frankwtu Member
  • Member since Feb 14th 2015
  • Last Activity:

Posts by frankwtu

  • Robert George of Brillouin Interview

    Jed


    I quoted directly from Brillouin's website. I have no idea how true the claims are. Now there are two targets for the skeptics. Rossi and Brillouin. I wonder if this will increase exponentially?


    Alan, sorry if I left you out. I think looking at your recent fan mail (ABD Jed and Mary) you could well qualify.


    Thanks for the correction above.


    Best regards
    Frank

  • Robert George of Brillouin Interview

    Has Brillouin developed its own technology or has some of it have come from Rossi by way of IH who claim the right to share with such as they wish.


    From Brillouin website:


    "Brillouin Energy has been able to demonstrate that it can reliably initiate LENR in its reactors by applying electronic pulses to the metal rod and stopped by ceasing the pulsing and achieve net energy output ratios exceeding four (“4X” or ‘four times excess heat’). Brillouin Energy is not aware of any other group that has been able to achieve the combination of the level of reproducibility, continuity of operations, control of reactions, and a net energy output ratio significantly exceeding 1X, which has been achieved by Brillouin Energy. Coupled with the tritium tests – which confirmed that the excess heat generation can confidently be ascribed to nuclear reactions – Brillouin Energy’s research results demonstrate that LENR can realistically be considered a potential future energy source. - See more at: http://brillouinenergy.com/#sthash.q8xjvZFB.dpuf"


    Best regards
    Frank

  • The Industrial Heat Answer

    Paradigmnoia


    Quote from Paradigmnoia

    What IH is not stating directly is that they were sold the equivalent of toilet paper for $10 million, while being told it was a recipe for an amazing technology.


    Well they have defended their right to share that toilet paper under the licence agreement to “sublicense the E-Cat IP to anyone they wanted on any terms they desired, without any confidentiality restrictions”.


    Best regards
    Frank

  • Industrial Heat Responds to Rossi’s Complaints

    Just a small tit bit:


    "Furthermore, the E-Cat IP was disclosed to Industrial Heat and IPH pursuant to the License Agreement without any restriction on Industrial Heat or IPH’s further disclosure of such. In fact, the License Agreement permitted Industrial Heat and IPH to sublicense the E-Cat IP to anyone they wanted on any terms they desired, without any confidentiality restrictions. See License Agreement §§ 1 & 16.4."


    While IH are denying most of the complaints but not all, they are claiming they had no restriction on further disclosure of Rossi's IP. So while almost everything else they say seems to point to Rossi's invention not working, they appear to be quite protective of their ownership and use of his IP. Interesting to say the least. (Ref page 16 & 17)


    Also this:


    "Counter-Plaintiffs were unable to replicate any of Leonardo and Rossi’s claimed results or otherwise generate measurable excess energy. This led Counter-Plaintiffs to realize that there were only three possible conclusions: 1) Leonardo and Rossi’s claimed results, including the purported results from the Validation, were fabricated; 2) Leonardo and Rossi did not provide all of the E-Cat IP to Counter-Plaintiffs as was required under the License Agreement in exchange for the $10 million payment; or 3) both". (Ref Page 26)


    So which is it? Fabrication by Rossi and Penon or Rossi not providing IP? But how could it be both? If it was a fabrication there would be no IP.


    This is cherry picking I know and I suggest this document be read and digested along with the original complaint for cross reference.


    Best regards
    Frank

  • Rossi: “I Confirm the [Industrial E-Cat] Production is Started”

    Mary


    Rossi takes up 120% of your time and has elicited thousands of words from you almost exclusive of any other subject, he has certainly got your attention.


    My understanding is that free energy scammers are ignored by serious analysts and only entertained by the gullible.


    You, Jed and Abd appear to be giving Rossi far more credibility and respect than he could expect from peer reviews, a bevy of 'super troupers'.


    See: http://www.digplanet.com/wiki/Super_Trouper_(spotlight)


    Best regards
    Frank

  • JM Chemical Products is the Key Witness in the Rossi vs. Industrial Heat Case

    Jed


    Quote from JedRothwell

    If the profession is licensed and regulated


    We don't know that for sure, its just your opinion. The equipment was 'experimental' involving unproven theoretical principles. But in any case, if a case is to be brought against Rossi for contravention of the Florida Boiler Laws, this will be a completely separate issue and absolutely nothing to do with the claimed 'breach of contract'.


    Lets take your point on face value. If it is proven Rossi's experimental E-cat is a boiler and contravened Florida Boiler Laws, he would be fined a few hundred dollars. But that would not in any way determine whether the contract was or was not breached.


    Best regards
    Frank

  • JM Chemical Products is the Key Witness in the Rossi vs. Industrial Heat Case

    Jed


    The data may be believed by the Jury or it may not. This applies to any data that Rossi, Penon or IH et al may put before the Jury. I suspect they will be like a rabbit in the headlights of a fast approaching car, like the rest of us.


    I see your data and logic like a saying we have across the pond, it depicts a searcher for the truth entering a dark tunnel saying "I can see the light at the end of the tunnel" only to find out it is the train coming towards him in the opposite direction.


    Don't lose heart, at the very least you Abd and Mary are providing some light relief.


    Best regards
    Frank

  • JM Chemical Products is the Key Witness in the Rossi vs. Industrial Heat Case

    Jed


    Quote from Wyttenbach

    May be Axil is right: And the E-cat is a large wormhole.., which sucks the brain of everybody who is trying to touch it...


    Is there a dowsing rod that someone could use to detect a wormhole, perhaps that would be expensive, maybe it would be cheaper just to look for worms; or snakes. Abd thinks there are snakes involved.


    No Jed, Mary, Abd, don't touch it Oooooooh, too late.


    Best regards
    Frank

  • Jed Rothwell on an Unpublished E-Cat Test Report that “Looks Like it Worked”

    Cam


    Quote from cam

    i.e. true believer. Do you mean that Ascoli65 is a true believer? I would be cautious.


    My understanding is that a pseudo-skeptic is not a 'true believer' or a true 'skeptic' but someone who has mischief in mind and who does more damage to the process of discovery than good. My comment about 'pseudo-skeptic' was based on Abd's admission that he was indeed a self confessed pseudo-skeptic - sometimes. My comments were not aimed at Ascoli65 at all, so if that was the impression I gave I apologise.


    Best regards
    Frank

  • JM Chemical Products is the Key Witness in the Rossi vs. Industrial Heat Case

    Jed


    Quote from JedRothwell

    Nope. That's not how business works here on Planet Earth. That is not how contracts are enforced. Only on Planet Rossi. Here on earth you have to actually do what is specified in a contract. You can't just write a preposterous report claiming that you did it. Even if the other side agreed to a report beforehand, you still can't issue a preposterous report and expect to be paid.


    I don't disagree. But the Judge takes what Rossi says as being true unless it is challenged. So, it must be challenged, right?


    Quote from JedRothwell

    You saw evidence in I.H.'s motion to dismiss.


    We saw 8 requests for a motion to dismiss but only 4 were successful, the same applies to evidence presented by both sides, it is subject to the courts ruling.


    Best regards
    Frank