally deprived IH of the full extent of his IP. Does IH have that proof? If so, what is it?
I wonder if the issue of Fabiani's loyalty will arise in the upcoming trial. First off, what employment agreements did Fabiani enter into such as non compete and non discloser. Does the contractor have the same loyalty obligations as an employee? And what does it mean to the contractual status of the employer when a contractor undercuts his employer in favor of another party's' interests? If the member of the IH employment team intentionally undercuts his employer to favor the other party in the fulfilment of a contract, does the other party in the contract have any legal liability. Such fine distinctions are critical in in the outcome in legal cases. What does Florida state law say about this issue?
