Re: [Vo]:Defkalion described how they got Rossi's formula
On 2 January 2012 04:35, OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson orionwo...@charter.net wrote: Not having direct access I think it's difficult for any of us to determine whether DGT or Rossi is ahead in the game. DGT strikes me as better organized, company wise. The organization is probably being run like a disciplined corporation. I cannot understand where did you get such an impression. Defkalion is still nothing but an unpopular discussion forum in the Internet. Nothing else. There is only one spokes person, Xanthoulis, who is making bold claims, without any real proofs. Everyone who has personal knowledge on Defkalion, does not trust them, and that is just two individuals in the whole world, i.e. Rossi and Stremmenos. There is only one known person who has visited Defkalion »laboratory» and he/she came back with an impression that 'I would not want to work with these guys'. (or something similar) There is nothing real ever presented on the company. And every scarce empirical evidence (a statements from three individuals) what we have, points into direction that Defkalion is a phony company. For me this kind of determination, what is the real nature of Defkalion, is very simple to do, because I trust Rossi. –Jouni
RE: [Vo]:Defkalion described how they got Rossi's formula
From Jouni, I cannot understand where did you get such an impression. Defkalion is still nothing but an unpopular discussion forum in the Internet. Nothing else. There is only one spokes person, Xanthoulis, who is making bold claims, without any real proofs. Everyone who has personal knowledge on Defkalion, does not trust them, and that is just two individuals in the whole world, i.e. Rossi and Stremmenos. There is only one known person who has visited Defkalion »laboratory» and he/she came back with an impression that 'I would not want to work with these guys'. (or something similar) There is nothing real ever presented on the company. And every scarce empirical evidence (a statements from three individuals) what we have, points into direction that Defkalion is a phony company. For me this kind of determination, what is the real nature of Defkalion, is very simple to do, because I trust Rossi. Your observations a tad bias to me, as are the individuals you cite to back up your claims: Rossi and Stremmenos. But no matter. Maybe you're right. Or maybe not. We shall see. I wait for more shoes to drop. Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:Defkalion described how they got Rossi's formula
On Sun, Jan 1, 2012 at 6:04 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: However, Defkalion spokesman Alexandros Xanthoulis told Swedish science magazine NyTeknik that they know exactly what the catalyst is. In a piece of subterfuge, a spectroscopic examination was carried out on an E-Cat being while it was being tested without Rossi's knowledge. Breach of contract. Everything they do is vitiated.
Re: [Vo]:Defkalion described how they got Rossi's formula
What about Jed Rothwell's secret source who just came back with glowing reviews? On Jan 3, 2012, at 4:35, Jouni Valkonen jounivalko...@gmail.com wrote: On 2 January 2012 04:35, OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson orionwo...@charter.net wrote: Not having direct access I think it's difficult for any of us to determine whether DGT or Rossi is ahead in the game. DGT strikes me as better organized, company wise. The organization is probably being run like a disciplined corporation. I cannot understand where did you get such an impression. Defkalion is still nothing but an unpopular discussion forum in the Internet. Nothing else. There is only one spokes person, Xanthoulis, who is making bold claims, without any real proofs. Everyone who has personal knowledge on Defkalion, does not trust them, and that is just two individuals in the whole world, i.e. Rossi and Stremmenos. There is only one known person who has visited Defkalion »laboratory» and he/she came back with an impression that 'I would not want to work with these guys'. (or something similar) There is nothing real ever presented on the company. And every scarce empirical evidence (a statements from three individuals) what we have, points into direction that Defkalion is a phony company. For me this kind of determination, what is the real nature of Defkalion, is very simple to do, because I trust Rossi. –Jouni
RE: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Defkalion described how they got Rossi's formula
James, that is according to Swedish science magazine NyTeknik and I am certain Xanthoulis' position is that NyTeknik misunderstood him and their synopsis not accurate on that point. From: James Bowery [mailto:jabow...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 03, 2012 10:29 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Defkalion described how they got Rossi's formula On Sun, Jan 1, 2012 at 6:04 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.commailto:jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: However, Defkalion spokesman Alexandros Xanthoulis told Swedish science magazine NyTeknik that they know exactly what the catalyst is. In a piece of subterfuge, a spectroscopic examination was carried out on an E-Cat being while it was being tested without Rossi's knowledge. Breach of contract. Everything they do is vitiated.
Re: [Vo]:Defkalion described how they got Rossi's formula
It is strange to me that they would even discuss this issue. This will really assist Rossi if a court trial determining ownership of his catalyst is held. Is this revelation supposed to increase our confidence in Defkalion? Dave -Original Message- From: James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tue, Jan 3, 2012 10:29 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:Defkalion described how they got Rossi's formula On Sun, Jan 1, 2012 at 6:04 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: However, Defkalion spokesman Alexandros Xanthoulis told Swedish science magazine NyTeknik that they know exactly what the catalyst is. In a piece of subterfuge, a spectroscopic examination was carried out on an E-Cat being while it was being tested without Rossi's knowledge. Breach of contract. Everything they do is vitiated.
Re: [Vo]:Defkalion described how they got Rossi's formula
On Sun, Jan 1, 2012 at 7:04 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: If there was subterfuge, it is no wonder Rossi is upset. But Rossi is also guilty of subterfuge. He has copied the geometry of Defkalion. Note that Defkalion stated they were surprised at what they saw when the October 6th demo Ottoman was opened. They were surprised that Rossi had copied their configuration. http://www.defkalion-energy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4t=285p=3316#p3316 We were surprised to see our old designs used in public testing. We were confused why our old designs were implemented wrongly, as well as witnessing insufficient use of instruments and testing protocols. We also identified confidential (yet shown in public) special instruments designed in collaboration with Rossi and prepared by Defkalion. http://www.defkalion-energy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4t=297 Your declaration that we don’t have the technology is in contradiction to your recent attempts to entice away our scientists which was not concluded successfully. We stress again that it is a pity that our designs were applied wrongly, demonstrating in public, immature prototypes with wrong protocols and instruments as explained in our communication on Monday, 10th October. Defkalion's kernel is rectangular, not cylindrical. They have found a way to wafer the kernel in such a way that the reaction is spread over a greater area. T
Re: [Vo]:Defkalion described how they got Rossi's formula
On Sun, Jan 1, 2012 at 8:22 PM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: Defkalion's kernel is rectangular, not cylindrical. They have found a way to wafer the kernel in such a way that the reaction is spread over a greater area. Here's the thread on Defkalion's geometry. I suspect that since they called it the Ottoman an older design, this describes their later refinements: http://www.defkalion-energy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=18t=599 T
RE: [Vo]:Defkalion described how they got Rossi's formula
I remember reading some of this stuff. Regarding the following statement from DGT: ... We were surprised to see our old designs used in public testing. We were confused why our old designs were implemented wrongly, as well as witnessing insufficient use of instruments and testing protocols. We also identified confidential (yet shown in public) special instruments designed in collaboration with Rossi and prepared by Defkalion. http://www.defkalion-energy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4t=297 Your declaration that we don't have the technology is in contradiction to your recent attempts to entice away our scientists which was not concluded successfully. We stress again that it is a pity that our designs were applied wrongly, demonstrating in public, immature prototypes with wrong protocols and instruments as explained in our communication on Monday, 10th October. It should be obvious to anyone that any kind of official statement issued by DGT in regards to whatever relationship they have (or had) with Rossi will be strategically parsed in such a manner as to infer that their line of products are superior to anything manufactured by Rossi Co. It also wouldn't hurt to infer that the competition isn't handling what fiddleybits they may have in their possession in a correct manner either. DGT's comments strike me as SOP, product placement in action: Accept no imitations other than the genuine article. Not having direct access I think it's difficult for any of us to determine whether DGT or Rossi is ahead in the game. DGT strikes me as better organized, company wise. The organization is probably being run like a disciplined corporation. I think it helps gives the impression to the casual observer that DGT is probably better funded and better equipped than Rossi Co. Whether that is true or not is anyone's guess. Nevertheless, DGT get points for that. Meanwhile, Rossi probably runs his business more in the style of a micromanager, with a heavy pinch of intuition and street smarts thrown in. Rossi gets points for possessing intuition and street smarts. I just hope both of these adversaries have enough of what they really need in order to fulfill contractual obligations. Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:Defkalion described how they got Rossi's formula
So where is the data obtained from the mass spec data taken by U. Padua? Is it in the paper, A. Carnera, S. Focardi, A. Rossi, to be published on Arxiv From: Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Sunday, January 1, 2012 7:04 PM Subject: [Vo]:Defkalion described how they got Rossi's formula Here is an article published in November: Defkalion: 'We have Rossi’s formula' http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3353181.ece I should have paid closer attention to this. In this article, Xanthoulis says they got the formula from mass spec data taken by U. Padua. I think the data is here, in a paper linked to this article: http://www.nyteknik.se/incoming/article3358646.ece/BINARY/Rossi-Focardi_paper.pdf They say they did not directly examine powder from Rossi. Assuming that is true, I think their work would be considered developed independently, like a PC compatible BIOS in 1980. They still have to pay royalties in the event Rossi gets a patent, but it would not be theft of intellectual property. In the early 1980s companies developed BIOS's with groups of programmers who had never seen IBM's source code or program notes. They developed it by observing program behavior. As I recall, BIOS was protected only by copyrights back then, not patents, so an independently developed version was free and clear. As I said, with a patent they would need to pay royalties no matter what, even if you independently discover something. When Ford tried to develop a hybrid car, they kept running into Toyota's patents for the Prius, and in the end decided to license them. This article also describes Defkalion's version of the issue that led to a falling out with Rossi: According to Xanthoulis, Rossi could not run the reaction more than 24 hours, and when Defkalion required a 48 hour test it supposedly led to a conflict with Rossi. 'It’s very simple but they didn’t think about it. (...) We solved the problem. Because the problem is that he cannot spread the reaction all over the pipe, and all the heating is concentrated in the middle', Xanthoulis told Ny Teknik. I took a second look at this article because I was surprised by this statement in the recent Wired UK article, and I am trying track it down: However, Defkalion spokesman Alexandros Xanthoulis told Swedish science magazine NyTeknik that they know exactly what the catalyst is. In a piece of subterfuge, a spectroscopic examination was carried out on an E-Cat being while it was being tested without Rossi's knowledge. However, to maintain 'fair play', Defkalion's scientists say they developed their technology without using this information. I still do not know what this refers to. The tests at U. Padua were conducted with Rossi's knowledge. Perhaps this is a misinterpretation. If there was subterfuge, it is no wonder Rossi is upset. - Jed
