Perhaps Rossi's lawyer advised him that he was not permitted to release the ERV report under the terms of the contract he signed.
I doubt it will be all that enlightening, anyway. It will contain none of the meaty stuff about who did what, when, how, and why.
It will be a load of data points, endless fuel for discussion, but probative of nothing - because the ways in which the data were generated will be the subject of most of the debate.
Nigel Appleton
Member
- Male
- Member since Apr 2nd 2015
- Last Activity:
Posts by Nigel Appleton
-
-
Nigel - are you implying that Walker's companies are potential ECat investors?
No, not at all. I know nothing of the investment plans of these companies. I suppose any company with interests in power generation MIGHT be POTENTIAL investors in LENR, given convincing demonstrations.
-
Walker - Do you have an opinion about how the big companies you mention will view the possible fact that they might be dealing with a litigious little company that took $10M for a paid-up license, didn't take the time or care to deliver then sued their customer?
Why, if they ARE involved, they'll do their due diligence, weigh one thing against another, and decide what level of risk they are willing to take, and write their proposals with appropriate safeguards.
Just like any investor should.
-
Display More
"A certified 1MW of output power for 24 hours with a COP of 4+ would be worth more than $89M and yes,
that could be raised from the existing network on relatively short notice. I don't expect you to be able to grasp or understand that. I also don't want to come across as anything other than confident in my convictions and our capabilities."Dewey Weaver just confirmed that Industrial Heat LLC has not the money to pay Andrea Rossi.
#facepalm #prnightmare
Oh get real!
You surely don't think that VC funds have large amounts of cash just lying about? That's not their job -
Every competent scientist has intuition, which basically makes your popperoid approach "let's disprove until it's really disproven and doesn't work at all (and if it's not falsifiable, well... means it's not scientific, that it doesn't work!)", moot and void.
They know where to go and what to look for, but pushing this kind of meme ensures those suffering from self-doubt will go nowhere.I understand which this meme is so widespread amongst fools and status quo lovers, though: it's basically the best way to feel safe about one's science and to paint a paradigm into a corner, because of the unknown and undetected, which are unfalsifiable: they cannot be proven or disproven, so when they have an effect on the experience, this experience is not scientific.
I wonder if Popper thought his concept would become a cultist's coercitive mindtrick?
Granted, intuition is often where the seed of the hypothesis comes from.
The rest of your post is Just. Plain. Wrong; and the Popperian concept of falsifiability is extremely useful.
-
Wow, that falsifiability meme taken to its absurd extremities. I do hope you're a troll, and not a scientist.
Enjoy your stagnant progress and status quo loving groupthink, otherwise. But maybe this is what you seek?
What on earth are you gibbering about? Every competent scientist I've ever worked with is aware of the necessity to design experiments that would disprove their pet hypothesis if it was wrong.
If you don't do it, someone else will. It is better to know you were wrong before anyone else shows it.Progress is not made by producing strings of false hypotheses. It comes from very critical examination of any new finding or phenomenon, building on that which is repeatable, improving and refining.
Rossi designs his trials and demonstrations with complete confirmation bias. Hence he gets the results he wants to see.
I very much hope he has something. Had he been an intellectually honest scientist/engineer, he could have given unequivocal evidence of whatever it is years ago. AND without being too revealing of intellectual property.
-
Where'd Sifferkoll go? I see him bopping thru the different strings on occasion but why the uncharacteristic silence all of a sudden? I have two possible theories - one is that he has seen the light and / or he may have gotten dumped for thenewflame. For that matter, Mats has been painfully silent of late as well. At least he got the title of his book correct. Just wondering.......
Perhaps, like many people, he has begun to take on board the sheer flakiness of Rossi and his doings, and is reserving judgement.
A great shame it is that Rossi is so oblivious to the desirability of adhering to high standards in science and engineering, and data collection and interpretation.
It is incredibly important to try very hard to disprove one's own hypotheses. How else are you going to know how right you were? -
I'm wondering. ..
If the Quark thingy works anything like as claimed, would IH consider themselves to have rights to it under the contract as signed by Rossi?
-
It looks to me as if Rossi either didn't engage a good lawyer to help write the contract, or did, but then ignored advice.
Ignoring advice seems to be his stock in trade. If he had listened to competent lawyers, scientists and engineers he would be a long way ahead of where he is now.
-
that means no facts?
the more you talk about it the more I get the feeling you're just whistling through the graveyard...
Dewey has become a disappointment. Anyone can make vaguely threatening remarks and trot out platitudes
Bring back that ol' fire and brimstone, Dewey!
-
I have deleted the offending post. But to a certain extent if Thomas feels that his position at work has been compromised by events in this forum he has to take some responsibility for that himself. If he were my employee so obviously spending hours every day posting on web forums I would not be happy about it. Since he posted under his real name with a photo-avatar of his younger self Thomas could hardly claim his cover was blown solely by Sifferkol.
I will certainly delete any more posts by Sifferkol that step across the line. And maybe those of a few others too. They know who they are.
The relationship between any poster and his/her employer is none of anyone else's business.
-
To my mind, the great "sin" is to allow reference to a poster's "real life" employment details, especially when they are irrelevant to whatever discussion is in progress.
Had Thomas been in the employ of Leonardo, IH, or any other outfit with a commercial interest in LENR, that might have been different; indeed one would hope it would have been declared
I do not always agree with Thomas, or his tone and approach - but he did nothing to warrant such treatment.
-
My opinion of the moderation of this forum has just plummeted. As, indeed, has my opinion of Sifferkoll, whose treatment of Thomas Clarke verged on the vindictive.
-
Thomas - regarding Mats and reports, that little exchange has proven to be quite productive. I've gotten a couple of messages that hint that that Rossi has shared some information from the "ERV" with Mats and apparently others as well. Very good development if that is the case.
I'm guessing that Rossi is trying to recruit some assistance for when the "ERV" goes public. We may see how smart or gullible these folks are in the near future.
No, no, Dewey.It's another dose of truth we need, as promised.
Not speculation. We have enough speculation
-
Here we go again. Team Rossi drops leading insinuations and fabrications casually into their postings in an ongoing effort to shape the argument their way. An insipid strategy from these folks (F1 & F2). I'm thinking that we need another dose of truth in the near future.
Absolutely!
Bring it on, Dewey!
-
Tom,
We don't know yet if the 1 year trial is irrelevant. You even admit as such by saying it: "appears to have no relevance". The more I read, the more it appears we are taking sides based on very, very limited information. Yes, I agree with you and most others, that from what we do know, what has been fed to us, so far points against Rossi.
But then again, there are others with inside information who still think this may go Rossi's way. You never allowed me to copy to here Mat's Lewan's email to you the other day. He makes it very clear in that email that he has information you, and we, are not privy to. Information that makes him believe that, not only are you wrong about this test, but also the others you have reviewed (6 Oct. /Lugano), and concluded they were not overunity....although for the record, you did conclude, as your best guess estimate, that Lugano was COP1.07.
AH secret information !
Known only to the few.
This is going to make for great melodrama
A Musical and a film too, I shouldn't wonder
-
We shouldn't expect to ever hear a single word from me356 ever again.
He has went down the commercialization path.
Is that so.
Quelle surprise
On the one hand it leaves one with a nasty taste in the mouth.
On the other, if he can demonstrate LENR, then so can others
I've no real objection to people profiting from their own work. However, in my experience to date, "conventional" business people are absolutely lousy at a) rewarding inventors justly; and b) getting really innovative products to market.
-
we will see who was right, and I expect "sorry" and "forgiven" to be exchanged afterward.
I live in hope of it eventually being clear who is right, and who wrong.
However, "sorry", and "forgiven" are words rarely seen on fora such as this.
-
Granted that it doesn't PROVE that he has nothing. Which is why I said that was my *theory*. I didn't say that he definitely has nothing because I can't know. But why wouldn't he want a true verification? And REALLY? I'm down voted? Was my post offensive to somebody in some way?
1. No-one knows for sure why Rossi is so resistant to proper verification, but many think the worst.
2. Your post was in no way offensive. Except to True Believers. It is impossible to post on this subject without one person or another taking offence
3. Look at it this way. If you have been down-voted, at least someone has read your post. -
Bob Greenyer's visit to me356 has been delayed by illness.
Is there any news of the return to health of me356, and the continuation of his work?
