Posts by Henry

    No problem, what he repeated many times it's irrational simply because it's a long time bluff.

    That example is for Science (not clownery and trickery by AR), Five-sigma meaning applicable to the BoH (boss of hoax) is:

    Five-sigma corresponds to a probability of 3x10^-7, or about 1 in 3.5 million (normal distribution).

    This is not the probability that the e-Cat exists or doesn't exist; rather it is the probability that the e-Cat is not a hoax and the "masterpiece" (he claimed) could be true, getting the confidence of 99.9997% that e-Cat is a hoax.


    Naive buyers beware, he's still seeking for chickens to be plucked. :D

    I'd expect Rossi wants to find funding for the quarkX but can survive on gains so far without that, and values his status as inventor extraordinaire, with a nuclear physics Journal and scientists all over the world as friends.


    Yes, he's searching the next chicken and a new accomplice somewhere.

    The theory written by Focardi is not at all devoided of any scientific basis! All the theories on LENRs are still hypotheses, otherwise we could read about LENRs in the most famous mainstream scientific journals. But that doesn't mean that these theories are unfounded, and what Focardi has written is perhaps not the right explanation for the functioning of the E-Cat, but it is not without foundation. Maybe Focardi has always tested the E-cat in the presence of Rossi, or maybe not .... how can you know that? Were you his assistant? Anyway, before he met Rossi, Focardi had already achieved several successes with cells built personally by him, so his confidence in the LENRs was not born with the E-Cat. What you say about the possibility that Focardi has been bamboozled by Rossi qualifies you as an ignorant who knows nothing about Focardi or about his research field, and who talks nonsense for the only purpose of insulting Rossi.



    Focardi was not a "theorical" and this is very evident reading what kind of stuff he wrote. The theory written by him is quite ridiculus because Ni+H=Cu nuclear fusion CS in that conditions, as known to any good scientists of nuclear Science (GAS), it's tiny (order of 10^-6 barns) and up to now proofs of that claimed fusion simply do not exist.


    As "experimenter", before to met and to be bambolized by Rossi, he made thermal measures based only on temperature (using high questionable calibration methods and so on) but nevertheless he claimed "excess heat". He never made a decent mass flow calorimetry test measuring the heat as due.

    It had been a great delusion, an old dreamer (emeritus-retired professor) and gullible, used by the hoaxer.

    Focardi has proposed a theory to explain a phenomenon and any theory can be overcome over time. Rossi continued with experiments and studies and probably what he saw over time led him to develop another explanation for the operation of his devices. But Focardi has not only written theoretical articles, has also released many interviews in which he talked about so many experimental tests performed with Rossi and described the positive results. But people like you at this point cling to the usual stupid apology by saying that Focardi was old and hence he was deceived by Rossi. Focardi was a great professor and a great experimental physicist, he was perfectly able to distinguish an object running from a scam and the words that he left us are valid for me more than all the small talks that are written on the internet.


    Focardi simply wrote a "theory" devoid of any scientific basis and he never tested any E-Cat independently from Rossi.

    He was a dreamer that was already convinted about CF, Rossi used him to get some "scientific credit" and in order to cover his hoax.

    What did you smoke? I never talked about fusionists, so you can't know my opinion about them .... but you don't need to know, you already have your truth, isn't it? I've already mentioned to you the evidence: the articles written by experts who tested the E-Cat and wrote that it works ARE EVIDENCE. But you ignore them deliberately.


    What did you drink? A very strong drink it seems :D

    What "your experts" wrote (sorry wrote not on Nature) are not scientific evidences that it works like claimed, it proves only that who tested that stuff committed a lot of "mistakes".

    What problem do you have with Mr.Cook? Do you think he can not formulate a valid theory for the fact that he is affiliated with the Department of Informatics? Do you think that only a Nobel can deal with science? It is difficult to seriously consider your way of judging Rossi and his associates if these are your judgmental parameters. In addition, Cook has formulated a theory. If you think that every time someone presents a theory should also make an experiment that validates it, then you are showing all your ignorance about these themes. And not just on these issues: what peer reviewed magazines would have buried the TPRs? Tell me their names, please, I'm just curious to see what you invent!


    In his "paper" (where published? on Nature ? No?) Cook even ignores how works the nuclear fusion he invoked. He wrote a fusion equation for Li+p is:


    .

    claim the absence of Gamma Rays and Neutrons emission

    This is his dream... in nuclear Science (it's not my invention, LOL) it's s well known and proved that kind of fusion it's a lot more complex, just to summarize:



    and the fusion paths are overlapped, the fusion results depend by the proton energy and value of CS.


    Could Cook be a good "Informatics" ? Maybe... but a Nobel (ROTFL) for his funny "nuclear theory" is absolutely out of discussion, that's paper is ticky-tachy.

    There are scientific evidence, the first dates back to the years of the collaboration with Focardi, then there were the tests of Ferrara, Bologna and Lugano, and the first IH (positive) tests, and there are the Swedish professors who are doing a replication of the E-Cat. How many tests do you need to understand that his technology works?


    Really? and where are the proves of? You believe to fusionists's rumors, not need proofs.


    You have a strange ideas of what is a real scientific evidence and probably you also miss that Focardi paper and theory have been "not confirmed" even by Rossi himself. LOL


    Quote

    When Rossi will succeed in transforming his invention into a commercial product, you will have nothing to cling to for keep on talking this way.


    Oh, when? "The year of the cat" ?


    :D :D :D

    Quote
    • Kenneth Kocher September 1, 2017 at 8:33 PM

      Dear Dr Andrea Rossi:


      1- On your quest to achieve Sigma 5 stability, how far along do you think you are: 25,50,75% or more?


      2- Who decides when Sigma 5 has been achieved?


    Quote


    Is this the Sigma 5 calculation procedure of his Mathematical calcula?


    Images

    • pasted-from-clipboard.png

    Which mistakes ? Which errors ?

    The only to see those "errors and mistakes" are the people with an agenda and/or pathoskeptic.


    Double LOL! It seems that you never read critics about TPRs. I suggest do it, obviously if you are able to understand the matter.

    Oh, sorry this is not in the agenda of hoax supporters :D :D :D

    Which clan? Mr. Cook, the Swedish professors, Gullstrom, Levi, Focardi ... do you think they're all part of a clan created to tease people? In recent years, Rossi's technology has been tested by various people, all competent, and the results obtained were positive. I'm sorry for you if you can not accept this reality, but I think it's a problem of yours.



    Nobody of those professors produced scientific evidence neither independent verification.

    Cook (Department of Informatics :D ) wrote just another miracolistic "nuclear theory", none verifiable proof has been provides of his claim.

    Peer review buried TPRs because they contain big errors. So what technology are you talking?

    If you don't see the lacking of substance during all these years it's really a yours problem.

    There is no Rossi's clan. The papers were signed by University Professors and the Swedish group is making research in that topic as Alan referred.

    Insulting people will not make you right. Normally who insults others have no arguments.


    And then?

    Anyone knows that also professors make mistakes.


    Who claim on web his miracolistic and disruptive technology from 10 years without scientific evidences?


    Did Alan referred about Rossi's group researches?

    Yes?

    What? Where are the evidences?

    (no words or speculations, but verifiable proofs)


    Show these proves or your word are like chatters.

    Science is not a faith nor a religion.


    That's what I said in past, a parrot can repeat but you support claims based on faith.

    Where are the due scientific and verifiable evidences after 10 years of Rossi's "says"?

    Papers and TPRs (full of "mistakes") written and signed by members of his clan are not.


    Quote

    You simply dismiss all technology tests by Rossi without any motivation as only an adept to religion would dismiss what he believes to be heresies.

    And of course you also omit that there are is a group that is doing research in that field, as an adept (but most probably just a poor man with an agenda) you select just what confirms your thesis.


    "technology" ? :D

    "Rossi's tests" are not Science, they are fictions.

    A "group", who are? The members (old and new) of Rossi's clan? LOL


    My agenda is simply to respect and defend the true Science and the scientific method, not live to support hoax like you.

    Quote
    • Barry August 29, 2017 at 3:15 PM

      Dr Andrea Rossi,


      In the Gullstrom-Rossi paper the measurements of the voltage were made by a couple of voltmeters, but recently you said here that now you are using an oscilloscope. Why this modification of the measurement system?


    Quote
    • Andrea Rossi August 29, 2017 at 5:31 PM

      Barry:


      The oscilloscope gives us more information about the nature of the electric energy that arrives to the E-Cat QX from the control box.


      Warm Regards,


      A.R.


    Really LOL,

    the nature of the electric energy that arrives to the E-Cat QX from the control box


    this nature is so "sophisticate" that to evaluate and verify correctly the electric energy that arrives to the E-Cat QX from the control box an oscillospe needed but to give evidence in the last "paper" about how much input electric energy has been consumed, a simple DC voltmeter (less than 50 USD) and a 1 ohm resistor have been ued.

    An hilarious comedy... :D :D :D

    You are anticipating the future! You are a Psychic!

    Very easy to anticipate is that independently from the number of arguments, soundness of proofs and people and Institutions involved you and others trolls and haters will be here to defend your only Pure Science.


    No, simply I look back to past comics, "papers", "demos", "TPRs" of years 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, ... stuff for psychopathology.

    True Science is the opposite to these comics.

    Here the only chicken seems to be you, who spends your days reading the blog of a person in which you don't believe. Don't you have best things to do?

    Rossi's new partner will make the deal of his life, if he can be just less sneaky and more competent than the previous one.


    It's so funny and free of charge, I read jonp blog in order to observe at what hoaxes his supporters (like you) are believing.

    The new chicken (from US or Sweden or ...) will be deeply plucked exactly like all the previous.

    The problem was first reported the day before.


    This is the ritual theater play.


    Writing what you do is why I suggested there should be a separate thread for people like you called "Shut Rossi Down"

    If used, it would remove half the junk from the other threads.


    I suggested there should be a separate place for people like you called "Rossi's hoax supporters". If used, it would remove 100% of the junk from Lenr-forum.

    This is exactly what I call Prejudice and having an agenda.

    You can't judge something that has not happened !


    LOL quite simple, all previous demos (playhouse without any possibility of verification of claim by any skilled independent team) were populated exclusively by "third party experts" members or sympathizing of Rossi's clan. Will this next demo really under an independent third party control ? Yes? Are you able to say who are these experts?



    Quote

    If people that do not think like you are part or the "Rossi's clan" , which is your clan ?

    Widom Larsen ? IH ?


    My clan? Simply the real Science, not voodoo science and not part of this kind of hoax. :D :D :D

    1000 quatloo prediction for the QX:


    Rossi will give a similar input power measurement methodology as in the Gullstrom paper, thus making it impossible to make any scientific conclusion from the demo.


    Highly probable, so the E-Cat saga and hoax can continue with the next story, mixed with old claims again re-proposed like a mantra: the market, the robotized factory and other old tales getting on jonp usual compliments from his puppets and supporters.