No. They have claimed to have done so. Far as I know, they have accomplished nothing worthwhile in LENR at all. Claims are not accomplishments else Rossi would be very accomplished in something other than conning people.
Nanospire has always been a legitimate business with clients. Nowadays, they seem to have put their LENR days behind them, and gotten on with life. I think they even dropped any reference about that radiation exposure story from their website.
Not sure if this deserves a different thread; but, I haven't seen a plausible rationale as to why Russia hasn't commercialized some 30 years of ongoing efforts by noble scientists in the area in regards to LENR devices.
Any thoughts about this matter?
I read a ProAtom article about that a few months ago. Basically they said Russia has brilliant scientists, but an entrepreneurial system unable to take their great ideas, and do anything with them.
That would be within the interested scientific/technical community, but from the PR side, the Nature paper mostly killed any potential new interest in the matter from the general public at large.
Agree about the "general public", but at this point we do not need them. Only time they were interested was the first 40 days following the FP's announcement. Since then the LENR flock have wandered in the desert looking for the promised land, and it still is, so nothing changes there.
But the field needs the mainstream science to take notice, and for those who read the Nature paper carefully, they will. Google reported 2 noteworthy successes that make further investigation acceptable, and those in mainstream reading the fine print, will conclude that is only the tip of the iceberg.
Yes, the paper came out before Team Google's Nature article, but the "Editors in Chief" ( sounds better than Moderator 
), say it is okay to discuss it now, as in today. Would they have said this without the Google umbrella effect?
I have no dream about Rossi's technology ever doing anything but languishing in his lab - or perhaps his kitchen. However, I know that his technology is real and works. What I was to see people do is use the knowledge we have gained about his systems to produce their own experiments which can show massive excess heat.
He has had a role, and as of yet it is still to be determined if it was good or bad overall. I tend to think good, because he brought Silicon Valley investment into the field, and sparked new research that may eventually come to fruition.
We will let history decide, but IMO he stole that tech from Piantelli...not that it means anything since he has this Inventors Syndrome, and is going nowhere with it. And Piantelli is doing well, and back in the game thankgoodness. At his age, that is remarkable, and more power to him. Must be that Mediterranean Diet. Maybe he will have the last laugh?
Many say Team Google provided an "umbrella effect" with their Nature paper, providing cover so that LENR can be studied, and discussed in the mainstream without repercussions. I wonder if this proof?
IMO, the Rossi believers can let go of the dream. LENR has many other individuals, and groups who want their support, and undivided attention. They would be more than happy to have just a fraction of the admiration lavished on him. Imagine how it feels for them...after he got away with what he did, what he continues to get away with, yet is admired, while they are toiling away hardly noticed.
If I had to chose today, #1 would be Takahashi's (Technova/Nissan & Tohoku/Kobe/Kyushu/Nagoya Universities) group. One does not have to be skilled in the lab to understand why. They have many on their team, and replicated each other. That is almost as good as a high impact journal peer review. A huge bonus, is that their team requested their work be replicated by others, and put out a rough blueprint to follow. I do believe also, that they would be open to any assistance requested by Team Google? And if it were necessary to keep that assistance quiet, there none better at keeping a secret than the Japanese.
Then, how could one beat Forsley/Mossier-Boss, and their co-dep work? It has been around for many years, and peer reviewed. So confident are they about their results, they are disseminating a kit as part of the STEM program. Better yet, GEC and NASA are incorporating the system into their hybrid space power generation system. That relationship has been ongoing almost 2 years now, at NASA's Plum Brook station near Cleveland, and it still appears to be progressing along well. How is that for confirmation of it's feasibilty? As with Takahashi; Larry, and Pam would I think be more than happy to help.
Not knocking Mizuno/Rothwell, but at this point that is an unknown. If Google had to start tomorrow to lay the ground work for the next research project, at least they have two other good choices already in hand.
But we are still not finished. I am still interested in what Russia has to offer? There has been so much quality research going on there for decades, much of it with positive results. I would think if they took their 3 best, their "list" for Google, would rival our 3. SERGEI ?
Inappropriate move in my opinion. Someone posted some BS from Godes and I responded in the same string. Why that needs to be in clearance is not clear. The guy is not responsible for the crap he posted? Or what? If admins find the need to move the response, fine but then move the original with it. Ah... never mind.
I missed the other post about BEC you were responding to. Yours was in the Mizuno Replication thread, and I thought it was in wrong place so moved here. Also, it is a little strongly worded so best it be here. No reason either to blame anyone back then who thought Rossi had something. Heck, even I did, and everyone knows I am no sucker.
Main thing is that BEC is a legitimate company, with employees/investors, and survived (so far) where others have not. They made some mistakes, misspelled a few words on their website, exaggerated a bit in the beginning, but that is all behind them now.
As I read this, Team Google did try, and failed to replicate Rossi:
"The team's second agenda tested whether heating hydrogen with various powdered metals triggers fusion, yielding heat and fusion byproducts. Italian cold-fusion proponents have made the claim since the 1990s, including Andrea Rossi, the colorful inventor of the E-Cat, a device that Rossi claims is a LENR reactor.
But when researchers tried to replicate Rossi's claims, they realized their tools could easily give inaccurate results at the required temperatures and pressures. So Berlinguette and his students built four of the world's most precise calorimeters, devices that measure the heat given off by reactions taking place within them. They then ran 420 separate trials of the experiments—and none of them clearly yielded excess heat."
They never heard about patents?
Patent law is complicated...especially when it comes to LENR. There have probably been 1000's of LENR "applications", but only a few have ever been approved. The vast majority lapse for varrious reasons, and what IP protections are there then? There is a reason why those like IH, and yes...even Rossi hire Patent Attorney's. My guess is that we do not know the half of it.
If anyone is asking for an experiment with a high chance of success, they need a lecture. I have no idea what these people are looking for. You said that. So I guess you need a lecture. Let us have no confusion about this. There is NO EASY WAY to do this.
Gets a bit busy here sometimes, but in a post above yours I backtracked on what I said about "high chance of success". I admitted making that up on my own, and that the only questions posed us by the GPM, via this thread, is the one in the title, and another in my first post. Everything else stands. Maybe a better way for me to put it, instead of telling Director we should "spare them (Team Google) the lecture" would be to say, give them credit for having thought these things out.
Display MoreIt isn't simple. From 1989 to last month, no cold fusion experiment had a high chance of success. They all took lots of expertise, months or years of effort, and a large dose of good luck. During this time, if we had known of an experiment with a high chance of success, we would have replicated it ourselves. We wouldn't have been sitting around waiting for Google.
I think the Mizuno experiment has a high chance of success. I hope it does. But unless and until it is replicated, I will not know that. Nobody can know that. You would have to be omniscient, like God. The only way to know is to do the experiment. If Google wants to wait and find out whether this experiment has a high chance of success, they will have to wait for a month, or perhaps several months, or perhaps a year. Maybe after that we will know, or maybe we won't.
I think the other Zr-Ni-Pd experiments in Japan also have a good chance of success, but I know much less about them, and I could not replicate the material or tell anyone how to do it. It is a secret. Perhaps they can find out. They should ask Brian Ahern and the people at Ames NL, who apparently replicated it (to some extent).
If they want an answer today to the question "what has a high chance of success" the answer is: "nothing." No cold fusion experiment has a high chance of success. It is like trying launch a rocket into space in 1958. Most of the time, it fails. We have learned a great deal from the failures, but we still fail most of the time. If they want to increase the chances of success, I suggest they buy some pretty little gadgets used in the semiconductor industry that cost anywhere from $50,000 to $250 million, and get cracking. They might get somewhere. Or they might flush that money down the toilet. There is no guarantee of success, and no person on earth can tell them how to succeed.
I, and several others, can probably tell them many ways to fail. I have a sense from their Nature paper that they failed because they did not achieve high loading. It was a vague paper and I can't be sure. I can tell them many reasons why they might have failed to load. Perhaps they already know these reasons, in which case I cannot help.
"I" said they want something with a "high chance of success", not them. Just reading between the lines, and filling in the blanks on my own. What I was asked, is in the form of an exact quote (along with another) included in the title of this thread. The field has claimed success for 30 years, and for Google to request of us the "best" experiment to prove that, should not be this difficult... or so I, and they thought.
Something for everyone to bear in mind.... which I pointed out in a reference above, is that Trevithick is not an enemy of the field. In fact, he is a friend who has been been involved since the beginning, as a young MIT student of Hagelstein. His team is quoted in the article I posted above, and appear to be as equally enthusiastic about continuing the research.
As to the rest of your comments; may I ask if you think Team Google has not already considered everything you say and more? I say we give them some credit, and spare them the lectures.
Very simple; all Team Google wants is something they can try to replicate with a high chance of success. They want us to prioritize those experiments down to 3 maximum. Nothing else.
Hah...you cheated!
Сожалею Gennadiy Tarassenko
. Для нас старая привычка называть всех тех, кто в вашей части света, русскими. Приятно знать, что о тебе позаботился Алан, и ты будешь в ICCF.
Entertainment break from the serious science discussions taking place on other threads:
Andrea Rossi
July 15, 2019 at 2:42 PM
1. still assessing – improving the working ones
2. this is a very complex issue
Now guess the question...don't cheat.
Display MoreResearchers at SRI International have issued a technical progress report covering their review and independent validation of Brillouin Energys LENR Reactor.
"We" can not ignore them, because they report constant COP values over 2.
https://brillouinenergy.com/test-results
Even if Brillouin Energy won't cooperate with Google Research, i think the technical report of SRI, combined with other papers, gives enough information to try a replication.
Problem with Brillouin is that their "Q Pulse" system is proprietary/secret. Without it, the reaction does not work. They are not going to divulge it either. They need to protect their IP to make themselves attractive to investors. No IP, no money. I would think all the researchers now tied up (except Mizuno) with IH/CP/LENRInvest, or going it alone are holding something back for the same reason.
