Re: [Vo]:Miley and other professors can only take money from official sources
McKubre believes in the Conservation of Miracles. I agree with him and would add my version: Different dog, same leg action. What is at the heart of the FPE drives all the effects we see. For all the early years the effect was called the Fleischmann-Pons Effect. Why change it now? I say give them the respect and credit they deserve. To hell with avoiding their names like they are poison and calling the effect they discovered a politically nice title of LENR as if not mentioning FP will make that new paper on LENR more politically correct and likely to get published. FP did the hard yards and paid with their careers. They deserve to be remembered and the effect they discovered named after them until the stars burn out and it all goes black. //On 12/19/2011 6:27 PM, Horace Heffner wrote: The use of the term FPE is misleading and confusing. The Wright brothers invented the first controlled flight. It would be nonsensical and misleading to call every kind of winged aircraft a Wright machine, not distinguishing between a 747 and a piper cub. The FP protocol was Pd-D low voltage electrolysis. This differs from Claytor's low pressure gas cells, Storm's glow discharge, Mizuno and Ohmori's HV DC plasma electrolysis, or solid state electrolyte experiments, Piantelli's gaseous Ni-H, Arata and Zhang's double structured spillover cathode using Pd black, Patterson's layered Pd-Ni beads, Szpack's codepositon cells, Les Case's Ni-carbon catalyst in gaseous deuterium, etc. etc. Not all airplanes are the same, not all LENR devices are the same. There are important differences. There is a vocabulary that describes those differences, and which is used by people in the field. Who is going to know what you are talking about if you call every LENR device an FPE? On Dec 18, 2011, at 10:23 PM, Aussie Guy E-Cat wrote: On 12/19/2011 5:19 PM, Mary Yugo wrote: If it were possible to replicate FP and build on it, there are thousands of people and companies who would have. They have been replicated. In many labs all around the world. Try searching in Jed's archives. Have you not listened to anything Jed has said about the history of the FPE? People lost their jobs and had their careers destroyed for reporting successful replications. Even FP themselves enjoyed new labs and millions of dollars in funds from the Japanese and never came up with definitive proof of their concepts. Amazing statement that. Too bad it is not correct. What they failed to do, as I understand it, is to produce a commercially ready device. Forged or ignored? I don't think there is any good evidence for that. Did you not see the unedited positive for FPE excess heat MIT results versus the edited no FPE excess heat MIT results? Someone in MIT forged the data and the Hot Fusion lab guys had a party. As for ignored, you must be joking? Right? Like the 24 SPAWAR peer reviewed results that were ignored? BTW Mary we are still testing and developing a FPE device. I wish you good luck with that-- I really do. We will get it done. Will I get my hands on a working FPE device? You can bet on it. I am not betting for you if you think you're getting one from Rossi or Defkalion! And if you are wrong? As you know I'm talking to DGT to do a factory visit. Just might talk Leonardo in one as well. Best regards, Horace Heffner http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
Re: [Vo]:Miley and other professors can only take money from official sources
Hello gang, As a friend of Abd Lomax, I am keenly interested in his evolving plans over the last two years to make a cheap do-it-yourself-at-home kit for replicating the detection of neutron tracks in plastic film adjacent to a 50 ml thin wall plastic cell with a palladium chloride and lithium chloride electrolyte and platinum wire anode and cathode -- the prototype SPAWAR experiment, codeposition. Despite the over 20 reports by SPAWAR for about a decade, there is, as far as I know, no such simple device that anyone can buy and run. How about some dedicated collaboration to aid Lomax? within mutual service, Rich
[Vo]:Heavy photon
One other thought is that for a given electric charge to move in a way that creates a photon it must move it's inertial mass around. The issue is that the inertial mass of an electron and a proton is highly different. This begs the question of if it takes the same energy or not to release the photon from a proton and how it's mass creates a potentially different photon. I don't know what answers exist in physics for these questions. Anyone know? -- If we doubt we can hardly hope to Shine. Be Alive when you are alive! You can't BE later. Life is not important, significant, serious or weighty. Life is a dance to be enjoyed. It is You and I that are important, Living life is at stake! There is no someday. There is no right way. There is only now. Virtue or Vice, a moment of pain for a lifetime of pleasure, or a moment of pleasure for a lifetime of pain. Construction or destruction, it is just a matter of order in which you experience pain and joy, spirit and integrity or weakness of flesh. If you aren't making mistakes, you aren't doing enough. How you feel is feedback on what you are currently doing and not informing you of what to do, don't wait to feel like it. Do it and see how you feel.
Re: [Vo]:Private information about Rossi was the Ampernergo tests described by McKubre
- Original Nachricht Von: Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com An: vortex-l@eskimo.com Datum: 19.12.2011 03:03 Betreff: [Vo]:Private information about Rossi was the Ampernergo tests described by McKubre Here is a key issue. Rossi's personality is an open book thanks to his website. That is unique to the 21st century. People who dismiss him because of his personality should think about that. Suppose in 1879 Edison had a kept an Internet blog while he invented the incandescent light. Suppose everyone could follow along with his trials and tribulations and his frequent crazy ideas. The comparison to Edison is a good one. What you forget, are the differences and there are many: If Edison had multiply announced a closed loop flow calorimetry test with all details to be made in University of Uppsalla, then he had done so. If Edison had invited Kullander and Essen, then he had not sent them home without definitive results. Edison did never instrumentalize scientists to support his claims, he had not the necessity to do so. If Edison had promised to give a device to UniBo or Uppsala, he had done so. If Edison had invited the european patent office for a test in a lab of UniBo with international high level scientists and journalists, then he had made this as announced in a lab of UniBo and not a doubtful test in his own shed. Edison had invited his worst pathological sceptics and enemies to the demo. If Edison had invented this device then he had made a demonstration as good as possible and would sell to known customers. It must also been said, Edison was a clever genius amateur, but he never made a really grundbreaking invention. The self excited generator was invented by Siemens. All really groundbreaking inventions where made by others. He made applications and improvements, but no groundbreaking inventions. Even the thermal electron emission, what he has discovered, was finally explored and developed by others. Peter
Re: [Vo]:e-cat replication by Celani
Couple of clarifications from an Italian speaker over on Talk Polywell: - Regarding the Gammas Celani stated that they are the final product of the reaction that can be removed (note: this was really not clear.) - Regarding the Catalyst, Celani thinks that it must be a metal like Platinum or Palladium. On 17 December 2011 12:45, Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com wrote: I've been informed of another typo/mistranslation. Celani has been working with (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giuliano_Preparata) friend of Eugene Mallove http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qq6YY8eFeYIfeature=related one of the first mainstream science's physicist that believed in cold fusion and worked with Martin Fleischmann in Milan in the late 90's: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=35T-gAvaKn4: According to Celani the reaction between Ni and H would be catalyzed by PHONONS . The phonons are not particles but the points where it contacts the thermal-electromagnetic waves in phase, produced by thermal agitation in the lattice of nickel. Are points of summation of multiple heat waves produced by a variety of nickel atoms that vibrate at the same frequency ... these frequencies would provide hydrogen (as HYDRIDES?) the ability to overcome the Coulomb barrier and make the merger of its proton to the core of nickel (as I understand it). [Editor's note. I'm asking Celani verification of this and other points of his speech] The power density is very high, and some of his reactions Celani has exceeded 1400 watts per gram of nickel, which is higher than that of uranium fission in the cladding Zirconium.Although Celani you hear talk about technological reality, as it has exceeded 200% yield (ie COP=2) for two weeks. Celani has worked very hard with the great Japanese scientist Arata. The Japanese government has funded plenty of not only the research but also those of three foreign groups who have had full access to the laboratory by Arata. Celani was able to perform various types of experiment and measurement, even the craziest. Among these groups was that of MIT and INFN (Italian national institute of Nuclear Physics; Celani et al). Worked with the Arata DEUTERIUM ... but as the import and production of Deuterium prohibited by the peace agreements had to self-refine it with the sulfur-iodine cycle . Arata was also excess power of 60 watts, which is easily measurable. The improvement over Fleishman and Pons was when he abandoned the traditional Arata electrode foil. Not only that, the best layers were not perfectly flat, shiny but rather rough, porous, etc.. In short, had to increase the surface area of contact between palladium and deuterium. When he returned to Italy, Celani modified experiments (*along with Professor Giuliano Preparata*) and began to use wires of nickel and hydrogen at high pressure (eliminating water, oxygen and ' Oxonian ) He realized that the power increased by using highly porous nickel. He returned to Japan. There Arata began to experiment with nickel of every size possible. He found that the nickel nanopowder in aggregates of less than 20 Ångström you had the best reactions. Indeed, the reaction took place (although not as powerful) even at room temperature. As for gammas they are an end product of the reaction, not desired by Celani, that you can do without. By applying radio frequency (microwave) to dust (I did not know whether that of Rossi or his), he had a massive production of gamma rays, which Celani does not want and does not consider useful. As the catalyst for him are metals such as platinum or palladium (must resist the micro-points where the heat reaches thousands of degrees, ionizing hydrogen) Celani comes to scientific reality PROCESS. Celani says that the Greeks of today have passed Defaklion Rossi, from the technological point of view. [Editor's note. others believe that Defkalion has put together a nice frame and a beautiful body ... but do not have the engine]. He says that this attitude of secrecy is stupid [ed. Celani is understandably affected by a) not being invited to the demonstration of 28 October and 2) the negative response to the proposal of Rossi independent testing under the aegis of INFN], and in the end, continue along this road will not have the triumph of science and industrial deserves it. According to Celani, Rossi arrives to yield around 600%.
Re: [Vo]:Mass media exposure kills SPAWAR cold fusion research
On Sun, 2011-12-18 at 15:10 -0500, fznidar...@aol.com wrote: I don't know. The hotter the better the reaction. The hotter the more hydrogen is driven out and the worse the reaction. If I knew I would do it. But doesn't your theory revolve around the idea that the distances affected by the nuclear forces change when molecules vibrate at a specific frequency -- the frequency which will allow an impedance match between energy as it moves from inside a nucleus to outside the nucleus -- the frequency at which the individual molecules are vibrating at 1.094 MHz-meters? If so, then doesn't this translate into a specific temperature? Craig On Sun, 2011-12-18 at 15:10 -0500, fznidar...@aol.com wrote: I don't know. The hotter the better the reaction. The hotter the more hydrogen is driven out and the worse the reaction. If I knew I would do it. Frank Frank! As I understand your theory, you believe that cold fusion can be optimized within a lattice vibrating with an angular velocity of (1.094 / pi) meters / sec, right? Can you predict the optimum temperature of Rossi's nickel that would facilitate this effect? Craig Haynie Manchester, NH
Re: [Vo]:Miley and other professors can only take money from official sources
On Sun, Dec 18, 2011 at 7:01 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Gene went from a top academic career to working in a warehouse at night to feed his family. He was a science writer. Respectable, yes. Top academic career, no. Fleischmann and Pons had a terrible time. Too much money? They had better funding after the CF announcement than at any previous time in their careers. I think it traumatized Pons. It did not bother Fleischmann as much because he is a tough, cynical person who had nightmare experiences during WWII. The Gestapo beat his father to death, and he himself barely escaped. Your arguments for cold fusion are aiming for the gut, not the mind... He told me that he knew calling that press conference would mean the end of his career. It would seem the reports on the sociology of CF are about as reliable as those on the science. It was not the end of his career. He was already resigned from his academic position at Southampton, so he had no job to lose. As it happens, he worked in a well funded lab in France until 1995, when he retired. France is not Siberia. How is that the end of his career? He knew he would be vilified and ridiculed for the rest of his life. So he says now, but his self-satisfied grinning during the press conferences after the announcement tell a different story. He went into it knowing what would happen. Right. That his research would be well funded until retirement. Until the announcement, PF were funding the experiments themselves. That was an act of courage. It was an act of fear. Fear that someone else would get priority.
Re: [Vo]:Miley and other professors can only take money from official sources
On Sun, Dec 18, 2011 at 8:38 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: He sure knew what he was getting into. Fleischmann wrote a lighthearted account of this, quoted in Beaudette's book. It starts off with Arrhenius in 1883. He was one of the most important electrochemists in history, like Faraday. He made a revolutionary discovery. As any student of history would predict, this led the academic authorities to kick him out of the university. He was vilified and ridiculed for years and years. Finally, long after, he won a Nobel prize. You mean like Einstein got kicked out of university? No, because his revolutionary ideas got him kicked *into* university. You mean like Planck's ideas got him kicked out of university? No, because they named one after him. etc. You can't just make shit up to please your audience. I'd like to know of a professor who got kicked out of university for a revolutionary idea. At least one that turned out to be right, and didn't have religious objectors. Because, contrary to your claim, Arrhenius does not provide an example. I admit, my source does not go beyond wikipedia, but according to it, his controversial ideas were presented in his doctoral thesis, so he didn't have a position to be kicked out of. And while there were local skeptics, his degree was granted, if only as 3rd class. Nevertheless, when the dissertation was sent to other European scholars, they came to Sweden trying to recruit him. Doesn't really sound much like cold fusion, does it? The Swedish Academy then awarded him a grant to study with the likes of Boltzmann and van 't Hoff. That doesn't sound like years and years of vilification does it? A few years after his graduation, he was *given* an appointment at the Stockholm university, and was a full professor/chair (rector) about a decade after his PhD. That doesn't sound much like ridicule, does it? It did take almost 20 years to recognize his work with a Nobel prize, but maybe the fact that the prize was not initiated until about 17 years after had something to do with that. He got the 3rd one in chemistry. He was on the Nobel committee from the beginning until his death, and it seems he was not a particularly nice guy himself, arranging awards for his friends, and attempting to deny them to his enemies. He also got involved in racial biology (eugenics) later in his life. That happens so often I am astounded anyone believes the myth that scientists welcome new ideas. Well, you would not be astounded if you actually paid attention to history, instead of twisting it to rationalize your fervent belief in cold fusion. Right about the same time as the CF announcement, high temperature superconductivity was discovered, and the Nobel prize was awarded -- now get this -- one year later. The discovery had no theory to support it, was unexpected, and yet the discoverers were not dismissed from their positions. Amazing, isn't it. Of course, most Nobel prizes (including Einstein's) take much longer, because it usually takes time for the importance to become manifest, but new discoveries are always celebrated in science, by scientists. As I've said before, the most revolutionary ideas in science in centuries, relativity and QM, were accepted almost as quickly as they could be developed. Because they fit the evidence so perfectly. Just about every evaluation of merit in science, from granting of degrees, to awarding academic or industrial positions, to granting awards, to giving funding, to accepting manuscripts for publication, to any degree of fame and glory, has as its first criterion: *** novelty ***. What scientists fear is not new ideas (they crave them), but wrong ideas. Scientists are skeptical; they have to be. Skepticism is a critical filter in guiding research. Without it, they would simply flounder around, like, well, like cold fusion researchers. Of course, that sometimes leads to rejecting good ideas, and finding the right balance is the most important quality a scientist can strive for. Linus Pauling was clever enough to win 2 Nobel prizes, and yet he ridiculed quasi-crystals. At the other end is perhaps Josephson, who got a Nobel prize for work done as a graduate student, when skeptical guidance was still provided by others. On his own, his lack of skepticism has led him to dabble in the paranormal, and to a life's work wholly unworthy of his brilliant beginning. After the press conference, Dr. Caldwell came up to us and said, Well, when my grandfather proposed electrolytic disassociation, he was dismissed from the University. At least that won’t happen to you. I said to her, “But you are entirely mistaken. We shall be dismissed as well. Their ideas were dismissed, but they were not fired from academic positions. Fleischmann was already retired, and continued to list his affiliation with Southampton until at least 1994. Pons was tenured, and left voluntarily for greener pastures and more money in France.
Re: [Vo]:Miley and other professors can only take money from official sources
On Sun, Dec 18, 2011 at 7:01 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Gene went from a top academic career to working in a warehouse at night to feed his family. He was a science writer. Respectable, yes. Top academic career, no. Fleischmann and Pons had a terrible time. Too much money? They had better funding after the CF announcement than at any previous time in their careers. I think it traumatized Pons. It did not bother Fleischmann as much because he is a tough, cynical person who had nightmare experiences during WWII. The Gestapo beat his father to death, and he himself barely escaped. Your arguments for cold fusion are aiming for the gut, not the mind... He told me that he knew calling that press conference would mean the end of his career. It would seem the reports on the sociology of CF are about as reliable as those on the science. It was not the end of his career. He was already resigned from his academic position at Southampton, so he had no job to lose. As it happens, he worked in a well funded lab in France until 1995, when he retired. France is not Siberia. How is that the end of his career? He knew he would be vilified and ridiculed for the rest of his life. So he says now, but his self-satisfied grinning during the press conferences after the announcement tell a different story. He went into it knowing what would happen. Right. That his research would be well funded until retirement. Until the announcement, PF were funding the experiments themselves. That was an act of courage. It was an act of fear. Fear that someone else would get priority. It is good some debunking of Rothwell's fantastic history.
Re: [Vo]:Miley and other professors can only take money from official sources
On Sun, Dec 18, 2011 at 8:54 PM, Aussie Guy E-Cat aussieguy.e...@gmail.comwrote: This is so wrong as to make me very upset. I'll do anything I can to get hold of a FPE device from Leonardo or Defkalion or who ever and shove it up some FPE deniers back side so far the sun will never shine on it again. And you wonder why I have no time for most university chalk heads. Ah, yes. Is this how cool, rational minds prevail? Rothwell knows how to get people's blood to boil. Would that he could do the same for their intellect.
Re: [Vo]:Miley and other professors can only take money from official sources
Cude what does this have to do with FP having been replicated in many labs all over the world? You need to accept that the FPE is real and move on to working out why it happens. Oh BTW you just might apologize to FP for the treatment they received by you and your mates. Would you please disclose if your income / pay check depends on you not believing the FPE is real and / or working to trash anyone who does? I ask because all you apparently contribute to this list is trashing the FPE. On 12/19/2011 11:23 PM, Joshua Cude wrote: On Sun, Dec 18, 2011 at 8:38 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com mailto:jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: He sure knew what he was getting into. Fleischmann wrote a lighthearted account of this, quoted in Beaudette's book. It starts off with Arrhenius in 1883. He was one of the most important electrochemists in history, like Faraday. He made a revolutionary discovery. As any student of history would predict, this led the academic authorities to kick him out of the university. He was vilified and ridiculed for years and years. Finally, long after, he won a Nobel prize. You mean like Einstein got kicked out of university? No, because his revolutionary ideas got him kicked *into* university. You mean like Planck's ideas got him kicked out of university? No, because they named one after him. etc. You can't just make shit up to please your audience. I'd like to know of a professor who got kicked out of university for a revolutionary idea. At least one that turned out to be right, and didn't have religious objectors. Because, contrary to your claim, Arrhenius does not provide an example. I admit, my source does not go beyond wikipedia, but according to it, his controversial ideas were presented in his doctoral thesis, so he didn't have a position to be kicked out of. And while there were local skeptics, his degree was granted, if only as 3rd class. Nevertheless, when the dissertation was sent to other European scholars, they came to Sweden trying to recruit him. Doesn't really sound much like cold fusion, does it? The Swedish Academy then awarded him a grant to study with the likes of Boltzmann and van 't Hoff. That doesn't sound like years and years of vilification does it? A few years after his graduation, he was *given* an appointment at the Stockholm university, and was a full professor/chair (rector) about a decade after his PhD. That doesn't sound much like ridicule, does it? It did take almost 20 years to recognize his work with a Nobel prize, but maybe the fact that the prize was not initiated until about 17 years after had something to do with that. He got the 3rd one in chemistry. He was on the Nobel committee from the beginning until his death, and it seems he was not a particularly nice guy himself, arranging awards for his friends, and attempting to deny them to his enemies. He also got involved in racial biology (eugenics) later in his life. That happens so often I am astounded anyone believes the myth that scientists welcome new ideas. Well, you would not be astounded if you actually paid attention to history, instead of twisting it to rationalize your fervent belief in cold fusion. Right about the same time as the CF announcement, high temperature superconductivity was discovered, and the Nobel prize was awarded -- now get this -- one year later. The discovery had no theory to support it, was unexpected, and yet the discoverers were not dismissed from their positions. Amazing, isn't it. Of course, most Nobel prizes (including Einstein's) take much longer, because it usually takes time for the importance to become manifest, but new discoveries are always celebrated in science, by scientists. As I've said before, the most revolutionary ideas in science in centuries, relativity and QM, were accepted almost as quickly as they could be developed. Because they fit the evidence so perfectly. Just about every evaluation of merit in science, from granting of degrees, to awarding academic or industrial positions, to granting awards, to giving funding, to accepting manuscripts for publication, to any degree of fame and glory, has as its first criterion: *** novelty ***. What scientists fear is not new ideas (they crave them), but wrong ideas. Scientists are skeptical; they have to be. Skepticism is a critical filter in guiding research. Without it, they would simply flounder around, like, well, like cold fusion researchers. Of course, that sometimes leads to rejecting good ideas, and finding the right balance is the most important quality a scientist can strive for. Linus Pauling was clever enough to win 2 Nobel prizes, and yet he ridiculed quasi-crystals. At the other end is perhaps Josephson, who got a Nobel prize for work done as a graduate student, when skeptical guidance was still provided by others. On his own, his lack of skepticism has
Re: [Vo]:Miley and other professors can only take money from official sources
I state again. 1 professor, 1 grad and 2 high school students replicated FP in a MIT lab in front of over 100 ICCF 10 participants in 2002 and 2003. The observed excess heat and transmutations. The FPE is real and can be easily replicated. Sorry but I have a Royal Flush and you have a pair of 2s. On 12/19/2011 11:22 PM, Vorl Bek wrote: On Sun, Dec 18, 2011 at 7:01 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Gene went from a top academic career to working in a warehouse at night to feed his family. He was a science writer. Respectable, yes. Top academic career, no. Fleischmann and Pons had a terrible time. Too much money? They had better funding after the CF announcement than at any previous time in their careers. I think it traumatized Pons. It did not bother Fleischmann as much because he is a tough, cynical person who had nightmare experiences during WWII. The Gestapo beat his father to death, and he himself barely escaped. Your arguments for cold fusion are aiming for the gut, not the mind... He told me that he knew calling that press conference would mean the end of his career. It would seem the reports on the sociology of CF are about as reliable as those on the science. It was not the end of his career. He was already resigned from his academic position at Southampton, so he had no job to lose. As it happens, he worked in a well funded lab in France until 1995, when he retired. France is not Siberia. How is that the end of his career? He knew he would be vilified and ridiculed for the rest of his life. So he says now, but his self-satisfied grinning during the press conferences after the announcement tell a different story. He went into it knowing what would happen. Right. That his research would be well funded until retirement. Until the announcement, PF were funding the experiments themselves. That was an act of courage. It was an act of fear. Fear that someone else would get priority. It is good some debunking of Rothwell's fantastic history.
Re: [Vo]:Miley and other professors can only take money from official sources
On Dec 18, 2011, at 11:18 PM, Aussie Guy E-Cat wrote: McKubre believes in the Conservation of Miracles. I agree with him and would add my version: Different dog, same leg action. What is at the heart of the FPE drives all the effects we see. For all the early years the effect was called the Fleischmann-Pons Effect. Why change it now? The effect initially was the ability of a palladium cathode sufficiently loaded with D, by electrolysis, to produce excess enthalpy excess heat without the corresponding tritium or neutrons expected using hot fusion branching ratios. It was later discovered, by Bockris and others, that Pd transmutation occurred also, as a byproduct of the FP effect, that different regimes produced different products. This might have some justification being called part of the FP effect, because it was still palladium Many other discoveries followed which were not by FP, and not in their regime of research. Claytor's low pressure gas cells, Storm's glow discharge, Mizuno and Ohmori's HV DC plasma electrolysis, or Mizuno's solid state electrolyte experiments, Piantelli's gaseous Ni- H, Arata and Zhang's double structured spillover cathode using Pd black, Patterson's layered Pd-Ni beads, Szpack's codepositon cells, Les Case's Ni-carbon catalyst in gaseous deuterium, etc., are not called the called FP effect. Cold fusion itself is not even entirely the domain of FP. Muon- catalyzed fusion was called this also. This muon catalysis effect was predicted by Andrei Sakharov, and first observed by Luis Alarez. Steve Jones et al. were preparing to make a cold fusion announcement regarding achieving 150 d-t fusion per muon, not enough for energy break-even. The FP effect, initially called by some (mostly Americans) the PF effect, was called that to distinguish it from muon catalyzed fusion, the other kind of cold fusion. Muon catalyzed fusion obeys conventional hot fusion branching ratios. The FP effect does not. Other forms of cold fusion can have differing branch ratios, especially very different T/n ratios, and differing triggering conditions. However, to call every such discovered effect a Fleischmann and Pons effect is to greatly diminish the work of others. The general field has been called LENR, CANR, LANR, and finally CMNS, for a reason. We owe Fleischmann and Pons a great debt for discovering the general field of research, this part of cold fusion which shows such great promise, unlike muon catalyzed fusion at this time. Still it is inappropriate to stamp their name on every effect discovered by everyone in the field, just a it would be inappropriate to include their names on every patent that will eventually be issued in the field. This is disrespectful to the contributions of those who have followed. It also brings confusion to the terminology that has developed over 20 years. Best regards, Horace Heffner http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
Re: [Vo]:Miley and other professors can only take money from official sources
On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 7:10 AM, Aussie Guy E-Cat aussieguy.e...@gmail.comwrote: Cude what does this have to do with FP having been replicated in many labs all over the world? They haven't been. McKubre himself has said that no one has achieved quantitative reproducibility. And interlay reproducibility always requires the interchange of personnel. Doesn't say much for the robustness of the effect. What cf researchers call replication is not what is considered replication in the rest of science. Which is why the expert panels in 1989 and 2004 judged the evidence to be inconclusive. Would you please disclose if your income / pay check depends on you not believing the FPE is real and / or working to trash anyone who does? No, like just about everyone else on the planet (probably everyone), I would benefit immensely if cold fusion were real. Like the the industrial revolution, everyone's standard of living would improve. What's not to like about that? That's why these arguments about political opposition and conspiracies are just rationalizations for people who are heavily invested, emotionally and otherwise, in the cold fusion delusion. I ask because all you apparently contribute to this list is trashing the FPE. On 12/19/2011 11:23 PM, Joshua Cude wrote: On Sun, Dec 18, 2011 at 8:38 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.commailto: jedrothw...@gmail.com** wrote: He sure knew what he was getting into. Fleischmann wrote a lighthearted account of this, quoted in Beaudette's book. It starts off with Arrhenius in 1883. He was one of the most important electrochemists in history, like Faraday. He made a revolutionary discovery. As any student of history would predict, this led the academic authorities to kick him out of the university. He was vilified and ridiculed for years and years. Finally, long after, he won a Nobel prize. You mean like Einstein got kicked out of university? No, because his revolutionary ideas got him kicked *into* university. You mean like Planck's ideas got him kicked out of university? No, because they named one after him. etc. You can't just make shit up to please your audience. I'd like to know of a professor who got kicked out of university for a revolutionary idea. At least one that turned out to be right, and didn't have religious objectors. Because, contrary to your claim, Arrhenius does not provide an example. I admit, my source does not go beyond wikipedia, but according to it, his controversial ideas were presented in his doctoral thesis, so he didn't have a position to be kicked out of. And while there were local skeptics, his degree was granted, if only as 3rd class. Nevertheless, when the dissertation was sent to other European scholars, they came to Sweden trying to recruit him. Doesn't really sound much like cold fusion, does it? The Swedish Academy then awarded him a grant to study with the likes of Boltzmann and van 't Hoff. That doesn't sound like years and years of vilification does it? A few years after his graduation, he was *given* an appointment at the Stockholm university, and was a full professor/chair (rector) about a decade after his PhD. That doesn't sound much like ridicule, does it? It did take almost 20 years to recognize his work with a Nobel prize, but maybe the fact that the prize was not initiated until about 17 years after had something to do with that. He got the 3rd one in chemistry. He was on the Nobel committee from the beginning until his death, and it seems he was not a particularly nice guy himself, arranging awards for his friends, and attempting to deny them to his enemies. He also got involved in racial biology (eugenics) later in his life. That happens so often I am astounded anyone believes the myth that scientists welcome new ideas. Well, you would not be astounded if you actually paid attention to history, instead of twisting it to rationalize your fervent belief in cold fusion. Right about the same time as the CF announcement, high temperature superconductivity was discovered, and the Nobel prize was awarded -- now get this -- one year later. The discovery had no theory to support it, was unexpected, and yet the discoverers were not dismissed from their positions. Amazing, isn't it. Of course, most Nobel prizes (including Einstein's) take much longer, because it usually takes time for the importance to become manifest, but new discoveries are always celebrated in science, by scientists. As I've said before, the most revolutionary ideas in science in centuries, relativity and QM, were accepted almost as quickly as they could be developed. Because they fit the evidence so perfectly. Just about every evaluation of merit in science, from granting of degrees, to awarding academic or industrial positions, to granting awards, to giving funding, to accepting manuscripts for publication, to any degree of fame and
Re: [Vo]:Miley and other professors can only take money from official sources
On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 7:15 AM, Aussie Guy E-Cat aussieguy.e...@gmail.comwrote: I state again. 1 professor, 1 grad and 2 high school students replicated FP in a MIT lab in front of over 100 ICCF 10 participants in 2002 and 2003. The observed excess heat and transmutations. It wasn't enough to convince the DOE in 2004. And why would they suppress it if they actually believed it? The prospect of other countries -- unfriendly countries -- getting the technology first would surely scare them shitless. The FPE is real and can be easily replicated. That's not what the researchers say. They always talk about how erratic the results are, how quantitative results are elusive. And if tens (or hundreds or thousands) of watts are being produced by nuclear reactions, why can no one set up an isolated device with no input energy and persistent output energy? You know, like an RTG.
Re: [Vo]:Miley and other professors can only take money from official sources
Horace I suggest that call should be made when we have nailed the exact process that caused Effect A and Effect B to have a different pathway. Until that time, if it ever occurs, I feel Different Dog, Same Leg Action is the road to follow. I have no problem if say WL is proven to be the correct pathway. It is still the FPE effect produced by a WL pathway. It will never be the WL effect as they did not discover it. History always records the initial discover and that is what should happen with the FPE effect. If it so happens that the H. Heffner theory is the correct pathway, it becomes the FPE effect produced by the HH pathway. Then both the effect discover and the pathway discover are recorded in history. Each then gets a fair go. On 12/19/2011 11:45 PM, Horace Heffner wrote: On Dec 18, 2011, at 11:18 PM, Aussie Guy E-Cat wrote: McKubre believes in the Conservation of Miracles. I agree with him and would add my version: Different dog, same leg action. What is at the heart of the FPE drives all the effects we see. For all the early years the effect was called the Fleischmann-Pons Effect. Why change it now? The effect initially was the ability of a palladium cathode sufficiently loaded with D, by electrolysis, to produce excess enthalpy excess heat without the corresponding tritium or neutrons expected using hot fusion branching ratios. It was later discovered, by Bockris and others, that Pd transmutation occurred also, as a byproduct of the FP effect, that different regimes produced different products. This might have some justification being called part of the FP effect, because it was still palladium Many other discoveries followed which were not by FP, and not in their regime of research. Claytor's low pressure gas cells, Storm's glow discharge, Mizuno and Ohmori's HV DC plasma electrolysis, or Mizuno's solid state electrolyte experiments, Piantelli's gaseous Ni-H, Arata and Zhang's double structured spillover cathode using Pd black, Patterson's layered Pd-Ni beads, Szpack's codepositon cells, Les Case's Ni-carbon catalyst in gaseous deuterium, etc., are not called the called FP effect. Cold fusion itself is not even entirely the domain of FP. Muon-catalyzed fusion was called this also. This muon catalysis effect was predicted by Andrei Sakharov, and first observed by Luis Alarez. Steve Jones et al. were preparing to make a cold fusion announcement regarding achieving 150 d-t fusion per muon, not enough for energy break-even. The FP effect, initially called by some (mostly Americans) the PF effect, was called that to distinguish it from muon catalyzed fusion, the other kind of cold fusion. Muon catalyzed fusion obeys conventional hot fusion branching ratios. The FP effect does not. Other forms of cold fusion can have differing branch ratios, especially very different T/n ratios, and differing triggering conditions. However, to call every such discovered effect a Fleischmann and Pons effect is to greatly diminish the work of others. The general field has been called LENR, CANR, LANR, and finally CMNS, for a reason. We owe Fleischmann and Pons a great debt for discovering the general field of research, this part of cold fusion which shows such great promise, unlike muon catalyzed fusion at this time. Still it is inappropriate to stamp their name on every effect discovered by everyone in the field, just a it would be inappropriate to include their names on every patent that will eventually be issued in the field. This is disrespectful to the contributions of those who have followed. It also brings confusion to the terminology that has developed over 20 years. Best regards, Horace Heffner http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
Re: [Vo]:Miley and other professors can only take money from official sources
I can't believe you really think that is a correct assessment. FP have been replicated. Just have a read through Jed's archives. Christ man high school students replicated PF with both excess heat and transmutations, in a MIT lab and in front of over 100 ICCF 10 attendees? Where you there? Have you seen their data? How can you make such statements that are just not correct. On 12/19/2011 11:49 PM, Joshua Cude wrote: On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 7:10 AM, Aussie Guy E-Cat aussieguy.e...@gmail.com mailto:aussieguy.e...@gmail.com wrote: Cude what does this have to do with FP having been replicated in many labs all over the world? They haven't been. McKubre himself has said that no one has achieved quantitative reproducibility. And interlay reproducibility always requires the interchange of personnel. Doesn't say much for the robustness of the effect. What cf researchers call replication is not what is considered replication in the rest of science. Which is why the expert panels in 1989 and 2004 judged the evidence to be inconclusive.
Re: [Vo]:Miley and other professors can only take money from official sources
On Dec 18, 2011, at 11:18 PM, Aussie Guy E-Cat wrote: McKubre believes in the Conservation of Miracles. I agree with him and would add my version: Different dog, same leg action. What is at the heart of the FPE drives all the effects we see. For all the early years the effect was called the Fleischmann-Pons Effect. Why change it now? I say give them the respect and credit they deserve. To hell with avoiding their names like they are poison and calling the effect they discovered a politically nice title of LENR as if not mentioning FP will make that new paper on LENR more politically correct and likely to get published. FP did the hard yards and paid with their careers. They deserve to be remembered and the effect they discovered named after them until the stars burn out and it all goes black. George Washington is regarded as the father of the United States just as Fleischmann and Pons are regarded by many as the fathers of LENR, or CMNS. A single individual deciding after these many years to call the entire United States George Washington or Washington would be inappropriate on their part, and confusing to others, to say the least. It is just as inappropriate now to call the field PFE. Cold fusion, LENR, LANR, CANR, and CMNS, these are all terms that have established, distinct, and useful meanings, just as the US, or United States, does. It is confusing for someone from Utah to say they are a citizen of Washington if they have never even been there. Best regards, Horace Heffner http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
Re: [Vo]:Miley and other professors can only take money from official sources
Did the DOE visit the students results? I suggest not. Did they sit in front of a SEM and see the transmutated products? I suggest they did not and never left their office. Sorry but real word results trumps DOE theory anytime. As far as replicating PF, did you actually read the test results the students did? I think the DOE would be severely embarrassed by 1 prof, 1 grad student and 2 high school students blowing up their negative FPE spin job. We will replicate the students results. It should be very low cost and simple to do. Something that any lab could do and for less than pocket change. If the students results in 2002 and 2003 did not convince the DOE, then then the DOE needs to be torn apart as it is non functional. On 12/19/2011 11:56 PM, Joshua Cude wrote: On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 7:15 AM, Aussie Guy E-Cat aussieguy.e...@gmail.com mailto:aussieguy.e...@gmail.com wrote: I state again. 1 professor, 1 grad and 2 high school students replicated FP in a MIT lab in front of over 100 ICCF 10 participants in 2002 and 2003. The observed excess heat and transmutations. It wasn't enough to convince the DOE in 2004. And why would they suppress it if they actually believed it? The prospect of other countries -- unfriendly countries -- getting the technology first would surely scare them shitless. The FPE is real and can be easily replicated. That's not what the researchers say. They always talk about how erratic the results are, how quantitative results are elusive. And if tens (or hundreds or thousands) of watts are being produced by nuclear reactions, why can no one set up an isolated device with no input energy and persistent output energy? You know, like an RTG.
Re: [Vo]:Miley and other professors can only take money from official sources
On Dec 19, 2011, at 4:29 AM, Aussie Guy E-Cat wrote: Horace I suggest that call should be made when we have nailed the exact process that caused Effect A and Effect B to have a different pathway. Until that time, if it ever occurs, I feel Different Dog, Same Leg Action is the road to follow. I have no problem if say WL is proven to be the correct pathway. It is still the FPE effect produced by a WL pathway. It will never be the WL effect as they did not discover it. History always records the initial discover and that is what should happen with the FPE effect. If it so happens that the H. Heffner theory is the correct pathway, it becomes the FPE effect produced by the HH pathway. Then both the effect discover and the pathway discover are recorded in history. Each then gets a fair go. It is hubris to think you or I or the members of this list combined should or could make such a determination. Best regards, Horace Heffner http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
RE: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:Our FPE device
Hi Aussie Guy, Jones Beene and I kicked around a similar idea of a pressurized tube with the h1 squeezing Out instead of the Arrata style nested Pd reactors where the pressurized H2 squeezes into the interior tube. We exchanged ideas regarding pourous staninless steel tubes with electroless plating of Ni instead of Solid Pd to reduce cost. The other concern using a tube was the reduction in surface area compared to nano powder. I am told electroless plating makes a better sealing layer for PSS and then regular electroplating on top of it to build up surface area Of active geometries for the escaping h1/x to migrate through - I wanted to bury the tube in nano powder but was given to believe the fractional Hydrogen must be continually maintained in a lattice or suppressed geometry and the interface between the tube exterior wall and the nano powder would allow the fh1 to return to normal h2. Regards Fran -Original Message- From: Aussie Guy E-Cat [mailto:aussieguy.e...@gmail.com] Sent: Sunday, December 18, 2011 11:14 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:Our FPE device We have not stopped our work on building a working FPE device. Jed your archives are a gold mine. I'm trying to read ALL the papers as my brain is very good at picking out individual items from different papers and then piecing them together. It was interesting to read the Storm paper giving a lot of hints about how to do a strict FPE replication. I noted his method to clean the palladium. We are working on using a coil formed with thin wall 1 mm diameter Ni tubing, which has the pressurized H2 inside. In the middle of the coil we have placed a ceramic heater with the whole assembly paced in a water jacket. This way the high pressure H2 is only applied to the inside of the tubing. We need a good way to clean the inner and outer surface of the Ni tubing.Would anyone expect Storm's method to work with cleaning thin Ni tubing formed into a coil? Jed I really don't know how you are still sane, knowing what you do and how so many people have either been screwed or ignored. But then maybe I'm too proactive and should learn a bit of your calmness.
RE: [Vo]:Private information about Rossi was the Ampernergo tests described by McKubre
From Susan Jed, How we call inidipendent the tests made by Ampenergo ? Do we have something else excepts a bunch of words ? Do you know who they are ? These guys are all friends or in someway related to Rossi. Somewhere there is the list and where thy come from (Leonardo, LTI..). I wouldn't be surprised also that some of them are involved in the TEG story. Sorry but in my world independent test has a different meaning. IOW, you don't trust individuals like McKubre. The fact that you (or I) have not personally met McKubre and as such don't personally know them, and therefore cannot assess their trustworthiness is a perfectly reasonable explanation as to why you or I might not immediately take their word pertaining to what appears to be extraordinary claims. OTOH, the danger of subscribing to such an attitude is that it also gives one convenient carte blanche to pretty much dismiss the statements of McKubre's and others like McKubre - because it is personally convenient to do so. I notice you support your reasoning by claiming it's all nothing more than ...a bunch of words while conveniently dismissing the evidence that backs up all of those words. Well, Susan, truth of the matter is: I have never met you either. Much of what I take from your posts also seems to boil down to ...a bunch of words. Dear me! What to do... what to do... Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:Private information about Rossi was the Ampernergo tests described by McKubre
Susanna Gipp susan.g...@gmail.com wrote: Do we have something else excepts a bunch of words ? Yes, data. Do you know who they are ? Yes, I said I did. Please read my message more carefully. These guys are all friends or in someway related to Rossi. No, they are not. Sorry but in my world independent test has a different meaning. You know nothing about this, except for McKubre's slide. You cannot judge. peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote: If Edison had invited Kullander and Essen, then he had not sent them home without definitive results. He did send them home with definitive results. They are convinced. You may not be, but they are. If you think people were convinced by Edison, you need to read history. Some observers and investors were convinced. Others, especially those who refused to go and look, said: It would be almost a public calamity if Mr. Edison should employ his great talent on such a puerility - letter to Scientific American from a noted scientist Edison's claims are So manifestly absurd as to indicate a positive want of knowledge of the electric circuit and the principles governing the construction and operation of electric machines. - Edwin Weston, arc-light and electrical equipment manufacturer, Newark, NJ (a short distance from Edison's lab) One must have lost all recollection of *American hoaxes* to accept such claims. The sorcerer of Menlo Park appears not to be equated with the subtleties of the electric science. Mr. Edison takes us backwards. - the distinguished Prof. Du Moncel After Edison displayed dozens of lights, impressed huge crowds of people, and was lauded in the mass media, a professor who had worked with him previously from the nearby Stevens Institute said he felt compelled to protest in behalf of true science that the results were a conspicuous failure, trumpeted as a wonderful success. A fraud upon the public. Edison did never instrumentalize scientists to support his claims, he had not the necessity to do so. He used the best instruments in the world, which he purchased for large sums of money, or invented himself. He was able to measure a vacuum to ppm levels. (When I say purchase I mean he issued a purchase order, accepted delivery, but he never actually paid in several cases. That was his way of doing business.) If Edison had promised to give a device to UniBo or Uppsala, he had done so. If Edison had invited the european patent office for a test in a lab of UniBo with international high level scientists and journalists, then he had made this as announced in a lab of UniBo . . . I suggest you learn something about Edison. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Miley and other professors can only take money from official sources
Vorl Bek vorl@antichef.com wrote: Gene went from a top academic career to working in a warehouse at night to feed his family. He was a science writer. Respectable, yes. Top academic career, no. In my opinion, being the science writer at MIT puts you at the top of your career. Gene knew every major science writer in the U.S., many other writers such as Arthur Clarke, and hundreds of scientists worldwide. This was before the Internet. He had hundreds of important people in his Rolodex, and file cabinets full of correspondence from them. I spent a lot of time in his office wading through old correspondence. You did not know him. You did not spend weeks at his house, as I did. You do know what he accomplished, or what difficulties he faced. So I suggest you stop making ignorant assertions about him. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Miley and other professors can only take money from official sources
Jed Rothwell wrote: You did not know him. You did not spend weeks at his house, as I did. You do know what he accomplished, or what difficulties he faced. So I suggest you stop making ignorant assertions about him. I think you have Cude killfiled, or you would know that he wrote what you are replying to.
Re: [Vo]:Private information about Rossi was the Ampernergo tests described by McKubre
You write too much. A lot of citations and it is unclear in which context there where made. A citation from Westinghouse, who where a competitor. (If this citation was about AC, then Westinghouse was correct. Not anything that Edison did or propagated, was a success) I think your other statements are worse. Confindential informations out of confidential and secret sources is almost ever wrong. This is this stuff that is used at stockmarkets to get the money of unexperienced investors. I give you some private information: I got a lot of mail for soon to explode tips after I sent a mail to you, using another (commercial business) adress. All was about questionable HHO devices that are known not to fullfil their promises. This was months ago before I joined this list. Never used this mail adress for something similar. I think you are in this business. You are not believed. As soon as I hear the word confidential or private all my alarm bells ring. If its private, then please keep it private or get permission to publish. If you dont have permission then stay quiet. Peter - Original Nachricht Von: Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com An: vortex-l@eskimo.com Datum: 19.12.2011 15:43 Betreff: Re: [Vo]:Private information about Rossi was the Ampernergo tests described by McKubre Susanna Gipp susan.g...@gmail.com wrote: Do we have something else excepts a bunch of words ? Yes, data. Do you know who they are ? Yes, I said I did. Please read my message more carefully. These guys are all friends or in someway related to Rossi. No, they are not. Sorry but in my world independent test has a different meaning. You know nothing about this, except for McKubre's slide. You cannot judge. peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote: If Edison had invited Kullander and Essen, then he had not sent them home without definitive results. He did send them home with definitive results. They are convinced. You may not be, but they are. If you think people were convinced by Edison, you need to read history. Some observers and investors were convinced. Others, especially those who refused to go and look, said: It would be almost a public calamity if Mr. Edison should employ his great talent on such a puerility - letter to Scientific American from a noted scientist Edison's claims are So manifestly absurd as to indicate a positive want of knowledge of the electric circuit and the principles governing the construction and operation of electric machines. - Edwin Weston, arc-light and electrical equipment manufacturer, Newark, NJ (a short distance from Edison's lab) One must have lost all recollection of *American hoaxes* to accept such claims. The sorcerer of Menlo Park appears not to be equated with the subtleties of the electric science. Mr. Edison takes us backwards. - the distinguished Prof. Du Moncel After Edison displayed dozens of lights, impressed huge crowds of people, and was lauded in the mass media, a professor who had worked with him previously from the nearby Stevens Institute said he felt compelled to protest in behalf of true science that the results were a conspicuous failure, trumpeted as a wonderful success. A fraud upon the public. Edison did never instrumentalize scientists to support his claims, he had not the necessity to do so. He used the best instruments in the world, which he purchased for large sums of money, or invented himself. He was able to measure a vacuum to ppm levels. (When I say purchase I mean he issued a purchase order, accepted delivery, but he never actually paid in several cases. That was his way of doing business.) If Edison had promised to give a device to UniBo or Uppsala, he had done so. If Edison had invited the european patent office for a test in a lab of UniBo with international high level scientists and journalists, then he had made this as announced in a lab of UniBo . . . I suggest you learn something about Edison. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Miley and other professors can only take money from official sources
Aussie Guy E-Cat aussieguy.e...@gmail.com wrote: You have seen the high school students doing FPE excess heat experiments at MIT during ICCF-10? I loved those kids! They know more chemistry than I'll ever master. But the experiment was far from definitive. I would call it suggestive, and worthy of further attention. I would given them all As. But it was not up the standard of a professional experiment. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Miley and other professors can only take money from official sources
Vorl Bek vorl@antichef.com wrote: faced. So I suggest you stop making ignorant assertions about him. I think you have Cude killfiled, or you would know that he wrote what you are replying to. I do have him killfiled. For my peace of mind. I apologize if I mixed you up with him. I wasn't paying much attention to the top of the message, or who wrote it. Sorry about that. - Jed
[Vo]:Policy Recommendations
As the theocracy unravels, opportunities for reform may present themselves. We can hope that such Reformation is not as bloody as that which followed Galileo but the modern era has given rise to much worse phenomena in reaction to calcified institutions, such as Pol Pot's Khmer Rougehttp://jimbowery.blogspot.com/2011/07/institutional-incompetence-conspiracy.html . Rather than merely hope for rational, peaceful, reform, what are the policy reforms that may allow us to say with confidence: Never again. ?
Re: [Vo]:Miley and other professors can only take money from official sources
Jed Rothwell wrote: I do have him killfiled. For my peace of mind. I apologize if I mixed you up with him. I wasn't paying much attention to the top of the message, or who wrote it. Sorry about that. That's OK. To the degree I can follow this, I agree with him rather than you or the other optimists here.
Re: [Vo]:Policy Recommendations
I remember the day when one out of every two messages was from Horace. Not a lot of room to talk there. Frank
Re: [Vo]:Miley and other professors can only take money from official sources
On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 10:12 AM, Vorl Bek vorl@antichef.com wrote: That's OK. To the degree I can follow this, I agree with him rather than you or the other optimists here. Then what is the reason for your presence on this list? To turn optimism into pessimism? To fix those optimists? T
Re: [Vo]:Miley and other professors can only take money from official sources
On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 10:12 AM, Vorl Bek vorl@antichef.com wrote: That's OK. To the degree I can follow this, I agree with him rather than you or the other optimists here. Then what is the reason for your presence on this list? To turn optimism into pessimism? To fix those optimists? I was being polite by calling Jed and the other 'believers' optimists; in reality, I think they are believing in something for which there are no rational grounds to believe. Although I am fairly ignorant, I can steer by the old saying that extraordinary claims require solid proof - lots of independent replications. Rossi hasn't done even one. He acts like a con man. I don't expect Jed or any of the other believers in this nonsense to change their minds until Rossi confesses. If he is jailed without admitting he is a phony, the believers will add him to their roll of martyrs in the CF cause. Even if he confesses they will probably say that he lost his mind due to the tortures inflicted by the servants of Big Oil. To answer your question, my presence on the list is to be entertained, and, if possible, to provide entertainment.
Re: [Vo]:Private information about Rossi was the Ampernergo tests described by McKubre
On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 6:43 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Susanna Gipp susan.g...@gmail.com wrote: Do we have something else excepts a bunch of words ? Yes, data. Ampenergo, like Levi/February 2011 are not data. They are hearsay and bad hearsay at that because the conditions under which the results were obtained are not specified nor do we know the materials and methods. It may be evidence but it's the flimsiest and least credible that qualifies as evidence. As to the relationship to Rossi, as a minimum, Ampenergo supposedly is Rossi's US distributor. And they are, so far, nothing but a one screen web site with no content. Ampenergo is hardly independent of Rossi and hardly a force of any sort to be considered seriously. | You know nothing about this, except for McKubre's slide. You cannot judge. If you have some inside knowledge and you expect anyone to rely on it, you have to state it a lot more convincingly than that! As to the comparison with Edison, when Rossi lights up Manhattan with cold fusion energy, let us know.
Re: [Vo]:Private information about Rossi was the Ampernergo tests described by McKubre
Am 19.12.2011 15:43, schrieb Jed Rothwell: Susanna Gippsusan.g...@gmail.com wrote: Do we have something else excepts a bunch of words ? Yes, data. Do you know who they are ? Yes, I said I did. Please read my message more carefully. Same what Allan Sterling says about the Penderev Magnet Motor. He knows very reliable and credible people who have seen it works. So he continues to promote it and he is sure it works. He never says he has seen it working himself. Posssibly Allan Sterling or people like him are Jed's trustable witnesses? ;-) ;-) Peter
Re: [Vo]:Private information about Rossi was the Ampernergo tests described by McKubre
Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote: Yes, data. Ampenergo, like Levi/February 2011 are not data. They are hearsay . . . No, the data shown by McKubre is not hearsay or secondhand. It is from Ampenergo. and bad hearsay at that because the conditions under which the results were obtained are not specified . . . They were not specified to you. They were to me, McKubre and others. Regrettably, they have not granted me permission to upload the other screens with more details. I do not know why. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Private information about Rossi was the Ampernergo tests described by McKubre
On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 9:25 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote: Yes, data. Ampenergo, like Levi/February 2011 are not data. They are hearsay . . . No, the data shown by McKubre is not hearsay or secondhand. It is from Ampenergo. And I say again: Ampenergo is Rossi's N. American distributor and has done and showed nothing unless one counts what you claim they did and that claim is without evidence. and bad hearsay at that because the conditions under which the results were obtained are not specified . . . They were not specified to you. They were to me, McKubre and others. Regrettably, they have not granted me permission to upload the other screens with more details. I do not know why. All I can say about that is the old British expression: 'tis a pity! You don't know why? Could it be because, like is probable about Levi's experiment, they would not stand up to close and proper scrutiny and of course, there is no way for anyone to replicate the experiment and the experiment has never been repeated and has never been independently replicated? Sort of same old/same old Rossi/Defkalion story. Lots of noise and absolutely no cheese.
Re: [Vo]:CALL FOR REDIRECT OF SOME TOPICS OR DISCUSSIONS TO VORTEX-B
Vortex is a great list.. but I think it has outgrown the email list format. I propose moving the list to a modern web forum based product. Modern forums allow embedded HTML/multimedia, moderation, yellow-card/red-card infractions, personal messaging, email protection, full searching, plus all the other features of web over email. talk-polywell.org has a decent forum, but LENR is still marginalized and off-topic. I would be happy to host vortex in any format on my site (ecatplanet.net) and would also be willing to transfer ownership or the domain name to something owned by the vort collective.. There are a number of fascinating writers out there who's work doesn't have a forum for ongoing discussion. (Frank, Axil, Horrace, to name a few.) Web based forums can have unlimited categories that are easily searched for a particular author or subject. This may be inviting too much off-topic discussion, but I've been thinking about this for a while.. - Brad
Re: [Vo]:Private information about Rossi was the Ampernergo tests described by McKubre
peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote: You write too much. You do not read enough. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:CALL FOR REDIRECT OF SOME TOPICS OR DISCUSSIONS TO VORTEX-B
+1 I would live to see this list migrate to a forum for reasons already mentioned by Brad
Re: [Vo]:Private information about Rossi was the Ampernergo tests described by McKubre
I received this in email from someone who prefers to remain anonymous: Regarding Rossi's relationship with Ampenergo, I find it interesting that Rossi's company (Leonardo Corp.) and Ampenergo share the same rented office space, which is owned by Ampenergo's founder, Karl Norwood. Rossi's company web site: http://leonardocorp1996.com/ (note the address and phone number) (Rossi's company has used this address/phone number for several years.) Karl Norwood's company web site: http://www.nainorwoodgroup.com/ (note the address and phone number) Ampenergo's corporate file for New Hampshire: https://www.sos.nh.gov/corporate/soskb/Corp.asp?1114558 Norwood's rental brochure for the office complex: http://www.nainorwoodgroup.com/propdocs/116%20South%20River%20Road%20Building%20A.pdf There is nothing wrong with any of this, but it certainly suggests that Ampenergo is not the independent company that Rossi's fans have been suggesting.
Re: [Vo]:CALL FOR REDIRECT OF SOME TOPICS OR DISCUSSIONS TO VORTEX-B
I'm a newcomer but my two cents is that it's fine as is and serves an entirely different purpose than a forum. Its form is suitable for its purpose.
Re: [Vo]:Private information about Rossi was the Ampernergo tests described by McKubre
Mary Yugo wrote: No, the data shown by McKubre is not hearsay or secondhand. It is from Ampenergo. And I say again: Ampenergo is Rossi's N. American distributor and has done and showed nothing As I noted, they were not the distributors when these tests were done. They have done something -- these tests -- and they showed them to a limited audience, including McKubre and me. Regrettably, they have not granted me permission to upload the other screens with more details. I do not know why. All I can say about that is the old British expression: 'tis a pity! You don't know why? No, and neither do you. Could it be because, like is probable about Levi's experiment, they would not stand up to close and proper scrutiny . . . No, that is not the reason. The test was done under the scrutiny of experts, as McKubre noted. Please stop asking questions that have already been answered. If you don't like my answers, feel free to ignore them, but do not confuse the issue by asking the same thing or making the same points repeatedly. Let's drop the subject. - Jed
RE: [Vo]:CALL FOR REDIRECT OF SOME TOPICS OR DISCUSSIONS TO VORTEX-B
OK, I ante'd up, so the rest of you out there need to help support this forum... RE: On the topic that Horace brings up re: moving all non-technical postings to the other vortex list... I couldn't agree more... I've posted several times in the past month or two to get voluntary action to limit repetitive opinions, in an attempt to increase the signal-to-noise. I would have expected to get better compliance from adults, but perhaps I was mistaken... This group was NOT formed as a general discussion group As Horace stated, there are way too many postings, which means people who have a life and other responsibilities and obligations can't hope to keep up. As a result, GOOD technical discussion is hampered, and there's a high probability that important exchanges are not taking place because one feels overwhelmed at the sheer volume of unread posts, and thus, begins to skip some due to lack of time to read them. The worst contributors know who they are... please make a conscious effort to INCREASE the SNR. Very SHORT postings about interesting (non-technical) happenings are ok, but if you can't say it in one or two sentences, then put in on vortex-B. Happy Holidays to All, -Mark --- You sent a payment Transaction ID: 3HH21245VN7788700 Dear Mark Iverson, You sent a payment for $20.00 USD to William Beaty. Please note that it may take a little while for this payment to appear in the Recent Activity list on your Account Overview. View the details of this transaction online --- Instructions on how to subscribe. I couldn't find instructions on how to subscribe to the 'B' list, but it's probably the same as vortex-l except there's a 'b' after vortex: i.e., vortexb-l-requ...@eskimo.com Vortex-L subscription instructions: To subscribe, send a *blank* message to: vortex-l-requ...@eskimo.com Put the single word subscribe in the subject line of the header. No quotes around subscribe, of course. You will get an automatic greeting message in response. Once subscribed, send your email to vortex-L@eskimo.com. To unsubscribe, send a *blank* message to: vortex-l-requ...@eskimo.com Put the single word unsubscribe in the subject line of the header. No quotes around unsubscribe, of course.
Re: [Vo]:CALL FOR REDIRECT OF SOME TOPICS OR DISCUSSIONS TO VORTEX-B
The mailing list format is fine. I'm completely opposed to web-based forums for discussing sensitive topics. With an e-mail based discussion list, each participant keeps a copy of the discussions. A web-based forum can be taken down very easily. Web-based forums are subject to hacking and manipulation. I have personally witnessed this. Web-based forums require more hardware, more software, more administration and more bandwidth. They are easier to monitor. They are easier to censor. Web-based forums quickly become small oligarchies where cabals impose their dictatorship. Also, web-based forums can inject malware, and web sites can be blocked. Lots of people may be reading Vortex e-mails from work; if Vortex moves to a web-based forum, some of them may no longer be able to participate due to IT policies in effect at their workplaces. -- Berke Durak
Re: [Vo]:CALL FOR REDIRECT OF SOME TOPICS OR DISCUSSIONS TO VORTEX-B
Regarding the matter of: RE: On the topic that Horace brings up re: moving all non-technical postings to the other vortex list... I presume this is in reference to vortex-b. Unfortunately, vortex-b is set up as a no-holds bar forum where anything goes. Long ago I stopped subscribing to b because what goes on there disgusts me. Anybody can join b and not fear being removed simply because there are no rules. It's turned into a place where people argue for the sake of arguing. It's a dumping ground which allows trolls to continue to feed on their habit of attacking others. IMO, It would be a disgrace to place useful informative off topic issues on b. That's why conscientious members on this list tend to place the prefix OT in front of the subject line - let people know this post is off topic but that it might be of interest to many anyway Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:CALL FOR REDIRECT OF SOME TOPICS OR DISCUSSIONS TO VORTEX-B
Also, mobile accessibility of web-based forums is poor. Like all complex web applications, they won't work uniformly well accross different browsers, esp. embedded ones. And e-mail has mechanisms for authentication. You can sign your messages with your private key using GPG, the signature will be distributed to the members of the mailing list along with your message without interfering with normal operation. You can't do this with a web-based forum. Using e-mail, you can also privately mesage members of the list without the administrator of the mailing list knowing it. With a web-based forum, the mail address of members generally remains hidden, and users have to go through the private message system of the forum, allowing the admins or hackers to spy on, disrupt or modify private messages exchanged between users. For a mailing list where topics as sensitive as cold fusion are discussed, this is totally inappropriate. -- Berke Durak
Re: [Vo]:CALL FOR REDIRECT OF SOME TOPICS OR DISCUSSIONS TO VORTEX-B
I suggest that a blog be created by whomever wants to, to discuss things related to Rossi. Personally, I like email format, and the fact vortex-l has over 15 years of archives. I prefer to post here. On Dec 19, 2011, at 8:38 AM, ecat builder wrote: Vortex is a great list.. but I think it has outgrown the email list format. I propose moving the list to a modern web forum based product. Modern forums allow embedded HTML/multimedia, moderation, yellow-card/red-card infractions, personal messaging, email protection, full searching, plus all the other features of web over email. talk-polywell.org has a decent forum, but LENR is still marginalized and off-topic. I would be happy to host vortex in any format on my site (ecatplanet.net) and would also be willing to transfer ownership or the domain name to something owned by the vort collective.. There are a number of fascinating writers out there who's work doesn't have a forum for ongoing discussion. (Frank, Axil, Horrace, to name a few.) Web based forums can have unlimited categories that are easily searched for a particular author or subject. This may be inviting too much off-topic discussion, but I've been thinking about this for a while.. - Brad Best regards, Horace Heffner http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
Re: [Vo]:Miley and other professors can only take money from official sources
Mary Yugo wrote: By the way, why don't you contact Jed personally about his experience with Defkalion and trying to arrange a visit with them. There is nothing to be said about that. It was delayed and delayed, and it appears to have petered out. Delays, confusion and cancellations are not unusual with start-up companies. You cannot draw any conclusions from that sort of thing. No doubt they have more pressing matters to deal with, and higher priorities than a visit by me. What is disturbing about Defkalion is their dispute with Stremmenos. I do not know what to make of that. It is a public relations disaster. - Jed
[Vo]:Phen formula from ecatbuilder.com
Phen formula from ecatbuilder.com The Ni powder, most pure and finest grade, is handled in dry box under inert atmosphere. It is mixed with 5 % by weight carbon powder, subjected to 500 C and degassed with a vacuum pump to prepare the surface and clean out any oxygen/oxides clinging to it. The surface is cooled. The chamber is pressurized with hydrogen to 2000 psi and heated to 200 C after the gas line is closed. When the pressure reaches stability the chamber is cooled. This process is repeated five times to fully load the Ni. This reactive powder is mixed with 10% by weight ferro magnetic Fe powder and an equal weight of magnesium powder using the same careful techniques given above. 2 grams of this mix is placed in an 8 inch lenth of 1/4 h Cu tube welded shut at one end. The open end is fitted with a hydrogen uptake valve. A second 3/4 gcopper tube is capped at one end and filled with mineral oil after inserting the reaction chamber. The tube is placed in the center of a 1000 coil of magnetic copper wire such as Belden Part No. 8054 which is connected to a source of alternating voltage adjustable from 25 cycles per second to 100 MHz. Using a thermocouple immersed in the oil, connected to an old computer, the RFG is adjusted to supply inductive energy to the Fe powder within the inner chamber raising the temperature to 250 C. The fusion is adjusted to self sustain and allowed to maintain the process for one year.
Re: [Vo]:Miley and other professors can only take money from official sources
What the heck is stopping someone from taking private money and doing research in their basement? From: Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Monday, December 19, 2011 2:14 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Miley and other professors can only take money from official sources Mary Yugo wrote: By the way, why don't you contact Jed personally about his experience with Defkalion and trying to arrange a visit with them. There is nothing to be said about that. It was delayed and delayed, and it appears to have petered out. Delays, confusion and cancellations are not unusual with start-up companies. You cannot draw any conclusions from that sort of thing. No doubt they have more pressing matters to deal with, and higher priorities than a visit by me. What is disturbing about Defkalion is their dispute with Stremmenos. I do not know what to make of that. It is a public relations disaster. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Private information about Rossi was the Ampernergo tests described by McKubre
Can you describe the first test that is left out of the PDF file? How many slides were you not allowed to post? From: Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Monday, December 19, 2011 1:36 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Private information about Rossi was the Ampernergo tests described by McKubre Mary Yugo wrote: No, the data shown by McKubre is not hearsay or secondhand. It is from Ampenergo. And I say again: Ampenergo is Rossi's N. American distributor and has done and showed nothing As I noted, they were not the distributors when these tests were done. They have done something -- these tests -- and they showed them to a limited audience, including McKubre and me. Regrettably, they have not granted me permission to upload the other screens with more details. I do not know why. All I can say about that is the old British expression: 'tis a pity! You don't know why? No, and neither do you. Could it be because, like is probable about Levi's experiment, they would not stand up to close and proper scrutiny . . . No, that is not the reason. The test was done under the scrutiny of experts, as McKubre noted. Please stop asking questions that have already been answered. If you don't like my answers, feel free to ignore them, but do not confuse the issue by asking the same thing or making the same points repeatedly. Let's drop the subject. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:CALL FOR REDIRECT OF SOME TOPICS OR DISCUSSIONS TO VORTEX-B
I presume this is in reference to vortex-b. Unfortunately, vortex-b is set up as a no-holds bar forum where anything goes. Long ago I stopped subscribing to b because what goes on there disgusts me. Anybody can join b and not fear being removed simply because there are no rules. It's turned into a place where people argue for the sake of arguing. It's a dumping ground which allows trolls to continue to feed on their habit of attacking others. IMO, It would be a disgrace to place useful informative off topic issues on b. Your 'b' must be different from the one I subscribe to. I haven't seen a post there in months, aside from the test I just did. I don't know if the topic should be moved there, but the place is not a sleazy barroom, it's more like an abandoned village meeting hall.
Re: [Vo]:CALL FOR REDIRECT OF SOME TOPICS OR DISCUSSIONS TO VORTEX-B
From Bek: Your 'b' must be different from the one I subscribe to. No, it's the same one. I haven't seen a post there in months, aside from the test I just did. Yes, and why do you suppose that is so? It's called the scorched earth syndrome. Things got so bad that most, myself included, simply subscribed out of b. I suspect the trolls are still however. They are still subscribed to b, abiding their time, waiting to pounce. Particularly the infamous Grok persona. It's possible that you are fairly recent vortex member. It's possible you do not recall some of his acrid contributions of grok, before Mr. Beaty kicked him out of the regular vortex group after insulting Storms, among other transgressions. IMO, b still radioactive, and is likely to remain radioactive for a long time to come. Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
[Vo]:Crystal Radio sets, high school students and the FPE
Sure not take it to the bank replications but hey they saw transmutations both up and down the atomic scale! You don't do that with any chemistry that I know of. This stuff is like the old days of Cat's Whisker Crystal radio sets. Frustrating to find the right spot and the right pressure to cause a diode effect but when you did the signal was clear. Imagine if the scientists who looked into the effect never bothered because it only worked some of the time and when it did work would stop for no apparent reason? I'm sure the valve makers of the time had absolutely no interest in a solid state signal rectification device (diode) that did not need a heater, cathode and anode and a vacuum tube to work. Had we stopped there, we would never have developed transistors, ICs and computers. The FPE is the same thing. That it works once is more than enough to spend time and money to understand why it works. It seems we have grown lazy and expect life to give us everything we want straight out of the box with no RD and sweat in between. I find it totally amazing that intelligent people refuse to accept the FPE is real because it doesn't work every time. Obviously they never played with a crystal radio set when they were kids. I did and loved it. Still like messing with stuff in the noise cause that is where all the interesting effects live, just waiting for someone to improve on the S/N ratio. On 12/20/2011 1:34 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote: Aussie Guy E-Cat aussieguy.e...@gmail.com mailto:aussieguy.e...@gmail.com wrote: You have seen the high school students doing FPE excess heat experiments at MIT during ICCF-10? I loved those kids! They know more chemistry than I'll ever master. But the experiment was far from definitive. I would call it suggestive, and worthy of further attention. I would given them all As. But it was not up the standard of a professional experiment. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:CALL FOR REDIRECT OF SOME TOPICS OR DISCUSSIONS TO VORTEX-B
For what it's worth I prefer Vortex as it is and has been. Ron --On Monday, December 19, 2011 9:38 AM -0800 ecat builder ecatbuil...@gmail.com wrote: Vortex is a great list.. but I think it has outgrown the email list format. I propose moving the list to a modern web forum based product. Modern forums allow embedded HTML/multimedia, moderation, yellow-card/red-card infractions, personal messaging, email protection, full searching, plus all the other features of web over email. talk-polywell.org has a decent forum, but LENR is still marginalized and off-topic. I would be happy to host vortex in any format on my site (ecatplanet.net) and would also be willing to transfer ownership or the domain name to something owned by the vort collective.. There are a number of fascinating writers out there who's work doesn't have a forum for ongoing discussion. (Frank, Axil, Horrace, to name a few.) Web based forums can have unlimited categories that are easily searched for a particular author or subject. This may be inviting too much off-topic discussion, but I've been thinking about this for a while.. - Brad
Re: [Vo]:Miley and other professors can only take money from official sources
Horace it was known as the Fleischmann-Pons Effect for years. Check Jed's archives. AG On 12/20/2011 12:14 AM, Horace Heffner wrote: On Dec 19, 2011, at 4:29 AM, Aussie Guy E-Cat wrote: Horace I suggest that call should be made when we have nailed the exact process that caused Effect A and Effect B to have a different pathway. Until that time, if it ever occurs, I feel Different Dog, Same Leg Action is the road to follow. I have no problem if say WL is proven to be the correct pathway. It is still the FPE effect produced by a WL pathway. It will never be the WL effect as they did not discover it. History always records the initial discover and that is what should happen with the FPE effect. If it so happens that the H. Heffner theory is the correct pathway, it becomes the FPE effect produced by the HH pathway. Then both the effect discover and the pathway discover are recorded in history. Each then gets a fair go. It is hubris to think you or I or the members of this list combined should or could make such a determination. Best regards, Horace Heffner http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
Re: [Vo]:Miley and other professors can only take money from official sources
I didn't invent the name. It was called the Fleischmann-Pons Effect for years. Google it. All I'm suggesting is that we should honour the effect they discovered with their names, even if we don't know how and why it happens. No point in inventing a new name for an effect that already has a very definitive name. It is the Fleischmann-Pons Effect. AG On 12/20/2011 12:05 AM, Horace Heffner wrote: On Dec 18, 2011, at 11:18 PM, Aussie Guy E-Cat wrote: McKubre believes in the Conservation of Miracles. I agree with him and would add my version: Different dog, same leg action. What is at the heart of the FPE drives all the effects we see. For all the early years the effect was called the Fleischmann-Pons Effect. Why change it now? I say give them the respect and credit they deserve. To hell with avoiding their names like they are poison and calling the effect they discovered a politically nice title of LENR as if not mentioning FP will make that new paper on LENR more politically correct and likely to get published. FP did the hard yards and paid with their careers. They deserve to be remembered and the effect they discovered named after them until the stars burn out and it all goes black. George Washington is regarded as the father of the United States just as Fleischmann and Pons are regarded by many as the fathers of LENR, or CMNS. A single individual deciding after these many years to call the entire United States George Washington or Washington would be inappropriate on their part, and confusing to others, to say the least. It is just as inappropriate now to call the field PFE. Cold fusion, LENR, LANR, CANR, and CMNS, these are all terms that have established, distinct, and useful meanings, just as the US, or United States, does. It is confusing for someone from Utah to say they are a citizen of Washington if they have never even been there. Best regards, Horace Heffner http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
Re: [Vo]:Phen formula from ecatbuilder.com
25 Hz to 100 MHz is a VERY wide range. Finding the right one would be like looking for a needle in a hay stack. How bout a few clues as to the actual frequency and the power level required? Most F Gens do not output much power. AG On 12/20/2011 5:52 AM, David ledin wrote: Phen formula from ecatbuilder.com The Ni powder, most pure and finest grade, is handled in dry box under inert atmosphere. It is mixed with 5 % by weight carbon powder, subjected to 500 C and degassed with a vacuum pump to prepare the surface and clean out any oxygen/oxides clinging to it. The surface is cooled. The chamber is pressurized with hydrogen to 2000 psi and heated to 200 C after the gas line is closed. When the pressure reaches stability the chamber is cooled. This process is repeated five times to fully load the Ni. This reactive powder is mixed with 10% by weight ferro magnetic Fe powder and an equal weight of magnesium powder using the same careful techniques given above. 2 grams of this mix is placed in an 8 inch lenth of 1/4 h Cu tube welded shut at one end. The open end is fitted with a hydrogen uptake valve. A second 3/4 gcopper tube is capped at one end and filled with mineral oil after inserting the reaction chamber. The tube is placed in the center of a 1000 coil of magnetic copper wire such as Belden Part No. 8054 which is connected to a source of alternating voltage adjustable from 25 cycles per second to 100 MHz. Using a thermocouple immersed in the oil, connected to an old computer, the RFG is adjusted to supply inductive energy to the Fe powder within the inner chamber raising the temperature to 250 C. The fusion is adjusted to self sustain and allowed to maintain the process for one year.
Re: [Vo]:CALL FOR REDIRECT OF SOME TOPICS OR DISCUSSIONS TO VORTEX-B
It's called the scorched earth syndrome. Things got so bad that most, myself included, simply subscribed out of b. I suspect the trolls are still however. They are still subscribed to b, abiding their time, waiting to pounce. If everybody feels that way, 'b' will never be used. It could at least be tried out if anybody thinks his posts are more appropriate there than here. And if the trolls want to make trouble, they can do it here as well as there. Bill Beatty can ban them from there as well as from here.
Re: [Vo]:e-cat replication by Celani
*- Regarding the Catalyst, Celani thinks that it must be a metal like Platinum or Palladium.* From this stantment, It can be clearly deduced that Celani does not trust Rossi. Rossi has stated that there is no precious metal in his reactor that is no Platinum or Palladium are used in the Rossi reactor. The special surface preparation of the nickel catalyst eliminates the need for Platinum or Palladium as a spill over catalyst in both the Rossi and Piantelli reactors. I take from this lack of understanding that Celani has no clue as to the general working principles of the Ni-H reactor type. On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 4:57 AM, Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com wrote: Couple of clarifications from an Italian speaker over on Talk Polywell: - Regarding the Gammas Celani stated that they are the final product of the reaction that can be removed (note: this was really not clear.) - Regarding the Catalyst, Celani thinks that it must be a metal like Platinum or Palladium. On 17 December 2011 12:45, Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com wrote: I've been informed of another typo/mistranslation. Celani has been working with (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giuliano_Preparata) friend of Eugene Mallove http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qq6YY8eFeYIfeature=related one of the first mainstream science's physicist that believed in cold fusion and worked with Martin Fleischmann in Milan in the late 90's: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=35T-gAvaKn4: According to Celani the reaction between Ni and H would be catalyzed by PHONONS . The phonons are not particles but the points where it contacts the thermal-electromagnetic waves in phase, produced by thermal agitation in the lattice of nickel. Are points of summation of multiple heat waves produced by a variety of nickel atoms that vibrate at the same frequency ... these frequencies would provide hydrogen (as HYDRIDES?) the ability to overcome the Coulomb barrier and make the merger of its proton to the core of nickel (as I understand it). [Editor's note. I'm asking Celani verification of this and other points of his speech] The power density is very high, and some of his reactions Celani has exceeded 1400 watts per gram of nickel, which is higher than that of uranium fission in the cladding Zirconium.Although Celani you hear talk about technological reality, as it has exceeded 200% yield (ie COP=2) for two weeks. Celani has worked very hard with the great Japanese scientist Arata. The Japanese government has funded plenty of not only the research but also those of three foreign groups who have had full access to the laboratory by Arata. Celani was able to perform various types of experiment and measurement, even the craziest. Among these groups was that of MIT and INFN (Italian national institute of Nuclear Physics; Celani et al). Worked with the Arata DEUTERIUM ... but as the import and production of Deuterium prohibited by the peace agreements had to self-refine it with the sulfur-iodine cycle . Arata was also excess power of 60 watts, which is easily measurable. The improvement over Fleishman and Pons was when he abandoned the traditional Arata electrode foil. Not only that, the best layers were not perfectly flat, shiny but rather rough, porous, etc.. In short, had to increase the surface area of contact between palladium and deuterium. When he returned to Italy, Celani modified experiments (*along with Professor Giuliano Preparata*) and began to use wires of nickel and hydrogen at high pressure (eliminating water, oxygen and ' Oxonian ) He realized that the power increased by using highly porous nickel. He returned to Japan. There Arata began to experiment with nickel of every size possible. He found that the nickel nanopowder in aggregates of less than 20 Ångström you had the best reactions. Indeed, the reaction took place (although not as powerful) even at room temperature. As for gammas they are an end product of the reaction, not desired by Celani, that you can do without. By applying radio frequency (microwave) to dust (I did not know whether that of Rossi or his), he had a massive production of gamma rays, which Celani does not want and does not consider useful. As the catalyst for him are metals such as platinum or palladium (must resist the micro-points where the heat reaches thousands of degrees, ionizing hydrogen) Celani comes to scientific reality PROCESS. Celani says that the Greeks of today have passed Defaklion Rossi, from the technological point of view. [Editor's note. others believe that Defkalion has put together a nice frame and a beautiful body ... but do not have the engine]. He says that this attitude of secrecy is stupid [ed. Celani is understandably affected by a) not being invited to the demonstration of 28 October and 2) the negative response to
Re: [Vo]:CALL FOR REDIRECT OF SOME TOPICS OR DISCUSSIONS TO VORTEX-B
Particularly the infamous Grok persona. He's there still. He calls it Vortex purgatory. T
[Vo]:Edison notebooks at Rutgers
This is great stuff! Anyone interested in the history of technology should look at Edison's notebooks, some now available on line: http://edison.rutgers.edu/docsamp.htm Here is a famous one kept by Charles Batchelor in 1879: http://edison.rutgers.edu/NamesSearch/SingleDoc.php3?DocId=N052105 Lots of great sketches. You can see them going through one design after another. Jump to image 58 for the comment about the globe that broke in the middle of a critical test, Shitt! Busted by Bohm. Bohm was the glassblower. Batchelor was British, as you can perhaps tell from the spelling and diction. He worked closely with Edison for many years. They have similar personalities. They were both night owls, and lonely, well read and fond of Shakespeare. A funny cartoon by Francis Upton of a light bulb as a person, with a recurring theme: this thing's worth millions! http://edison.rutgers.edu/NamesSearch/SingleDoc.php3?DocId=N068075 I shed the light of my shining countenance for $15,000 per share Other pages in this book show glassware designs. Here is Edison's personal diary. He was self educated, but not the uneducated bumpkin that he sometimes portrayed himself as: http://edison.rutgers.edu/NamesSearch/SingleDoc.php3?DocId=MA001 - Jed
Re: [Vo]:e-cat replication by Celani
Celani knew enough to try to covertly obtain a radiation spectrum during the test run where Rossi left 2 holes through the lead shielding. When Rossi caught him, Celani said something like That is what Professors do, like that excused his conduct. I suggest it is Rossi that does not trust Celani. AG On 12/20/2011 7:15 AM, Axil Axil wrote: */- Regarding the Catalyst, Celani thinks that it must be a metal like Platinum or Palladium./* From this stantment, It can be clearly deduced that Celani does not trust Rossi. Rossi has stated that there is no precious metal in his reactor that is no Platinum or Palladium are used in the Rossi reactor. The special surface preparation of the nickel catalyst eliminates the need for Platinum or Palladium as a spill over catalyst in both the Rossi and Piantelli reactors. I take from this lack of understanding that Celani has no clue as to the general working principles of the Ni-H reactor type. On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 4:57 AM, Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com mailto:robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com wrote: Couple of clarifications from an Italian speaker over on Talk Polywell: - Regarding the Gammas Celani stated that they are the final product of the reaction that can be removed (note: this was really not clear.) - Regarding the Catalyst, Celani thinks that it must be a metal like Platinum or Palladium. On 17 December 2011 12:45, Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com mailto:robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com wrote: I've been informed of another typo/mistranslation. Celani has been working with (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giuliano_Preparata) friend of Eugene Mallove http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qq6YY8eFeYIfeature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qq6YY8eFeYIfeature=related one of the first mainstream science's physicist that believed in cold fusion and worked with Martin Fleischmann in Milan in the late 90's: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=35T-gAvaKn4: According to Celani the reaction between Ni and H would be catalyzed by PHONONS . The phonons are not particles but the points where it contacts the thermal-electromagnetic waves in phase, produced by thermal agitation in the lattice of nickel. Are points of summation of multiple heat waves produced by a variety of nickel atoms that vibrate at the same frequency ... these frequencies would provide hydrogen (as HYDRIDES?) the ability to overcome the Coulomb barrier and make the merger of its proton to the core of nickel (as I understand it). [Editor's note. I'm asking Celani verification of this and other points of his speech] The power density is very high, and some of his reactions Celani has exceeded 1400 watts per gram of nickel, which is higher than that of uranium fission in the cladding Zirconium.Although Celani you hear talk about technological reality, as it has exceeded 200% yield (ie COP=2) for two weeks. Celani has worked very hard with the great Japanese scientist Arata. The Japanese government has funded plenty of not only the research but also those of three foreign groups who have had full access to the laboratory by Arata. Celani was able to perform various types of experiment and measurement, even the craziest. Among these groups was that of MIT and INFN (Italian national institute of Nuclear Physics; Celani et al). Worked with the Arata DEUTERIUM ... but as the import and production of Deuterium prohibited by the peace agreements had to self-refine it with the sulfur-iodine cycle . Arata was also excess power of 60 watts, which is easily measurable. The improvement over Fleishman and Pons was when he abandoned the traditional Arata electrode foil. Not only that, the best layers were not perfectly flat, shiny but rather rough, porous, etc.. In short, had to increase the surface area of contact between palladium and deuterium. When he returned to Italy, Celani modified experiments (*along with Professor Giuliano Preparata*) and began to use wires of nickel and hydrogen at high pressure (eliminating water, oxygen and ' Oxonian ) He realized that the power increased by using highly porous nickel. He returned to Japan. There Arata began to experiment with nickel of every size possible. He found that the nickel nanopowder in aggregates of less than 20 Ångström you had the best reactions. Indeed, the reaction took place (although not as powerful) even at room temperature. As for gammas they are an end product of the reaction, not desired by Celani, that you can do without. By
Re: [Vo]:Phen formula from ecatbuilder.com
Hey Aussie, It seems like Chan is doing all his heating by RF coil. A slow tuning of the dial may be all it takes to find a harmonic that works. I take it you've tried the 81.9Mhz figure from Storms? Maybe ask how he came up with that number? I have some new copper pipe, a freq gen, and some new powders coming in.. will keep you posted. - Brad
Re: [Vo]:CALL FOR REDIRECT OF SOME TOPICS OR DISCUSSIONS TO VORTEX-B
From Bek: It's called the scorched earth syndrome. Things got so bad that most, myself included, simply subscribed out of b. I suspect the trolls are still however. They are still subscribed to b, abiding their time, waiting to pounce. If everybody feels that way, 'b' will never be used. It could at least be tried out if anybody thinks his posts are more appropriate there than here. And if the trolls want to make trouble, they can do it here as well as there. Bill Beatty can ban them from there as well as from here. To be honest, I don't know how others feel about vortex-b. I'm giving you my personal assessment and experience of what happened to b. As such, I have no desire to participate there. Others may disagree with my opinion on the matter. It is, however, incorrect to say that trolls would be kicked out of B, just as they have been kicked out of vortex proper. That does not appear to be the purpose of B. B is a no-holds bar discussion (argument for the sake of argument) group. As Mr. Beaty has felt inclined to kick trolls out of vortex proper (most likely due to bad behavior), they are allowed to say and do whatever they want to do over at B. IOW, the same rules don't apply over at B. At least that has been my assessment of the purpose of B. However, Mr. Beaty may disagree. Bill has the final say on the matter. Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:Phen formula from ecatbuilder.com
81.9 MHz is the NMR frequency for Deuterium. READ THIS: http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/BockrisJtriggering.pdf The RFG and wide band RF amp model used are quoted. AG On 12/20/2011 7:41 AM, ecat builder wrote: Hey Aussie, It seems like Chan is doing all his heating by RF coil. A slow tuning of the dial may be all it takes to find a harmonic that works. I take it you've tried the 81.9Mhz figure from Storms? Maybe ask how he came up with that number? I have some new copper pipe, a freq gen, and some new powders coming in.. will keep you posted. - Brad
Re: [Vo]:e-cat replication by Celani
Aussie Guy E-Cat aussieguy.e...@gmail.com wrote: Celani knew enough to try to covertly obtain a radiation spectrum during the test run where Rossi left 2 holes through the lead shielding. He told me he was sitting in the next room when the instruments registered a burst. He did not know about any holes. Shortly after the burst, someone came in and said: We finally got the machine to turn on, so come in and have a look. (Something like that, in Italian.) When Celani went in, Rossi was upset to see he was carrying two meters, and asked him to put them away. He did. I described this event here, and posted comments from Celani. I do not think it was covert. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:e-cat replication by Celani
Thanks for the clarification. Appreciated. I expect to be seeing these guys 1st Qtr 2012, so good to know more about what went on and who did what. AG On 12/20/2011 7:53 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote: Aussie Guy E-Cat aussieguy.e...@gmail.com mailto:aussieguy.e...@gmail.com wrote: Celani knew enough to try to covertly obtain a radiation spectrum during the test run where Rossi left 2 holes through the lead shielding. He told me he was sitting in the next room when the instruments registered a burst. He did not know about any holes. Shortly after the burst, someone came in and said: We finally got the machine to turn on, so come in and have a look. (Something like that, in Italian.) When Celani went in, Rossi was upset to see he was carrying two meters, and asked him to put them away. He did. I described this event here, and posted comments from Celani. I do not think it was covert. - Jed
[Vo]:Celani claims to have replicated Rossi
http://energycatalyzer3.com/news/top-italian-scientist-claims-to-have-achieved-nickel-hydrogen-cold-fusion
[Vo]:Names given to the study of cold fusion since 1989
See Dave Nagel's Table 1, p. iv: http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/NagelDJproceeding.pdf I will copy the table here from the Word file: Table 1. Names given to the study of “cold fusion” since 1989 *Terminology* *Comments* Cold Fusion Original and recognized name, but incomplete Low Energy Nuclear Reactions Low is a relative term and unclear Lattice Enabled Nuclear Reactions Clear and specific, but very new and little known Lattice Assisted Nuclear Reactions Also accurate, but little used Chemically Assisted Nuclear Reactions Many chemists like this Cold Fusion Nuclear Reactions Little used Cold Nuclear Transmutations A Russian favorite New Hydrogen Energy A major Japanese program Metal Deuterium Energy A current program in Japan SANER *SA*fe *N*uclear *E*nergy *R*elease Fleischmann-Pons Effect Clear and encompassing I do not think it matters what you call it, and as I said, no one is in charge of language. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Private information about Rossi was the Ampernergo tests described by McKubre
Jed, I like you because you are romantic. I think a little too optimistic but I can see your heart is in the right place. I hope you are right. Giovanni On Sun, Dec 18, 2011 at 8:03 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com wrote: Jed, you have previously stated that you have private information on which you base your conclusions as to the reality of Rossi. Please cut the rest of us some slack! We have no way of knowing if your private information is sound, or if you have been misled, or if you have drawn unsound conclusions from what you know. Mainly what I know was revealed by McKubre in his recent talk: http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/McKubreMCHwhathappen.pdf See where it says AmpEnerco Run I These were independent tests done by Ampenergo before they made an agreement with Rossi. Various experts participated, including someone McKubre knows well. He trusts his expert. I know some of those people too, and I trust them. That is not to suggest that I can judge calorimetry as well as McKubre can! Far from it. But it isn't hard to judge these results. These tests were similar to the public tests conducted by Rossi, only they were independent, with someone else's instruments. Somewhat better instruments, proper computers and so on, but basically the same sort of HVAC test procedures. Okay, ask yourself this. Suppose you know that tests similar the 18-hour February test and the October self-sustaining tests were done, with instruments supplied and operated by someone you knew to be an expert, and a trustworthy person. Would that convince you? If the answer is yes, you can see why McKubre and I are pretty confident this result is real. On the other hand, if the HVAC-style testing does not satisfy you, then you will not be convinced. Mary Yugo has said she demands a blank run. As far as I know they did not do one. I think she wants to see a Seebeck calorimeter. I am sure they did not use that. So she would not be satisfied by these tests. That's all there is to it. I have no knowledge of Rossi's personal business. For all I know he might be robbing dozens of investors. I do not think he is. I have absolutely no knowledge of any such thing, no evidence, and frankly I could not care less if he is robbing people. I am sure his claims are real. That does not preclude the possibility that he is defrauding people; it would mean he is defrauding them with a genuine cold fusion reactor. Not my problem. Here is a key issue. Rossi's personality is an open book thanks to his website. That is unique to the 21st century. People who dismiss him because of his personality should think about that. Suppose in 1879 Edison had a kept an Internet blog while he invented the incandescent light. Suppose everyone could follow along with his trials and tribulations and his frequent crazy ideas. Now, 140 years later, you can read detailed biographies of him. You can read the lab notebooks. You can see why some of his investors lost their nerve and sold out for pennies on the dollar as he floundered around spending rivers of money, changing the design radically, apparently getting nowhere. In my opinion, his comments were no less extreme than Rossi's; his behavior no less erratic. That is true of many other famous inventors. It is also true of many ordinary programmers, chemists and others doing creative work that is worthy, difficult, but never becomes famous. It is true of some top notch gourmet chefs; a guy I know who can climb and cut down just about any tree with minimal equipment but frightful risk; and many farmers and fishermen in Yamaguchi. People who do extraordinary, creative, or dangerous things are sometimes odd. If they were not odd, they would do these things. In the past, we did not know how odd people such as Edison were until long after they became rich famous, when all their sins were forgiven. Now, with Rossi, we learn of it in real time. My guess is that people such as Mary Yugo cannot look past Rossi's personality because they have not read many biographies, diaries and personal papers left by famous people. They have not met a broad range of people from other cultures, or eccentric people, or downright crazy people. I have. I mean that literally. I grew up encountering people who were diagnosed with mental illness, in the era before effective psychotropic drugs. You can read about them here: http://books.google.com/books/about/The_psychiatric_halfway_house.html?id=8wsEAQAAIAAJ (The authors are my mother and my aunt.) In other words, I am used to discounting personality quirks, and looking at the content of the work. That is not an easy thing to do. It is not always a wise thing to do. It just happens I am good at it, because I have had a lot of practice. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Celani claims to have replicated Rossi
At 01:35 PM 12/19/2011, Aussie Guy E-Cat wrote: http://energycatalyzer3.com/news/top-italian-scientist-claims-to-have-achieved-nickel-hydrogen-cold-fusion Hard to tell ... since that's an echo of an echo from a google translation of Passerini's blog On p1 of comments Passi said he would get clarification from Celani ... but nothing's shown up. http://22passi.blogspot.com/2011/12/roma-14-dicembre-coherence-2011-ii.html?commentPage=2 Mario Mass suggested a petition to Rossi : He will say no, but if people get a petition of 1000 the road (not anonymous of course) many of them supporters from the early days, he will say no more difficult than say no to Celani. What excuse have? Should admit that he wants to keep the uncertainty, admitting that all the tests done so far were questionable. Which location would be more suitable than 22passi who has always supported (while not disputing the skeptics like me)? Daniel, I know who are obsessive with my request and I had already answered that until this summer, your request would probably be to Rossi heard, but not today, because it has decided not to do more tests. I agree, but IF you believe this request appropriate (do not say legitimate, since it is obvious that it is legitimate), what keeps you from throwing 22passi of this petition? 22passi Daniel said ... @ Mario mass UniBO If the contract has not been activated within 1 February, will support your proposal to petition, but also another: the request / prayer to leave research and development of E-Cat in Italy ... at least that. December 19, 2011 22:42 That's the first time I've seen a UniBO Feb 1 date (it was previously weeks .. ) : I wonder if they have now set a deadline.
Re: [Vo]:Celani claims to have replicated Rossi
That's the first time I've seen a UniBO Feb 1 date (it was previously weeks .. ) : I wonder if they have now set a deadline. IIRC, U of Bologna/UniBo set the deadline. They will cancel the contract if not activated by a certain time -- not sure if it was Feb 1 but sounds right. I guess they don't want to be used indefinitely and for free as an excuse for Rossi's failure to get proper testing.
RE: [Vo]:Celani claims to have replicated Rossi
From New Energy Times: ___ New Energy Times asked Braga yesterday whether the university had set a specific deadline for the first payment. “The deadline for this is mid-January, and, as far as I know, an extension is unlikely,” Braga wrote ___ http://blog.newenergytimes.com/2011/12/01/university-of-bologna-clarifies-relationship-with-rossi/ Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2011 14:16:34 -0800 Subject: Re: [Vo]:Celani claims to have replicated Rossi From: maryyu...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com That's the first time I've seen a UniBO Feb 1 date (it was previously weeks .. ) : I wonder if they have now set a deadline. IIRC, U of Bologna/UniBo set the deadline. They will cancel the contract if not activated by a certain time -- not sure if it was Feb 1 but sounds right. I guess they don't want to be used indefinitely and for free as an excuse for Rossi's failure to get proper testing.
Re: [Vo]:Private information about Rossi was the Ampernergo tests described by McKubre
Jed, I'm not sure what is the ethnic origin of Mary. But I was born and grown up in Italy. I have met several Italian scientists. In fact, I met in person, and I have been at his house another LENR researcher of relatively old times: Renzo Boscoli (you can do a web search for him if you don't know who he is). I was young and naive at that time and I was fascinated by this modern Leonardo, as it was introduced to me by a senior student friend of mine (we were both physics students at Universita' di Bologna at that time). Looking back I can see how amateurish and badly incorrect Boscoli's theories were (in particular the Cold Sun idea). I can say this about Italian science. For some reason, cultural and historical for certain, Italy has a certain tolerance for crackpotshness. Maybe it is the romantic idea of a self-taught genius as Leonardo was. Also while people are not gullible and in fact they have a certain keen sense of skepticism, there is a general sense of mutual trust based on counting on a strong community for support and help. Many business transactions are still dealt with a handshake. People that abuse the system are shunned and usually are not given many chances once exposed. Of course there are exceptions, corruptions of every kind but in general what I have described is what is innate in the Italian people. I can tell you strongly I don't like Rossi's attitude exactly because I'm Italian and he has abused even the tolerant Italian way of doing. If he is cheating then he will be very damaging to Italian science. He claims to have been a victim of the corrupted Italian system and I was open to accept that but then when you see how he followed the negative behavior (the oil from waste that never happened) with another (the recycling of gold and silver, presumably from waste again but it was instead money laundry) then you can see there is a precise pattern and the one's tolerance and understanding has to be changed immediately in extreme caution and in fact defensiveness. Yes, in the end reality is what matter. Rossi could be the worst person on earth but if his results are real then it doesn't matter. But Rossi 's behavior is not explainable by him being Italian. Quite the contrary. Giovanni On Sun, Dec 18, 2011 at 8:03 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com wrote: Jed, you have previously stated that you have private information on which you base your conclusions as to the reality of Rossi. Please cut the rest of us some slack! We have no way of knowing if your private information is sound, or if you have been misled, or if you have drawn unsound conclusions from what you know. Mainly what I know was revealed by McKubre in his recent talk: http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/McKubreMCHwhathappen.pdf See where it says AmpEnerco Run I These were independent tests done by Ampenergo before they made an agreement with Rossi. Various experts participated, including someone McKubre knows well. He trusts his expert. I know some of those people too, and I trust them. That is not to suggest that I can judge calorimetry as well as McKubre can! Far from it. But it isn't hard to judge these results. These tests were similar to the public tests conducted by Rossi, only they were independent, with someone else's instruments. Somewhat better instruments, proper computers and so on, but basically the same sort of HVAC test procedures. Okay, ask yourself this. Suppose you know that tests similar the 18-hour February test and the October self-sustaining tests were done, with instruments supplied and operated by someone you knew to be an expert, and a trustworthy person. Would that convince you? If the answer is yes, you can see why McKubre and I are pretty confident this result is real. On the other hand, if the HVAC-style testing does not satisfy you, then you will not be convinced. Mary Yugo has said she demands a blank run. As far as I know they did not do one. I think she wants to see a Seebeck calorimeter. I am sure they did not use that. So she would not be satisfied by these tests. That's all there is to it. I have no knowledge of Rossi's personal business. For all I know he might be robbing dozens of investors. I do not think he is. I have absolutely no knowledge of any such thing, no evidence, and frankly I could not care less if he is robbing people. I am sure his claims are real. That does not preclude the possibility that he is defrauding people; it would mean he is defrauding them with a genuine cold fusion reactor. Not my problem. Here is a key issue. Rossi's personality is an open book thanks to his website. That is unique to the 21st century. People who dismiss him because of his personality should think about that. Suppose in 1879 Edison had a kept an Internet blog while he invented the incandescent light. Suppose everyone could follow along with his trials and tribulations and his frequent
Re: [Vo]:Celani claims to have replicated Rossi
Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote: I guess they don't want to be used indefinitely and for free as an excuse for Rossi's failure to get proper testing. I think it would be more accurate to call this Rossi's policy to avoid proper testing. It is not a failure; it is deliberate. He has said no tests! for years. He means it. He never wanted them. He thinks tests are incompatible with his business strategy. He allowed a few mainly as a favor to his friends, especially Focardi. I mean it when I say he did tests as a favor. I do not think there is an ulterior motive. He sometimes has a bad temper, but he is a sweet fellow and a loyal friend who likes to do things for his friends. Good for him! I believe McKubre is right, and Rossi is avoiding tests to keep a low profile. He does not want many people to believe his claims are real. Just a small group with lots of money to buy 1 MW systems. Defkalion also seems to feel that tests will hurt their business strategy. It is unclear what they feel, but I get a sense that is what recent comments mean. I think these policies are ill advised, but neither Rossi nor Defkalion cares what I think. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Celani claims to have replicated Rossi
I doubt the deadline has much to do with being used and more to do with trying to force action out of Rossi. The UniBO will suffer the loss of funding if Rossi doesn't carry out the contract. Under maryyugo's view of the world it will be because Rossi has nothing real to provide the UniBO to test. However, it may also mean he has an American substitute for his reasech needs and doesn't need them anymore. My prediction is he let's it lapse for either of the above reasons. I guess they don't want to be used indefinitely and for free as an excuse for Rossi's failure to get proper testing.
Re: [Vo]:Celani claims to have replicated Rossi
On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 2:34 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: I think it would be more accurate to call this Rossi's policy to avoid proper testing. It is not a failure; it is deliberate. He has said no tests! for years. He means it. He never wanted them. He thinks tests are incompatible with his business strategy. He allowed a few mainly as a favor to his friends, especially Focardi. What does he think his first client is going to do if not test? How convenient that the first client is a deep water clam and can't talk! And even more convenient: his second to thirteenth and last announced client is ready for this? It's his first silent anonymous and probably imaginary client. I mean it when I say he did tests as a favor. I do not think there is an ulterior motive. He sometimes has a bad temper, but he is a sweet fellow and a loyal friend who likes to do things for his friends. Good for him! I believe McKubre is right, and Rossi is avoiding tests to keep a low profile. Sure. You always invite reporters from AP when keeping a low profile. It's essential. He does not want many people to believe his claims are real. Just a small group with lots of money to buy 1 MW systems. Then why does he not simply solicit and demonstrate his stuff to them? And what of the failed demos for NASA and Quantum? Oh yes. I forgot. He deliberately sabotaged himself for those too. What a master strategist Rossi is. Defkalion also seems to feel that tests will hurt their business strategy. It is unclear what they feel, but I get a sense that is what recent comments mean. I think these policies are ill advised, but neither Rossi nor Defkalion cares what I think. One could make the same sorts of excuses for Mark Goldes and for Steorn. But there is a much MUCH simpler explanation for what these folks do. Pardon my sarcasm but these points of view are untenable. You're bending yourself over backwards like a pretzel to make the unfortunate facts fit into a fantastic and highly improbably theory.
Re: [Vo]:Celani claims to have replicated Rossi
Mary Yugo wrote: He allowed a few mainly as a favor to his friends, especially Focardi. What does he think his first client is going to do if not test? I meant tests open to the public. I am sure it is obvious that is what I mean, so you are being a pill again, making a useless remark just to be disagreeable. Knock it off. Everyone knows that Rossi expects his customers to conduct tests. He does not ask for money from the escrow fund until the tests are finished and the customer is satisfied. The customer can return the system for any reason before the money leaves escrow. Those are his terms. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Private information about Rossi was the Ampernergo tests described by McKubre
On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 2:24 PM, Giovanni Santostasi gsantost...@gmail.comwrote: Jed, I'm not sure what is the ethnic origin of Mary. Sorry, not Italian. He claims to have been a victim of the corrupted Italian system and I was open to accept that but then when you see how he followed the negative behavior (the oil from waste that never happened) with another (the recycling of gold and silver, presumably from waste again but it was instead money laundry) then you can see there is a precise pattern and the one's tolerance and understanding has to be changed immediately in extreme caution and in fact defensiveness. I just ran again into the long list of charges and convictions Rossi amassed -- someone who wants to remain anonymous was kind enough to email it to me. It ends with an eight year prison sentence being imposed -- not sure how much if any of it he served or what happened after that. Maybe he's innocent of the entire lot but it's quite a bit and it seems unlikely he didn't do any of what he was convicted for. Rather than repost it, those interested can find it at this link http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2811976/posts?page=20#20 If your browser doesn't track the item correctly down the page, you can search for a typical string like this one: January 8, 1992: Rossi indicted with 8 others, based on false invoices related to building a factory. Each item is followed by a link for the Italian and for the English. I have not confirmed all the links. There are TWENTY-TWO line items.
[Vo]:Do some analysis on time varying radioactivity counts
I have a radioactivity counter going for a piece of Cs 137. You find it's log here http://a.djk.se/counts.txt First column is the sequence number. Second column is the timestamp in seconds since 1970 with microsecond precision. I am trying to keep it at 2 seconds. When the ntp correction is done there can be a big timestep like this 33057 : 1324332734.041153 : 6850633 33058 : 1324332818.342256 : 6850938 Third column is the ticks in the geiger tube. Typically 200 per second. Sometimes the rechargeable battery runs out in the counter and then the counts drop. Sometimes data is missing but counts have to be accumulated over several minutes anyway to get statistical precision so this is not a problem. The counter is 32 bit unsigned and will return to zero after 4 billion something. This is close to 8 months. This is a setup trying to determine the variations in nuclear decay over time measured by several people, for example Baurov http://www.osti.gov/energycitations/product.biblio.jsp?osti_id=21399929 Jere Jenkins http://arxiv.org/abs/1106.1470 The measurements are done in central Stockholm, Sweden. I hope to improve this experiment over time. Right now I am just doing preliminary trivial measurements. If anyone could donate one or several better radiation counters to me I would be happy. David David Jonsson, Sweden, phone callto:+46703000370
Re: [Vo]:Celani claims to have replicated Rossi
On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 2:55 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: I meant tests open to the public. I am sure it is obvious that is what I mean, so you are being a pill again, making a useless remark just to be disagreeable. Knock it off. This time you're the one being a pill. There would be nothing whatever to stop anyone getting the device from testing it once they own it and from publishing the test results. That he can only find one client for the world's first table top fusion reactor and that this client bought 1300 line items of it and won't identify or say a word to anyone -- well, only you and Aussie Guy and a very few others would swallow that silliness hook line, and sinker. If Rossi ever sold the Ecat freely and for real, it would be tested almost immediately and the test would be made known. Everyone knows that Rossi expects his customers to conduct tests. He does not ask for money from the escrow fund until the tests are finished and the customer is satisfied. The customer can return the system for any reason before the money leaves escrow. Those are his terms. So Rossi SAYS. And unless you know for sure and have contacted Mr. Anonymous Customer, that is the only evidence for it and for the existence of a customer that you have.
Re: [Vo]:Celani claims to have replicated Rossi
I don't think this debate needs to take place on the Vortex. It is maryyugo's litany. Why no independent tests? Well maybe Rossi doesn't want them, at least the kind that satisfy Maryyugo. It might be because he has nothing or maybe because he is no fool. You see if it were me I would not want tests particularly ones that satisfied the skeptics who are helping keep a lid on this. If LENR tests were ever performed to satisfy the skeptics and entice coverage by the media, well watch out. In other words if the world thought this was all real, the flood gates to investment research would open like you have never seen before and the tidal wave would wash over those doing this research like nothing you can imagine. These reactors aren't that hard to make and it doesn't cost much to make them (not really). You could literally do thousands of tests in a matter of months if you had the itch and if real that itch will be compulsive. Rossi better pray he has a big jump on everyone if it is real, he is going to need it.
Re: [Vo]:Celani claims to have replicated Rossi
Mary Yugo wrote: There would be nothing whatever to stop anyone getting the device from testing it once they own it and from publishing the test results. Yes. We know that. On many occasions Rossi has invited people to buy a system in order to test it. That is what he told the people at MIT, for example, and a consortium of people here. He said in essence: If you want to do academic research on the reactor, buy one when they go on sale, and do whatever testing you like. His blog and other sources make all of this abundantly clear. We have discussed it here. You are ignoring and contradicting these sources. Perhaps Rossi is lying and he will not really sell a system to MIT or the Vortex consortium. But he _said_ he would, and he said that once you take possession of a system, it will be none of his business how many tests you do or where you publish them. He has also said that he knows there will be a Niagara of competition soon. His no test policy will only temporarily stave off the inevitable. It will be useful for months, or perhaps a year or two. You make think these policies are misguided, but if you have been paying attention you will know that is what his policies are. Maybe he means something else, but you are denying that is what he says! This is tiresome. I repeat: knock it off. - Jed
RE: [Vo]:Celani claims to have replicated Rossi
I've been watching this soap opera for months now and wonder greatly how persons of such education are blind to the pathological nature of this Rossi discussion. This endless debate isn't about honest concern for science or anything else. This is pure OCD and having been afflicted with that illness, I can recognize it in others - especially as they jump from one blog site to another, spending hours and hours in ceaseless contention, that can't be solved as yet. The solution is not more tests by Rossi here- it's Cognitive Therapy and maybe some Clonipin for some people. The best I can say otherwise is that I hope the obsessive nature of the pro-LENR folks overcomes the obsessive Anti-LENR knee-jerk skeptics - and , if I was Rossi, I would seek verification VERY CAREFULLY , just in case somebody decides I need to be the victim in a Cold Case homicide. If you think the elite are incapable of such extremes of behavior, I've got news for you !
[Vo]: FYI, interesting news in cell biology...
This from PhysOrg.com. In short, we discovered we can grow normal and tumor cells from the same patient forever, and nobody has been able to do that, he says. Normal cell cultures for most organ systems can't be established in the lab, so it wasn't possible previously to compare normal and tumor cells directly. The implication is that various cancer treatments (chemical, radiation, other) can be tried on the patient's own cancer and normal cells to determine efficacy of killing cancerous cells and not good cells BEFORE administering to patient! I think this also potentially opens the door to growing a replacement organ from a person's own cells to eliminate rejection when transplanted into the patient. -Mark
Re: [Vo]:Miley and other professors can only take money from official sources
On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 7:35 AM, Aussie Guy E-Cat aussieguy.e...@gmail.comwrote: Christ man high school students replicated PF with both excess heat and transmutations, in a MIT lab and in front of over 100 ICCF 10 attendees? And what did those 100 people see? A power supply pumping 3 A into a cell, and a mercury thermometer. How is that supposed to be evidence of nuclear reactions producing heat? It would be possible to make a visual demo of cold fusion, if it were real. Rothwell has described it: an isolated device palpably warmer than the surroundings for a sufficiently long time.
Re: [Vo]:Celani claims to have replicated Rossi
Randy Wuller wrote: You see if it were me I would not want tests particularly ones that satisfied the skeptics who are helping keep a lid on this. If LENR tests were ever performed to satisfy the skeptics and entice coverage by the media, well watch out. In other words if the world thought this was all real, the flood gates to investment research would open like you have never seen before and the tidal wave would wash over those doing this research like nothing you can imagine. McKubre and I agree this is the likely reason Rossi wants no tests. He is trying to keep a lid on things. Especially because he has no patent. We think he may be having trouble filing a comprehensive one. Ed Storms suspects that. McKubre thinks Rossi has other reasons to maintain widespread doubt, especially to avoid the evil eye of the DoE as McKubre puts it. Nothing good can come of getting their attention. Researchers want to avoid it for as long as they can. As it happens, the DoE does not want to turn its evil eye in this direction. They would prefer to go on pretending cold fusion does not exist. It is comical that this charade happens to fit the best interests of both sides. It is a sort of non-aggression treaty. It will last until the public becomes aware that cold fusion is real. Then, needless to say, the DoE, the fossil fuel companies and others will to launch every weapon at their disposal to prevent cold fusion RD. I predict it will be the political battle of the century. You can see how it will play out in the present battle between the coal industry and the wind turbine industry. Big coal is trying to get the Congress to pass laws banning the use of wind turbines, and disassembling the ones now in place. They are 10 years to late. Wind energy already employs more people than coal, and it makes enough money to bribe as many Representatives as needed. I doubt that big coal will wait around this time. They have learned their lesson, letting wind snatch ~4% of their business. I expect a hue and cry, and full-page ads saying we cannot allow nuclear fusion power in houses, cars or even central generators. As I said in the introduction to my book, I predict that the only way cold fusion will survive this onslaught will be with widespread, grassroots public support. Without that, the combined forces of big coal, big oil, the DoE, the wind and solar industries and other conventional energy producers will crush cold fusion once and for all. Corporations wanting to make money with cold fusion will be a countervailing force against conventional energy. They will pay for the media campaign in favor of cold fusion. But the political power must come from the public. That's how I see it shaping up. You can't predict the future, but that's my guess. Rossi better pray he has a big jump on everyone if it is real, he is going to need it. Yup. That seems likely to me. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Miley and other professors can only take money from official sources
On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 7:43 AM, Aussie Guy E-Cat aussieguy.e...@gmail.comwrote: Did the DOE visit the students results? I suggest not. Did they sit in front of a SEM and see the transmutated products? I suggest they did not and never left their office. I suggest you didn't either. Sorry but real word results trumps DOE theory anytime. But not the DOE's judgement on real world results as presented by the best cold fusion could put forward. I think the DOE would be severely embarrassed by 1 prof, 1 grad student and 2 high school students blowing up their negative FPE spin job. True. But it'd be much worse if they called it bogus and then Japan executed a cold fusion Pearl Harbor on them, even if it were a peaceful equivalent of it. That would be career ending. And they could not have possibly expected something like cold fusion to remain dormant if it were real. So, their judgement had to be based on their belief that the field had no merit, rather than any kind of a desire to suppress it. We will replicate the students results. It should be very low cost and simple to do. Something that any lab could do and for less than pocket change. I wonder why they are always using the lack of funding as an excuse for not producing definitive evidence. If the students results in 2002 and 2003 did not convince the DOE, then then the DOE needs to be torn apart as it is non functional. Well, it's not just the DOE, but the entire scientific establishment that should be torn apart then. But in the last 20 years, progress in all branches of science has continued apace. But you're planning to repeat a 10-year old cold fusion experiment, which is a repeat of a 20-year old experiment, because basically there hasn't been much new to celebrate in the field. We know from the reaction in 1989 that the establishment would love nothing more than to see a working cold fusion experiment, so once again, they can cheer the rebellious chemists on at ACS meetings. But this time, it'll take more than a dubious electrolysis experiment with questionable calorimetry. Give us an isolated thing that stays persistently hot, and the world will beat a path to your door.
Re: [Vo]:Miley and other professors can only take money from official sources
You skipped over the bit about the up and down transmutations they found on the cathodes. As for the temperature, you need to read the reports and see the photographs. It is not what you said. On 12/20/2011 10:15 AM, Joshua Cude wrote: On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 7:35 AM, Aussie Guy E-Cat aussieguy.e...@gmail.com mailto:aussieguy.e...@gmail.com wrote: Christ man high school students replicated PF with both excess heat and transmutations, in a MIT lab and in front of over 100 ICCF 10 attendees? And what did those 100 people see? A power supply pumping 3 A into a cell, and a mercury thermometer. How is that supposed to be evidence of nuclear reactions producing heat? It would be possible to make a visual demo of cold fusion, if it were real. Rothwell has described it: an isolated device palpably warmer than the surroundings for a sufficiently long time.
Re: [Vo]:Miley and other professors can only take money from official sources
On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 8:50 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Vorl Bek vorl@antichef.com wrote: Gene went from a top academic career to working in a warehouse at night to feed his family. He was a science writer. Respectable, yes. Top academic career, no. In my opinion, being the science writer at MIT puts you at the top of your career. Maybe I'm quibbling, but it's not an academic career was the point. An academic career, to me, involves primarily research. And a top academic career would be a chair at a university or director of a research institute. A science writer is a journalist. Not that there's anything wrong with that, but it's not usually considered academic. Some people, like Sagan, mixed them successfully, Gene knew every major science writer in the U.S., many other writers such as Arthur Clarke, and hundreds of scientists worldwide. This was before the Internet. He had hundreds of important people in his Rolodex, and file cabinets full of correspondence from them. I spent a lot of time in his office wading through old correspondence. You did not know him. You did not spend weeks at his house, as I did. You do know what he accomplished, or what difficulties he faced. Completely irrelevant. I didn't know Feynman, but I know he had a top academic career. I didn't know Clarke, but I know he didn't. I don't know Gary Taubes, but I know he doesn't either.
Re: [Vo]:Miley and other professors can only take money from official sources
On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 9:06 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: I do have him killfiled. For my peace of mind. What a coincidence. Your posts all go to a special file too: my must-reply-to file. In a way, it's a kill file, too. Unfortunately, I can't always keep up with your verbosity, and sometimes I have to delete posts that are crying out for rebuttal. The DOE and oil companies don't pay me enough, and I have to moonlight at a real job.
Re: [Vo]:Celani claims to have replicated Rossi
On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 6:48 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: He is trying to keep a lid on things. Especially because he has no patent. At €2,000,000 per MW with 13 MW on order, he has a guaranteed income of €26M. At some point, he might be satisfied that he has enough money in the bank and start licensing production. So, I figure, within a couple of years, he will be happy with a 10% royalty and screw the patents. So, we just have to wait 2 more years. ;-) We have already waited one year come January. No biggy. T
Re: [Vo]:Celani claims to have replicated Rossi
On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 7:21 PM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: No biggy. No biggy compared to waiting 22 years to date. T
RE: [Vo]:Miley and other professors can only take money from official sources
Joshua wrote: . And a top academic career would be a chair at a university or director of a research institute. Well, Josh, by your own definition, Dr. Robert Duncan, Vice Chancellor of Research at Univ of Missouri, would then most definitely qualify as top academic career, and he was skeptical when CBS 60-Minutes asked him to be their expert on the Cold Fusion piece done in 2009. His conclusions are reasonable and in-line with the evidence: that something interesting seems to be going on and deserves a dedicated effort; which is CONTRARY to your position. Oh, well, he must have all of a sudden lost his objective faculties once he was infected with the LENR virus! Could be worse. At least he isn't infected with the pathological skeptics virus which would only keep us in the dark (or fossil fuel) age. Josh also wrote: A science writer is a journalist. Not that there's anything wrong with that, but it's not usually considered academic. Some people, like Sagan, mixed them successfully You seem to be unaware of the fact that Mallove was NOT educated as a journalist. He was a graduate of MIT and Harvard with engineering degrees, so he was very well educated in technical disciplines; enough to know when raw data was deliberately manipulated. I think Mallove's career was very similar to that of Sagan; he just didn't live long enough to enjoy more journalistic successes. The following is taken from Wikipedia: Eugene Mallove held a BS (1969) and MS degree (1970) in aeronautical and astronautical engineering from MIT and a ScD degree (1975) in environmental health sciences from Harvard University. He had worked for technology engineering firms such as Hughes Research Laboratories, the Analytic Science Corporation, and MIT's Lincoln Laboratory, and he consulted in research and development of new energies. -Mark
Re: [Vo]:Private information about Rossi was the Ampernergo tests described by McKubre
Yugo... must be serbian http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zastava_Koral! (or croatian...slovenian...macedonian...) Just kidding. :-) No matter what, I like your skepticism. Even though, to me, it seems to be a lot of evidences pro-CF, it helps keeping our feet on the ground. 2011/12/19 Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 2:24 PM, Giovanni Santostasi gsantost...@gmail.com wrote: Jed, I'm not sure what is the ethnic origin of Mary. Sorry, not Italian.
RE: [Vo]:Phen formula from ecatbuilder.com
Hi Guys , Pete from Australia here , I just found your site and joined up . I got interested in Phen as well Phen talks about The chamber is pressurized with hydrogen to 2000 psi and heated to 200 C I'm trying replicate this stuff, got some of the gear here already , the rest is coming . The Hurdle is how do I pressureize my H2 at 2000 psi . Most of the Gas compressor I've seen are $5000 + ( To rich for my blood ) One guy I read adapted his frigeration compressor for 600 psi Any ideas guys Thanks Pete Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2011 23:05:44 -0200 Subject: Re: [Vo]:Private information about Rossi was the Ampernergo tests described by McKubre From: besantos1...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Yugo... must be serbian! (or croatian...slovenian...macedonian...) Just kidding. :-) No matter what, I like your skepticism. Even though, to me, it seems to be a lot of evidences pro-CF, it helps keeping our feet on the ground. 2011/12/19 Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 2:24 PM, Giovanni Santostasi gsantost...@gmail.com wrote: Jed,I'm not sure what is the ethnic origin of Mary. Sorry, not Italian.
RE: [Vo]:Phen formula from ecatbuilder.com
It comes out of a nearly full tank at more than that. -Original Message- From: Peter Brosnan [mailto:ddc...@hotmail.com] Sent: Monday, December 19, 2011 6:53 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]:Phen formula from ecatbuilder.com Hi Guys , Pete from Australia here , I just found your site and joined up . I got interested in Phen as well Phen talks about The chamber is pressurized with hydrogen to 2000 psi and heated to 200 C I'm trying replicate this stuff, got some of the gear here already , the rest is coming . The Hurdle is how do I pressureize my H2 at 2000 psi . Most of the Gas compressor I've seen are $5000 + ( To rich for my blood ) One guy I read adapted his frigeration compressor for 600 psi Any ideas guys Thanks Pete -- Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2011 23:05:44 -0200 Subject: Re: [Vo]:Private information about Rossi was the Ampernergo tests described by McKubre From: besantos1...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Yugo... must be serbian! (or croatian...slovenian...macedonian...) Just kidding. :-) No matter what, I like your skepticism. Even though, to me, it seems to be a lot of evidences pro-CF, it helps keeping our feet on the ground. 2011/12/19 Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 2:24 PM, Giovanni Santostasi gsantost...@gmail.com wrote: Jed, I'm not sure what is the ethnic origin of Mary. Sorry, not Italian.
[Vo]:Once again, I advise Defkalion to show Stremmenos their reactors
I am surely not making any friends at Defkalion. This is a surrealistic conversation. http://www.defkalion-energy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=4879#p4879 JedRothwell wrote: What is disturbing about Defkalion is their dispute with Stremmenos. To have member of the Board of Directors accusing you of criminal activity in the mass media is the worst public relations nightmare I have ever heard of. It seems to me that if they are going to begin allowing visitors, they should invite Stremmenos first. . Dear Mr Rothwell, Prof Christos Stremmenos accused us in public for not paying Andrea Rossi for what he could not deliver, claiming such reason as his ethical problem with our company. We have not heard or read anything about accusations against us for *criminal activity *either from C.Stremmenos nor any one else. If you did, please provide us here with a link or a reference. Otherwise, please edit your last post immediately. Still C. Stremmenos is a member of our board, as he has never resigned from his position (or his shares he got for free for his past and expected services to his country) in the company claiming ethical problems with. And this is a personal logical contradiction, not a PR problem of our company. As a member of our board and a great patriot, as we still believe he is, Christos Stremmenos needs no invitation to visit any time our HQ or any of our labs, which he has not visited for 7 months now. DGT Defkalion GT wrote: Prof Christos Stremmenos accused us in public for not paying Andrea Rossi for what he could not deliver, claiming such reason as his ethical problem with our company. We have not heard or read anything about accusations against us for *criminal activity *either from C.Stremmenos nor any one else. If you did, please provide us here with a link or a reference. I did not read Stremmenos' accusation about not paying Andrea Rossi. I know nothing about that. It a private business matter between you and Rossi. (A matter of civil law.) I was not talking about that. In NyTeknik and elsewhere Stremmenos claimed that you do not have the reactor core technology. Rossi also said this, as you know. Yet during your June press conference and in this web site, you claim that you have working reactors. I do not know about the laws in Greece or the EU, but in the U.S. or Japan, if you do not have a working product yet you claim that you do, this is false advertising. It is a criminal offense, not a civil offense. It is against the law to offer for sale something you do not have and cannot get. A common example would be an electronics store offering a laptop computer at a low price to bring in customers, when the store does not have the laptop in stock. If what Stremmenos and Rossi say is true, then you are soliciting customers and dealers to sell a product you do not have in stock, you have no means to manufacture, and you have no legal right to sell. You are asking dealers to commit tens of millions of Euros, as I recall. In my experience doing business in the U.S., if a company were to do this, and a company officer such as a member of the Board of Directors were to publicly declare the company does not actually have the product, this would be headline news in the business section of the local newspaper. Regulators and the police would show up at the company the next day with search warrants. The company would be closed down, pending an investigation. I think this would also happen in Japan. I do not suppose that Stremmenos and Rossi are correct. I assume there is a misunderstanding, and you actually do have working reactors. Therefore I recommend you invite Stremmenos into you lab as soon as possible, and prove to him that you have the reactor cores. Ask him to please publish a retraction in NyTeknik. I also strongly recommend you publish an independent third party test of your equipment, to put these and all other doubts to rest. I will grant, this could be a cultural difference. However, I assure you that in the U.S. or Japan, having a member of the Board of Directors publish a statement like this would be considered a calamity. It is tantamount to having him announce that you are a fraud. It would quickly cause the collapse of any ordinary start-up company.
