Posts by joshg

    neither sigmoidal nor I are trying to distort your position.


    Well if you're not trying then I guess it just comes naturally. ;)


    In your case, I detect also from your post here that you are convinced that viable LENR technology now exists (but has not been rolled out due to the worldwide anti-LENR forces). That would perhaps be part of your evidence that such forces exist. My view would be simpler - that commercially viable LENR technology does not to my knowledge now exist. Anyway, it is easy for any actor to prove me wrong by showing commercially viable LENR technology. They'd need a different attitude to independent testing than that shown by Rossi.


    Afraid to tell you that once again you're off the mark. Though I guess it depends on what you mean by 'viable.' If you mean a technology that is read to be commercialized, then my answer is 'probably not yet.' So no, I don't think the technology has come that far yet and so active suppression of a 'ready for prime time' LENR tech probably hasn't happened -- although I pause to stress that I believe it's entirely possible. But I do not take it as evidence that such forces exist. My evidence for that comes from a myriad of sources, only some of which are directly related to the field of LENR per se (such as Stanley Pons saying he went into hiding due to death threats). You can dismiss me as a kooky conspiracy theorist, and I in turn will dismiss you as hopelessly naive.



    While I'm not sure about a viable LENR technology, I feel quite certain that LENR as an 'over-unity' phenomenon does exist. But I don't think we've got a good handle on it, yet. It seems that Brillouin is the closest. Here's hoping MFMP will find something worthwhile with Suhas's technology. Or Me356. But I'm not holding my breath.


    The "powers what be" cannot prevent people from providing an unambiguous and convincing proof-of-principle that LENR exists. To even think that requires that every qualified scientist on the planet is under the thumb of the nefarious forces of energy evil. Sure, they can make it tough to get funding, but it is pretty lame to argue that LENR has not been validated because of lack of funding. And the counterargument that such proof already exists is nonsense.


    I think your view that LENR hasn't had convincing, unambiguous proof-of-principle evidence that it exists puts you in the minority here. I don't feel any need to argue this point with you. The argument that such proof already exists is not nonsense. It just shows your ignorance. And I never argued that LENR hadn't bee validated due to lack of funding.


    LENR has a long way to go before the bad guys could be bothered to plot against it. It is just plain silly to think that a 5 trillion dollar industry is sweating bullets about the pet science dream of a few thousand internet fans that the overwhelming majority of the world has never spent 5 minutes thinking about.


    You really think LENR is the wet science dream of some people on the internet? If so, I'm not surprised you think it poses no threat. But in my opinion you are not only ignorant, you are naive.

    Thanks for this clarification.


    You're welcome. I agree that one of my working assumptions is that the deeply entrenched political and economic powers that currently control the world's energy supply do not want to see their control and profits evaporate due to LENR. And since it is easy to see that those forces are extremely powerful and do not want LENR, it is reasonable to conclude that these powerful forces will fight LENR. They will fight against independent LENR researchers/inventors (at least a the point where they being to show signs of meaningful success) and they will fight to take control of the (what I hope is now inevitable) roll-out of LENR technology. After all, the most effective way of controlling the opposition is to lead it.


    I'm sorry I don't fit into your arbitrary and inadequate classification scheme. I don't like fitting into molds that other people make for me. I guess you need to scrap it. Or make it more elaborate. Perhaps consider a wider matrix of assumptions and beliefs and how they do or don't or can or can't logically fit together in a more flexible grid.

    While I agree with this, I still don't think they would have been clear Rossi would sue.


    There you go again twisting what I said. I never said or claimed that they would have been clear Rossi would sue. I simply said that they were not surprised. Those are not mirror opposites, and I can see you agree with me. So why distort my position by creating a straw man?


    Speaking of distorting my position:


    IHFB, Joshg are type 3.... If I've got this wrong and misrepresented anyone I apologise - I'm sure they will correct me.


    Yes, I will correct you. My position is both in flux and also far more nuanced than your typology allows for. Instead of wasting my time correcting you, I will simply paste a recent post of mine from the playground, which does a pretty good job of laying out where I stand:


    "I don't know that IH is 'evil.' I believe there is (circumstantial) evidence that they engaged in dishonest business practices at least with respect to Woodford and the Chinese (which might nevertheless be legal according to the letter of the law). But dishonesty and shading the truth in business is part of the game. So that doesn't make them evil, just dishonest, though probably not more so than similarly situated companies (and here I guess I'm really talking about Cherokee). Incidentally, that reading of events is wholly compatible with the notion that Rossi has nothing and is simply a con man. [It also doesn't make Rossi's claims more credible just because IH says it ain't so.]


    "The circumstantial evidence for the notion that they are trying to stall or discredit LENR (i.e., that they are "evil") is extremely thin and requires a rather tendentious reading of the facts, I admit. But still and all that reading exists. I have a very cynical (or in my view, realistic) perspective of how power works in this topsy-turvy world of ours, so I am willing to entertain that possibility. In my view it cannot be summarily dismissed as a crazy "conspiracy theory." It awaits further evidence one way or the other. However I believe such a reading of the tea leaves is less compatible with Rossi the con man. It either means that they know Rossi really does have something (even if it's only 1.5 COP instead of 20 or 20,000 or whatever Rossi claims), or that they knew Rossi was a con man all along (or figured it out at some point) and used him to make LENR look ridiculous. Or hell, who knows, maybe that was Rossi's goal all along and IH merely gave an assist. At this point in my life, knowing what I now know, I am willing to consider any possibility, though some are much more likely than others. Bob Greenyer said that we cannot underestimate the forces aligned against LENR. I agree with him."

    hoards of patent applications that are not worth the paper they're written on--they mean nothing unless/until granted, and judging from his track record of patents, experiments, data and physics, the ONLY ones that will be issued are in Italy


    Except that the US granted him a patent in August 2015. Though now I'm being told that is not worth the paper it's written on. Whatever happens, one thing's for sure: the lawyers make out like bandits.

    Fastest way to browse through them is to click link above and in docket view click up arrow in top right corner to sort documents from newest to oldest, because name starts with the document number.

    Nice summary overall, Argon! One thing to add about the best way to view the court documents: Abd Lomax (no relation to Chris, I presume) has posted an extremely helpful and uncharacteristically brief summary of each document with links here: http://coldfusioncommunity.net…en-docket-and-case-files/

    And anyway, YOU are the one saying 'suddenly lawsuit', so aren't you eroding your own assertion

    What? Where? When? No, I am not and did not. YOU are the one who wrote:

    Then Rossi sued them. You can bet that took them by surprise

    My post stated clearly and unambiguously that the lawsuit was not a surprise. Also see my response above to Jed. How am I the one saying 'suddenly lawsuit'? Are you gaslighting me or was this post made during your "temporary" excursion into knucklehead territory? ;)

    I should think that Rossi's lawsuit would come as a surprise to anyone.

    You can think that all you want, and I agree it's chutzpah. But nevertheless IH seems to have been preparing for it well in advance, and a threatening letters were sent by Rossi's lawyer, Annesser, to Jones Day/IH. Here are some excerpts from that letter, dated December 14 from 264-14 (which was a response to a Jones Day letter sent on Dec. 4, which itself was a response sent by Annesser to IH on November 20 and from Rossi to IH on August 3, both of which warned IH about their alleged infringement of the license agreement):


    "IH's intentional infringement upon my client's IP cannot and will not stand.... Demand is again made that IH and IPH international, BV cease and desist such infringement and immediately withdraw all patent and/or PCT applications immediately."


    "Your statement that 'the total price has already been paid' is, in and of itself, an anticipatory breach of the License Agreement and is actionable."


    He suggests a meeting between the parties and says: "At such meeting, my client expects your client to provide reasonable assurances that it will perform in accordance with the License Agreement upon completion of the Guaranteed Performance validation."


    There is simply no way that IH was surprised by Rossi's lawsuit. They may have been surprised at the timing or some of the claims, but they could see it coming a mile away. They may have been aghast at his chutzpah, but not taken unawares. It explains all the precautions they were taking leading up to Rossi's filings with Murray etc., some of which I described in my previous post. By the way, note also that there is nothing in Jones Day's letter to indicate that IH considered any of Rossi's behavior actionable or a violation of the license agreement. So at least as of December 4, 2015, they do not appear to have been contemplating suing Rossi, though perhaps they were waiting on further evidence. We don't know. But my guess is they would not have sued him to avoid unwanted publicity as well as the time and money sink of such a lawsuit. Besides, these guys are angels, right?

    I don't understand how anyone who says this:

    I'm embarrassed by how much time I have spent (wasted?) examining the documents

    Can also claim this:

    Then Rossi sued them. You can bet that took them by surprise

    Nobody who has read any of the following court documents could possibly make such a claim with a straight face:


    1. The letters that were going back and forth between Rossi, IH, and their Lawyers during the second half of 2015


    2. Murray's deposition where he says that IH brought him to inspect the plant at the end of the test in anticipation of litigation


    3. Fabiani's deposition discussing his meeting with Murray and Jones Day lawyers before Rossi filed suit (or Murray's deposition where he talks about the same meeting).


    ROSSI'S LAWSUIT DID NOT COME AS A SURPRISE TO IH. Period. End of Sentence.


    Can we finally once-and-for all drop that meme from this discussion? It has no connection to reality.

    IH may have been promoting their portfolio of technologies as being more 'rosey' than they themselves believed, particularly some time after the beginning of 2015.


    If that's what you think they are guilty of, I think that's an entirely reasonable (even if somewhat speculative) conclusion.


    Well at least we agree on that. :)

    no one has reported yet seeing any statements from IH principals along the lines of "even though we know this thing with Rossi is going nowhere, we'll say to Woodford that it's all great, because then we'll get 50 million dollars." I.e., direct evidence of collusion. That places the burden for IH being evil on very circumstantial evidence and a lot of inference. I suppose they could be smooth enough operators not to leave a trail. So far I find this line of reasoning uncompelling, myself.

    Yes, it is circumstantial. That's for sure. At the same time I don't think we have direct evidence of Rossi conspiring against IH, although it's true that the circumstantial evidence against him is much stronger.


    I have actually been surprised about all the things we don't have evidence about via e-mails in this case. For example: we don't have any evidence of Darden informing Rossi in advance that the Doral debacle does not count as a test. (Yes, I know that there is a lot of testimony around that issue about who said what to whom, but nevertheless there are no e-mails from IH to Darden; there is no written record.) And that is only one of many examples of things that I would have expected to see some written evidence for. I would not have expected to see them writing e-mails to each other about screwing over Woodford (or working with Woodford to screw over Rossi). That would not only have been criminal, it would have been criminally stupid. So the fact that there is no such direct evidence does not surprise me, and I don't think they need to be smooth operators, just use some common sense. So on this point, absence of evidence cannot be construed as evidence of absence.


    I don't know that IH is 'evil.' I believe there is (circumstantial) evidence that they engaged in dishonest business practices at least with respect to Woodford and the Chinese (which might nevertheless be legal according to the letter of the law). But dishonesty and shading the truth in business is part of the game. So that doesn't make them evil, just dishonest, though probably not more so than similarly situated companies (and here I guess I'm really talking about Cherokee). Incidentally, that reading of events is compatible with the notion that Rossi has nothing and is simply a con man.


    The circumstantial evidence for the notion that they are trying to stall or discredit LENR (i.e., that they are "evil") is extremely thin and requires a rather tendentious reading of the facts, I admit. But still and all that reading exists. I have a very cynical (or in my view, realistic) perspective of how power works in this topsy-turvy world of ours, so I am willing to entertain that possibility. In my view it cannot be summarily dismissed as a crazy "conspiracy theory." It awaits further evidence one way or the other. However I believe such a reading of the tea leaves is less compatible with Rossi the con man. It either means that Rossi really does have something (even if it's only 1.5 COP instead of 20 or 20,000 or whatever Rossi claims), or that they knew Rossi was a con man all along and used him to make LENR look ridiculous. Or hell, who knows, maybe that was Rossi's goal all along. At this point in my life, knowing what I now know, I am willing to consider any possibility, though some are much more likely than others. Bob Greenyer said that we cannot underestimate the forces aligned against LENR. I agree with him.

    with every chance of the patent holder losing any infringement suit.

    Patent trolls usually like to threaten a lawsuit in order to settle. Anyway I don't know if the patent can be considered nebulous or ambiguous. Either way, the patent was granted, and I find it hard to imagine the patent had no effect on IH's decisionmaking. In what way I'm not sure.

    It does not each its subject matter in such a way as to allow a reasonably skilled person to reproduce it.

    If your goal with a patent is to teach others your secrets, then it fails. But most people apply for patents to secure IP, and if that's your goal then it's great. Even better if it's a bit nebulous or ambiguous, so it can be applied to a wider range of patent infringement suits.

    Mathis is without doubt a genius. If they taught this stuff in courses then physics would advance its own field exponentially overnight. To suppose the wall and slits don't feature in the field equations is the madness. QED is still useful and partially accurate too and actually makes more logical sense with this thinking.as to why this isn't taught? I'm stumped.

    Yes I agree. One reason it isn't taught is because mainstream, establishment science has turned into something resembling a religious cult. In the BLP update thread, Alan linked to Hotson's paper on the Dirac equation. Hotson relates how he was advised not to pursue a degree in science because he asked too many inconvenient, yet logical and straightforward questions such as "what does it mean for a particle to have intrinsic spin?" [Edit: here are some e-mails a mainstream physicist sent Mathis that reveal a similar experience.] We are now coming up on a century of scientific authorities browbeating anyone who disagrees with QM and the Copenhagen Interpretation and shouting down all dissenters who are dismissed as cranks. "Shut up and calculate!" Livelihoods and reputations depend on it. Mathis has suffered the same fate as LENR pioneers.


    You will likely find some interest in my paper speculating on how Mathis's theories can help us understand LENR (and in fact all "over-unity" power generating devices): https://goo.gl/5kgB0G


    Edit: And yes, you are right, physicists (and laypeople) are enamored with the esoteric. We are indoctrinated into it early on, told that the quantum world is mysterious and complex. People who go into physics nowadays accept that, they embrace it. They feel themselves somehow select members of a privileged priesthood who are able to understand the unfathomable. Occam's razor has been turned on its head, and now the more complex and mystical your explanation, the more likely it is to be seen as true. Straightforward, elegant solutions are viewed with scorn. Physics since the early 20th century has been a move towards idealism with ever more esoteric theories. It is a hard habit to break, a difficult addiction to give up. And it means admitting that the castle you thought you lorded over turned out to be nothing but a house of cards.

    A thought occurred to me. Rossi's patent was granted August 25, 2015. I haven't gone back through the chain of letters between Rossi, IH, and their lawyers, but that is around the time when things between IH and Rossi started to turn south. I wonder if the patent approval might have some bearing on IH's (and Rossi's) decision-making.

    You have been good about taking dates into account with specific statements. But there are many other statements that have been made as well which need to be placed into the timeline, and an allowance for the possibility of different understandings of different IH principals at different times.

    Yes, I agree that there are other data points, and I can certainly see how a different narrative could be constructed out of them. I have chosen to focus on the specific points that sort of blow that narrative apart. My assessment is not just based on the events revealed in this case so far but also on other data points with respect to IH that were dug up and pieced together last year when this whole thing exploded.


    Anyway, I hope I'm wrong about IH just as much as I hope I'm wrong about Rossi. And at this point it seems I'm much more likely to be wrong about IH than about Rossi. But that's about as far as I'll budge for the time being. I am open to revising my opinion about IH on the basis of new evidence, just as I did with Rossi. But my opinion on the issue is vastly unimportant to anyone but myself.

    They have been gullible fools who have ignored countless enormous red flag warnings

    The irony here is that pro-IH people are ignoring all the red flags around IH. As for me, I think both IH and Rossi stink to high heaven. I'm long overdue for a shower to get the stank of this affair off me...