On 2011-11-29 13:32, Akira Shirakawa wrote:
On 2011-11-29 12:14, Akira Shirakawa wrote:
Hello group,
http://www.energeticambiente.it/sistemi-idrogeno-nikel/14742857-novita-cella-piantelli-5.html#post119273029
Roy Virgilio states again and confirms that there are no agreements
between the
So, it is likely that Piantelli is involved in this, after all:
*Piantelli* is working with the *University of Siena* on his Ni-H cell
http://ecatnews.com/?p=581
2011/11/29 Akira Shirakawa shirakawa.ak...@gmail.com
Hello group,
Have a read at this article posted today on NyTeknik. It's
On 2011-11-29 12:14, Akira Shirakawa wrote:
Hello group,
For what it's worth, Daniele Passerini on a recent comment in his Blog
[1] is saying that when Roy Virgilio denied any relationship between
Piantelli and DGT, he answered him privately that according to his
sources both do have an
So, if that is confirmed, we can put Piantelli also as a scammer, from the
point of view of the hardest skeptics.
2011/11/29 Akira Shirakawa shirakawa.ak...@gmail.com
On 2011-11-29 12:14, Akira Shirakawa wrote:
Hello group,
For what it's worth, Daniele Passerini on a recent comment in his
More like just another snake who needed the spectrum to work out Rossi's
key IP. If proven, all involved are just common thieves.
AG
On 11/29/2011 11:12 PM, Daniel Rocha wrote:
So, if that is confirmed, we can put Piantelli also as a scammer, from
the point of view of the hardest skeptics.
Technically, Rossi still has to prove the I part of the IP, besides, he
must show that it is not based on prior art from Piantelli.
2011/11/29 Aussie Guy E-Cat aussieguy.e...@gmail.com
More like just another snake who needed the spectrum to work out Rossi's
key IP. If proven, all involved are
That people conspired together to steal the IP / trade secrets says it
is not prior knowledge.
AG
On 11/29/2011 11:33 PM, Daniel Rocha wrote:
Technically, Rossi still has to prove the I part of the IP, besides,
he must show that it is not based on prior art from Piantelli.
2011/11/29
what is more sensible for me is that in the article they pretend that
the e-cat cannot be stable for more of 24hour because of the design that
create hot-sport in the middle(explanation is credible)...
the second most sensible point is that they pretend to have solved the
problem,
meaning that it
It is still theft. No way to spin it any other way.
AG
On 11/30/2011 12:29 AM, Alain dit le Cycliste wrote:
it looks like what I say about patent race... hard to keep an IP from
creative competitors...
That's the problem with IP protection through security, leaks are not
necessarily theft in a legal sense (the only one that matters
commercially). Even if there may be individuals who have signed
non-disclosure agreements etc and then leaked info, it is only them
and the organisations they work
Here's an extremely interesting item from the linked Nyteknik article:
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.
Exactly how do we square this with Rossi's claim that
On 2011-11-29 16:46, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
Exactly how do we square this with Rossi's claim that he ran a reactor
for *two years*, heating a factory?
Perhaps they meant that in self-sustaining mode?
Just guessing.
Cheers,
S.A.
Or perhaps in very low power. Like, for example, an input of 10W, output of
150W.
2011/11/29 Akira Shirakawa shirakawa.ak...@gmail.com
On 2011-11-29 16:46, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
Exactly how do we square this with Rossi's claim that he ran a reactor
for *two years*, heating a factory?
Akira Shirakawa wrote:
Exactly how do we square this with Rossi's claim that he ran a reactor
for *two years*, heating a factory?
Perhaps they meant that in self-sustaining mode?
I believe that's what it means. Obviously they know a reactor ran for 18
hours in one test. I think they are
On 11-11-29 10:55 AM, Daniel Rocha wrote:
Or perhaps in very low power. Like, for example, an input of 10W,
output of 150W.
That doesn't seem to me to make a lot of sense for a space heater
adequate to heat an entire factory. But I suppose you can assume that,
if you like, and justify
On 11-11-29 11:03 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Akira Shirakawa wrote:
Exactly how do we square this with Rossi's claim that he ran a reactor
for *two years*, heating a factory?
Perhaps they meant that in self-sustaining mode?
I believe that's what it means. Obviously they know a reactor ran
Did he ever say entire factory or just heat a factory? :) Or was only his
room? Seeing his old tests to McKubre, it should be something below 400W,
if that was the state of the art back then.
2011/11/29 Stephen A. Lawrence sa...@pobox.com
**
On 11-11-29 10:55 AM, Daniel Rocha wrote:
Or
/snip/
Did he ever say entire factory or just heat a factory? :) Or was only his
room? Seeing his old tests to McKubre, it should be something below 400W, if
that was the state of the art back then.
/snip/
In his patent application, he states:
[0060] A practical embodiment of the inventive
He didn't say how much that was heated! But it's weird that he mentions
that. It's like he is inviting the patent analyzers to test his device, LOL!
2011/11/29 Robert Leguillon robert.leguil...@hotmail.com
/snip/
Did he ever say entire factory or just heat a factory? :) Or was only
his room?
I think the only device that did not somehow impress the people who
attended demonstrations, according to these, was the one shown to Krivit.
2011/11/29 Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com
2011/11/29 Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com
He didn't say how much that was heated! But it's weird that he
2011/11/29 Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com:
I think the only device that did not somehow impress the people who attended
demonstrations, according to these, was the one shown to Krivit.
Maybe it was Rossi who set up Krivit knowing that he supported
Piantelli and that Krivit would ultimately
21 matches
Mail list logo
