Re: [Vo]:Why professors are often late
Excuse my ignorance, because my interest in Rossi is small maybe I have not been paying enough attention... But has this report still not come out and not a peep from them? Just checking... On Sat, Jul 5, 2014 at 5:00 AM, Lennart Thornros lenn...@thornros.com wrote: Different folks different culture. Sorry about your cornflakes (not good for you anyhow and now they are ruined or you like them that way?). Happy 4th. Best Regards , Lennart Thornros www.StrategicLeadershipSac.com lenn...@thornros.com +1 916 436 1899 202 Granite Park Court, Lincoln CA 95648 “Productivity is never an accident. It is always the result of a commitment to excellence, intelligent planning, and focused effort.” PJM On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 8:58 AM, Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 8:51 AM, Lennart Thornros lenn...@thornros.com wrote: You really do not have to try you are independent from all logic. ***You're itching for a fight. Who peed in your cornflakes this morning?
Re: [Vo]:Why professors are often late
I was referring to a peer-review of the tests sponsored by ELFORSK, which is somewhat different from a review of Rossi's own work. However, I agree it is related, and it would be difficult to peer-review. Also, a journal such as *Nature* would never allow a report of a black-box test such as this. ***Jed, earlier you said that submitting a peer reviewable report was a fool's errand. Do you think these dilly-dallying professors have engaged in such a fool's errand?
Re: [Vo]:Why professors are often late
OK Kevin it is independence day. Try to be independent from Swedes in the future. You really do not have to try you are independent from all logic. Happy 4th. Best Regards , Lennart Thornros www.StrategicLeadershipSac.com lenn...@thornros.com +1 916 436 1899 202 Granite Park Court, Lincoln CA 95648 “Productivity is never an accident. It is always the result of a commitment to excellence, intelligent planning, and focused effort.” PJM On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 12:33 AM, Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com wrote: I was referring to a peer-review of the tests sponsored by ELFORSK, which is somewhat different from a review of Rossi's own work. However, I agree it is related, and it would be difficult to peer-review. Also, a journal such as *Nature* would never allow a report of a black-box test such as this. ***Jed, earlier you said that submitting a peer reviewable report was a fool's errand. Do you think these dilly-dallying professors have engaged in such a fool's errand?
Re: [Vo]:Why professors are often late
Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com wrote: ***Jed, earlier you said that submitting a peer reviewable report was a fool's errand. Do you think these dilly-dallying professors have engaged in such a fool's errand? I have heard rumors to that effect, but I have no solid information. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Why professors are often late
On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 8:51 AM, Lennart Thornros lenn...@thornros.com wrote: You really do not have to try you are independent from all logic. ***You're itching for a fight. Who peed in your cornflakes this morning?
Re: [Vo]:Why professors are often late
Different folks different culture. Sorry about your cornflakes (not good for you anyhow and now they are ruined or you like them that way?). Happy 4th. Best Regards , Lennart Thornros www.StrategicLeadershipSac.com lenn...@thornros.com +1 916 436 1899 202 Granite Park Court, Lincoln CA 95648 “Productivity is never an accident. It is always the result of a commitment to excellence, intelligent planning, and focused effort.” PJM On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 8:58 AM, Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 8:51 AM, Lennart Thornros lenn...@thornros.com wrote: You really do not have to try you are independent from all logic. ***You're itching for a fight. Who peed in your cornflakes this morning?
Re: [Vo]:Why professors are often late
Kevin if you repeat my statements they at least have to be correct. I did not say they are incompetent as a reason for that I know they are not making any non-defensible investments. I said that is because they could not survive the social pressure in the small country of Sweden. All these guys are well established in a small community and would rather have a little, which is fair than risk their position for dollars they probably will lose when it becomes clear they have cheated. You do not know me and you do not know the country's culture, but you have clear opinions about both. Well . . . Best Regards , Lennart Thornros www.StrategicLeadershipSac.com lenn...@thornros.com +1 916 436 1899 202 Granite Park Court, Lincoln CA 95648 “Productivity is never an accident. It is always the result of a commitment to excellence, intelligent planning, and focused effort.” PJM On Wed, Jul 2, 2014 at 7:25 PM, Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Jul 2, 2014 at 6:39 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Kevin O’Malley suspects they may be involved in inside trading, and they are hoarding the information for that reason. I doubt it because: 1. Professors are usually not well-versed in things like investments and business. This is a cliché but it is true nonetheless. ***Yup. That's why it's taking them so long to get their financial ducks in a row. 2. They often hoard information but the usual reason is to achieve academic priority. ***There's no doubting that this is going on but keep in mind that this is the greatest scientific achievement since gunpowder. Usual reasons stop being applicable, and simple greed is a reasonable conclusion. 3. It seems unlikely to me that anyone will be able to cash in on this information in the near term. What would you do? Short sell oil company stocks? ***Yes. There is no direct way to invest in Rossi’s device at this stage. ***You could go for CYPW Cyclone Power, or CPST, or any other publicly traded waste heat engine company. Or publicly traded desalination companies. Or, as a professor, you could collect birddog fees for giving fund managers the heads up. There are some direct ways, mostly indirect ways. That's why these guys are dragging their feet so much ... ;-/ On to the reasons -- ***It seems almost all of your reasons support Lennart's contention that they're simply incompetent. But this is a MONUMENTAL development, so how could they be too old/lazy, not have urgency priority, have no idea of a public deadline, etc.? Bowlsheet. And WTF are we talking about when it comes to the nature of research??? This ain't research. This is reading a voltmeter, an ammeter, and a thermometer. All of us Vorts KNEW there should be isotopic analysis, and only NOW these idiots are thinking about doing it? They simply CANNOT be that incompetent. They are cashing in with their hoarded information. they are willing to dillydally and delay. This is a mystery to me. ***The mystery is solved in this case. These guys are doing the traditional swedish dance of providing for their families and they are leveraging on this hoarded information.
Re: [Vo]:Why professors are often late
On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 10:14 AM, Lennart Thornros lenn...@thornros.com wrote: Kevin if you repeat my statements they at least have to be correct. ***I'm not repeating, I'm paraphrasing. I did not say they are incompetent ***Then you need to perform a cephalorectomy. You can't see greed. You can't see incompetence. It's there for all others to see. as a reason for that I know they are not making any non-defensible investments ***That is, ONCE AGAIN, not a REASON. It is SIMPLY an ASSERTION from you. . I said that is because they could not survive the social pressure in the small country of Sweden. ***I don't think you said that, but it doesn't make much difference. If you finagle a few $billion with insider trading, you can afford to move away from Sweden. All these guys are well established in a small community and would rather have a little, ***And you know this... how? You're able to read minds? You think these guys are above the common temptations of ordinary humans? which is fair than risk their position for dollars they probably will lose when it becomes clear they have cheated. ***Like Martha Stewart. That's precisely what she did, even though she had position, status, money already. But somehow you know that these guys don't have temptation to engage in insider trading. You don't seem to be able to insert any reasons for this position of yours, you just reiterate your assertion, over and over, calling it a reason. It ain't a reason. It's an assertion, and a poor one at that. It's the rhetorical equivalent of pissing on a man's back calling it rain. You do not know me and you do not know the country's culture, but you have clear opinions about both. Well . . . ***I have clear opinions about HUMANS, regardless of their culture or country. Humans are fallible. Swedes are humans. Ergo, Swedes are fallible.
Re: [Vo]:Why professors are often late
Kevin - just give up - you are saying I said and then you say you paraphrased. Not much style but what to expect. Anyone can afford to move from Sweden. However, nobody get lucky from moving from - only from moving to. Besides they are old enough they have a life already invested in that oscial environment - and money is not as important as you think. My contribution is/ was that I know the Swedish society. It is different than the US. Just as you and I are different. I have never pissed on a man's back and I would apologies if did - not try to say that it is rain. Your idea of paraphrasing I guess. Ask Martha Stewart if she is happy she decided to take advantage of an insider tips. Not. She lost way more than if she had kept her stock and taken the loss. Economically I am quite sure from other perspectives a COP of 100 times. Your opinion of humans is rather sad. Try to get in to a leadership program. Try to get some personal development training it would make you much happier than to be a negative, suspicious person. I promise you will send me a thank you letter afterwards. I am sorry but I am not able to help you - find someone you like. Best Regards , Lennart Thornros www.StrategicLeadershipSac.com lenn...@thornros.com +1 916 436 1899 202 Granite Park Court, Lincoln CA 95648 “Productivity is never an accident. It is always the result of a commitment to excellence, intelligent planning, and focused effort.” PJM On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 12:38 PM, Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 10:14 AM, Lennart Thornros lenn...@thornros.com wrote: Kevin if you repeat my statements they at least have to be correct. ***I'm not repeating, I'm paraphrasing. I did not say they are incompetent ***Then you need to perform a cephalorectomy. You can't see greed. You can't see incompetence. It's there for all others to see. as a reason for that I know they are not making any non-defensible investments ***That is, ONCE AGAIN, not a REASON. It is SIMPLY an ASSERTION from you. . I said that is because they could not survive the social pressure in the small country of Sweden. ***I don't think you said that, but it doesn't make much difference. If you finagle a few $billion with insider trading, you can afford to move away from Sweden. All these guys are well established in a small community and would rather have a little, ***And you know this... how? You're able to read minds? You think these guys are above the common temptations of ordinary humans? which is fair than risk their position for dollars they probably will lose when it becomes clear they have cheated. ***Like Martha Stewart. That's precisely what she did, even though she had position, status, money already. But somehow you know that these guys don't have temptation to engage in insider trading. You don't seem to be able to insert any reasons for this position of yours, you just reiterate your assertion, over and over, calling it a reason. It ain't a reason. It's an assertion, and a poor one at that. It's the rhetorical equivalent of pissing on a man's back calling it rain. You do not know me and you do not know the country's culture, but you have clear opinions about both. Well . . . ***I have clear opinions about HUMANS, regardless of their culture or country. Humans are fallible. Swedes are humans. Ergo, Swedes are fallible.
Re: [Vo]:Why professors are often late
On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 5:14 PM, Lennart Thornros lenn...@thornros.com wrote: Kevin - just give up - you are saying I said and then you say you paraphrased. Not much style but what to expect. ***Lennart. If it is not your contention that these guys are simply feckless then you need to pull your head far out from your hind quarters. You don't see the greed, you don't see the incompetence, you just see some hapless swedes. You are ridiculous. Anyone can afford to move from Sweden. ***Well, then, there it is. Thanks for solidifying my point. However, nobody get lucky from moving from - only from moving to. ***Useless and meaningless phrase. You really aren't very good at demonstrating strategic leadership. Besides they are old enough they have a life already invested in that oscial environment ***Just like Martha Stewart. Round round you go. Same old dog vomit argument. - and money is not as important as you think. ***Actually, what I consider to be important is competence in this case. And these guys blew well past incompetence while handling the greatest scientific breakthrough since gunpowder. They're so incompetent that they can't possibly be THAT incompetent, there are other forces at work here including greed. But you can't see greed, nor incompetence, nor any other forces of temptation. You only see the wonderfully soft mild swedish bent towards social pressure. Bullshit. My contribution is/ was that I know the Swedish society. It is different than the US. Just as you and I are different. ***Swedes are fallible humans. Being swedish doesn't exempt you from temptation. But it sure doesn't stop you from trying to pretend that it does. I have never pissed on a man's back and I would apologies if did - not try to say that it is rain. Your idea of paraphrasing I guess. ***You don't seem to be able to grasp analogies, or simple reasoning. Ask Martha Stewart if she is happy she decided to take advantage of an insider tips. Not. ***Precisely. But she was in exactly the position you describe your swedish buddies -- comfortably wealthy, well known, established. Temptation blew into her life and it can blow into anyone else's life who is in the same position... like your swedish buddies. She lost way more than if she had kept her stock and taken the loss. Economically I am quite sure from other perspectives a COP of 100 times. ***You don't make a very strong point here. The point was about how temptation can strike ANYone, and you're off into the weeds describing the negative outcome of temptation. How incredibly droll. DUHH, it's bad. Your opinion of humans is rather sad. ***Your opinion of swedes is rather ridiculous. Try to get in to a leadership program. ***You mean, like your strategic leadership bullshit? No thanks. Try to get some personal development training it would make you much happier than to be a negative, suspicious person. ***Only the paranoid survive~Andy Grove, President of Intel. And here's a hint: Negative, suspicious people don't park their money where their mouth is to promote LENR. I put my money where my mouth is; you didn't, because you are a negative and suspicious person, a lagger claiming to lead, a pasquinade. I promise you will send me a thank you letter afterwards. ***Your promises are probably worth about as much as what I paid for your advice. I am sorry but I am not able to help you - find someone you like. ***Your interactions are not of a sort where a person's trying to help another. It's more like, you're just a simple browbeater who spouts cliches, giving assertions calling them reasons, obfuscating, and being generally inane. Best Regards , Lennart Thornros www.StrategicLeadershipSac.com lenn...@thornros.com +1 916 436 1899 202 Granite Park Court, Lincoln CA 95648 “Productivity is never an accident. It is always the result of a commitment to excellence, intelligent planning, and focused effort.” PJM On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 12:38 PM, Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 10:14 AM, Lennart Thornros lenn...@thornros.com wrote: Kevin if you repeat my statements they at least have to be correct. ***I'm not repeating, I'm paraphrasing. I did not say they are incompetent ***Then you need to perform a cephalorectomy. You can't see greed. You can't see incompetence. It's there for all others to see. as a reason for that I know they are not making any non-defensible investments ***That is, ONCE AGAIN, not a REASON. It is SIMPLY an ASSERTION from you. . I said that is because they could not survive the social pressure in the small country of Sweden. ***I don't think you said that, but it doesn't make much difference. If you finagle a few $billion with insider trading, you can afford to move away from Sweden. All these guys are well established in a small community and would rather have a little, ***And you know
[Vo]:Why professors are often late
There has been some discussion here about why the people from Sweden who are investigating the Rossi device missed their deadline. I have absolutely no inside information on this. I have no idea why they are late. However, I have worked with professors for many years and I know why other professors often miss deadlines. Let me describe some of the reasons. First, a likely non-reason. Kevin O’Malley suspects they may be involved in inside trading, and they are hoarding the information for that reason. I doubt it because: 1. Professors are usually not well-versed in things like investments and business. This is a cliché but it is true nonetheless. 2. They often hoard information but the usual reason is to achieve academic priority. 3. It seems unlikely to me that anyone will be able to cash in on this information in the near term. What would you do? Short sell oil company stocks? There is no direct way to invest in Rossi’s device at this stage. On to the reasons -- Age. These professors are old. It is sad to say this but, there is no way a person in his 60s can work as hard or accomplish as much as someone in his 20s or 30s. They know too much about old methods and not enough about new ones. As Mizuno says, “we are analog people living in a digital world.” Urgency priority. They feel no sense of urgency. They often stop working in the middle of an important project to devote six months to editing a book on some obscure academic aspect of electrochemistry. The older people get in the less time they have left in their life the more they are willing to dillydally and delay. This is a mystery to me. No customers. The underlying problem is that they have no customer, and no deadline. If a software company delays producing a new version of a product for a year, it gets in deep trouble. Its income is cut off. Professors are paid no matter what they do. Most of these professors are probably retired so they get paid a pension no matter what they do. Funding. They probably have only shoestring funding. The nature of research. All real scientific research is groundbreaking, by definition. It is something that people have never done before in history. Of course they have done similar things, but never this particular experiment. It is usually harder than anyone anticipated. It takes longer. It costs more. I mean much more: a factor of 10 or 100 more. When Oppenheimer went to organize the laboratory at Los Alamos, he thought he would need a few dozen experts. They ended up with thousands. People never do groundbreaking research right the first time. If you look at the design of early experiments or the first versions of new technology you see it is suboptimal. Perfectionism. Some professors are obsessive perfectionists. They do in experiment one way, then they think of a better method and they go back and spend several months doing it again even though the first results were important and good enough to be published. A famous example of perfectionism and the never ending development cycle in software is the “Duke Nukem saga, described here: Learn to Let Go: How Success Killed Duke Nukem http://www.wired.com/2009/12/fail_duke_nukem/ - Jed
RE: [Vo]:Why professors are often late
From: Jed Rothwell Learn to Let Go: How Success Killed Duke Nukem http://www.wired.com/2009/12/fail_duke_nukem/ LOL. I could not help but think of Rossi as “Il Duce Nukem” … … since, despite the differences, AR has a bit of that characteristic Italian ego which is epitomized in Il Duce… but in all fairness, he has tamed it to a large degree in the last year.
Re: [Vo]:Why professors are often late
It is also possible the delay is caused by the peer review process as Rossi alludes to. One of my friends- reputed professor at Budapest says he will believe CF is real when a ppaer about it will be published in the NATURE journal- the process of review there is a guarantee of the quality and validity of the paper and the research. For a peer reviewer at a high rank journal is a high risk, danger for reputation to say YES to such a dubious subject so the reviewers verify and ask and verify again. We have to remember what has happened with the 1st Report how was it buried in suspicion and unanswerable questions. This time more certainty has to be achieved - the target is intense incontrovertible excess heat demonstrated. Peter On Wed, Jul 2, 2014 at 4:39 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: There has been some discussion here about why the people from Sweden who are investigating the Rossi device missed their deadline. I have absolutely no inside information on this. I have no idea why they are late. However, I have worked with professors for many years and I know why other professors often miss deadlines. Let me describe some of the reasons. First, a likely non-reason. Kevin O’Malley suspects they may be involved in inside trading, and they are hoarding the information for that reason. I doubt it because: 1. Professors are usually not well-versed in things like investments and business. This is a cliché but it is true nonetheless. 2. They often hoard information but the usual reason is to achieve academic priority. 3. It seems unlikely to me that anyone will be able to cash in on this information in the near term. What would you do? Short sell oil company stocks? There is no direct way to invest in Rossi’s device at this stage. On to the reasons -- Age. These professors are old. It is sad to say this but, there is no way a person in his 60s can work as hard or accomplish as much as someone in his 20s or 30s. They know too much about old methods and not enough about new ones. As Mizuno says, “we are analog people living in a digital world.” Urgency priority. They feel no sense of urgency. They often stop working in the middle of an important project to devote six months to editing a book on some obscure academic aspect of electrochemistry. The older people get in the less time they have left in their life the more they are willing to dillydally and delay. This is a mystery to me. No customers. The underlying problem is that they have no customer, and no deadline. If a software company delays producing a new version of a product for a year, it gets in deep trouble. Its income is cut off. Professors are paid no matter what they do. Most of these professors are probably retired so they get paid a pension no matter what they do. Funding. They probably have only shoestring funding. The nature of research. All real scientific research is groundbreaking, by definition. It is something that people have never done before in history. Of course they have done similar things, but never this particular experiment. It is usually harder than anyone anticipated. It takes longer. It costs more. I mean much more: a factor of 10 or 100 more. When Oppenheimer went to organize the laboratory at Los Alamos, he thought he would need a few dozen experts. They ended up with thousands. People never do groundbreaking research right the first time. If you look at the design of early experiments or the first versions of new technology you see it is suboptimal. Perfectionism. Some professors are obsessive perfectionists. They do in experiment one way, then they think of a better method and they go back and spend several months doing it again even though the first results were important and good enough to be published. A famous example of perfectionism and the never ending development cycle in software is the “Duke Nukem saga, described here: Learn to Let Go: How Success Killed Duke Nukem http://www.wired.com/2009/12/fail_duke_nukem/ - Jed -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
Re: [Vo]:Why professors are often late
Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote: It is also possible the delay is caused by the peer review process as Rossi alludes to. One of my friends- reputed professor at Budapest says he will believe CF is real when a ppaer about it will be published in the NATURE journal- the process of review there is a guarantee of the quality and validity of the paper and the research. This attitude is widespread. Mike Melich asked someone at the DoE: Why have you put the editor of Nature in charge of U.S. energy policy? The person was unhappy with the question. There is no chance *Nature* or *Science* will publish a paper about cold fusion. If the Swedes are waiting for this to happen, they will wait forever. Even a second-tier journal make take years to peer-review a paper. Mike McKubre told me it took several years for his *J. Electroanal. Chem.* paper to pass peer review. For a peer reviewer at a high rank journal is a high risk, danger for reputation to say YES to such a dubious subject so the reviewers verify and ask and verify again. Yes. I have seen the comments from reviewers. Some were reasonable, but many were written by people grasping at straws. They were trying to think up ways to prevent publication. They resemble the 2004 DoE cold fusion reviewer's remarks, which were 9/10th baloney. See: http://lenr-canr.org/wordpress/?page_id=455 - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Why professors are often late
I seriously doubt that Peer Review of the Rossi reactor can be done, It is a waste of time. First of all, Rossi has no peers. Peer review is the evaluation of work by one or more people of similar competence to the producers of the work (peers). Rossi has made sure that only he can produce the results of his reactor. If the Rossi reactor works, it will be incredible and unexplainable to any reviewer. LENR has no scientific underpinning to compare against, to be consistent with, to judge violations against. If Peer Review of the Rossi reactor is done, it will take on the visage of a group of magic debunkers who will try to find the tricks used to fool the public. If such tricks cannot be found, the Peer Review process will never be terminated because Peer Review of miracles cannot be done. On Wed, Jul 2, 2014 at 10:26 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote: It is also possible the delay is caused by the peer review process as Rossi alludes to. One of my friends- reputed professor at Budapest says he will believe CF is real when a ppaer about it will be published in the NATURE journal- the process of review there is a guarantee of the quality and validity of the paper and the research. This attitude is widespread. Mike Melich asked someone at the DoE: Why have you put the editor of Nature in charge of U.S. energy policy? The person was unhappy with the question. There is no chance *Nature* or *Science* will publish a paper about cold fusion. If the Swedes are waiting for this to happen, they will wait forever. Even a second-tier journal make take years to peer-review a paper. Mike McKubre told me it took several years for his *J. Electroanal. Chem.* paper to pass peer review. For a peer reviewer at a high rank journal is a high risk, danger for reputation to say YES to such a dubious subject so the reviewers verify and ask and verify again. Yes. I have seen the comments from reviewers. Some were reasonable, but many were written by people grasping at straws. They were trying to think up ways to prevent publication. They resemble the 2004 DoE cold fusion reviewer's remarks, which were 9/10th baloney. See: http://lenr-canr.org/wordpress/?page_id=455 - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Why professors are often late
So the things are very nasty if mainstream peer review will be tried. Today's Gapingvoid.art drawing says: Anyone who tries to please the mainstream, deserves everything they get” A good, solid, secular miracle could help...or the commercial generator Peter Scientists can only hope On Wed, Jul 2, 2014 at 5:26 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote: It is also possible the delay is caused by the peer review process as Rossi alludes to. One of my friends- reputed professor at Budapest says he will believe CF is real when a ppaer about it will be published in the NATURE journal- the process of review there is a guarantee of the quality and validity of the paper and the research. This attitude is widespread. Mike Melich asked someone at the DoE: Why have you put the editor of Nature in charge of U.S. energy policy? The person was unhappy with the question. There is no chance *Nature* or *Science* will publish a paper about cold fusion. If the Swedes are waiting for this to happen, they will wait forever. Even a second-tier journal make take years to peer-review a paper. Mike McKubre told me it took several years for his *J. Electroanal. Chem.* paper to pass peer review. For a peer reviewer at a high rank journal is a high risk, danger for reputation to say YES to such a dubious subject so the reviewers verify and ask and verify again. Yes. I have seen the comments from reviewers. Some were reasonable, but many were written by people grasping at straws. They were trying to think up ways to prevent publication. They resemble the 2004 DoE cold fusion reviewer's remarks, which were 9/10th baloney. See: http://lenr-canr.org/wordpress/?page_id=455 - Jed -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
Re: [Vo]:Why professors are often late
Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: I seriously doubt that Peer Review of the Rossi reactor can be done, It is a waste of time. First of all, Rossi has no peers. Peer review is the evaluation of work by one or more people of similar competence to the producers of the work (peers). Rossi has made sure that only he can produce the results of his reactor. That is a good point. I was referring to a peer-review of the tests sponsored by ELFORSK, which is somewhat different from a review of Rossi's own work. However, I agree it is related, and it would be difficult to peer-review. Also, a journal such as *Nature* would never allow a report of a black-box test such as this. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Why professors are often late
On Wed, Jul 2, 2014 at 6:39 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Kevin O’Malley suspects they may be involved in inside trading, and they are hoarding the information for that reason. I doubt it because: 1. Professors are usually not well-versed in things like investments and business. This is a cliché but it is true nonetheless. ***Yup. That's why it's taking them so long to get their financial ducks in a row. 2. They often hoard information but the usual reason is to achieve academic priority. ***There's no doubting that this is going on but keep in mind that this is the greatest scientific achievement since gunpowder. Usual reasons stop being applicable, and simple greed is a reasonable conclusion. 3. It seems unlikely to me that anyone will be able to cash in on this information in the near term. What would you do? Short sell oil company stocks? ***Yes. There is no direct way to invest in Rossi’s device at this stage. ***You could go for CYPW Cyclone Power, or CPST, or any other publicly traded waste heat engine company. Or publicly traded desalination companies. Or, as a professor, you could collect birddog fees for giving fund managers the heads up. There are some direct ways, mostly indirect ways. That's why these guys are dragging their feet so much ... ;-/ On to the reasons -- ***It seems almost all of your reasons support Lennart's contention that they're simply incompetent. But this is a MONUMENTAL development, so how could they be too old/lazy, not have urgency priority, have no idea of a public deadline, etc.? Bowlsheet. And WTF are we talking about when it comes to the nature of research??? This ain't research. This is reading a voltmeter, an ammeter, and a thermometer. All of us Vorts KNEW there should be isotopic analysis, and only NOW these idiots are thinking about doing it? They simply CANNOT be that incompetent. They are cashing in with their hoarded information. they are willing to dillydally and delay. This is a mystery to me. ***The mystery is solved in this case. These guys are doing the traditional swedish dance of providing for their families and they are leveraging on this hoarded information.
