Re: [Vo]:Let's continue to think about passive vs active approach to LENR 's existentil problems

The misconception that something mysterious is going on in the hydrogen torch results from William Lyne's book "Occult Ether Physics". However, this one sentence tells precisely why Lyne is wrong. Do you see it? (the ans. is here https://goo.gl/mwohke ) *It seemed odd to me that it was later

Re: [Vo]:Let's continue to think about passive vs active approach to LENR 's existentil problems

>>>And there you have it!  WTF!  Is the whole “science” establishment so filled >>>with cowardice or dominated by ‘physics as a religion’ that no one will do >>>or discuss anomalies? Exactly, but I am not afraid of speaking out. Physics has probably got too complicated for them, and they have

Re: [Vo]:Let's continue to think about passive vs active approach to LENR 's existentil problems

On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 7:01 AM, a.ashfield wrote: The fact remains he is wrong. There are numerous cases where LENR has been > proved. Pons & Fleischmann produced excess heat in the famous 1989 > experiment let alone later. The diehards won't accept that. > I agree

Re: [Vo]:Let's continue to think about passive vs active approach to LENR 's existentil problems

a.ashfield wrote: You do seem to rely on people who may be like Tom Clarke. Very bright is > many ways but closed minded. > No, I rely on my own technical judgement, and on information from people who know that cold fusion is real. Many aspects of cold fusion are over

RE: [Vo]:Let's continue to think about passive vs active approach to LENR 's existentil problems

I very much would like to see attempted replications of Langmuir's hydrogen-tungsten experiment, as well as Wendt and Irion's exploding tungsten wire experiment and Paneth and Peter's PdH absorption experiment. And there you have it! WTF! Is the whole “science” establishment so filled with

Re: [Vo]:Let's continue to think about passive vs active approach to LENR 's existentil problems

Eric, "On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 9:44 PM, a.ashfield wrote: You do seem to rely on people who may be like Tom Clarke. Very bright is many ways but closed minded. He has stated that LENR is impossible and any excess heat must be measurement error. If you start out thinking that way,

Re: [Vo]:Let's continue to think about passive vs active approach to LENR 's existentil problems

Hi, On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 9:44 PM, a.ashfield wrote: You do seem to rely on people who may be like Tom Clarke. Very bright is > many ways but closed minded. He has stated that LENR is impossible and any > excess heat must be measurement error. If you start out

Re: [Vo]:Let's continue to think about passive vs active approach to LENR 's existentil problems

Jed, "Bob Cook > wrote: I think I understand why you believe NASA the Navy and elsewhere, as well as the venture capitalists—they have spoon-feed you. Most of them are the same government/energy village, not unlike the “nuclear

Re: [Vo]:Let's continue to think about passive vs active approach to LENR 's existentil problems

On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 11:40 AM, Chris Zell wrote: ... I always found it strange that critics were so relaxed in dismissing > an effect that resembles Langmuir’s atomic hydrogen experiments. I mean > there must be something weird going on there. I very much would like

Re: [Vo]:Let's continue to think about passive vs active approach to LENR 's existentil problems

Lennart Thornros wrote: Why the hell do you say what you are saying? > Because I know about Rossi. I have spoken with people who tried to deal with him, and offered him millions. He refused to do a simple test to get the money. This happened on at least three occasions to

Re: [Vo]:Let's continue to think about passive vs active approach to LENR 's existentil problems

Jed, Why the hell do you say what you are saying? You are disappointed. Well we all are. No Rossi is Rossi. He is an entrepreneur. He does thing others think are stupid. That is how entrepreneurs are. You make judgments with no knowledge or facts. Just your emotions. Best Regards , Lennart

Re: [Vo]:Let's continue to think about passive vs active approach to LENR 's existentil problems

Axil Axil wrote: https://animpossibleinvention.com/2015/11/25/rossis-engineer-i-have-seen-things-you-people-wouldnt-believe/ > > Rossi’s engineer: ‘I have seen things you people wouldn’t believe’ > People wouldn't believe for good reason. All of Rossi's previous claims were

Re: [Vo]:Let's continue to think about passive vs active approach to LENR 's existentil problems

https://animpossibleinvention.com/2015/11/25/rossis-engineer-i-have-seen-things-you-people-wouldnt-believe/ Rossi’s engineer: ‘I have seen things you people wouldn’t believe’ Talking about the validity of the E-Cat technology, Fabiani continues: “With the failures, I found myself having to

Re: [Vo]:Let's continue to think about passive vs active approach to LENR 's existentil problems

Axil Axil wrote: An IH employee has said that he saw a Rossi reactor melt down. How does > this fact fit in with your (Jed) contentions? > I have not heard of this. Which IH employee? Where was this written up? Levi saw a reactor melt. See p. 2:

Re: [Vo]:Let's continue to think about passive vs active approach to LENR 's existentil problems

Peter Gluck wrote: > Jed, when have you heard the first time from IH that the plant does not > work- in which form was this expressed? > I don't recall when. Many months ago. It was expressed in plain English. With unrefined Anglo-Saxon words, as opposed to ornate

Re: [Vo]:Let's continue to think about passive vs active approach to LENR 's existentil problems

An IH employee has said that he saw a Rossi reactor melt down. How does this fact fit in with your (Jed) contentions? On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 2:41 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > Lennart Thornros wrote: > > >> Jed, quick to judgment because you decide who

Re: [Vo]:Let's continue to think about passive vs active approach to LENR 's existentil problems

Lennart Thornros wrote: > Jed, quick to judgment because you decide who is right before you have the > facts and to no value. > This is not a quick judgement. I heard about the situation many months ago. The facts I related about their skill levels are of great value.

Re: [Vo]:Let's continue to think about passive vs active approach to LENR 's existentil problems

Bob Higgins wrote: > I do believe IH is honest and has NOT been able to produce any working > LENR technology using what Rossi has *disclosed* to them. > They said that the 1 MW reactor did not produce any excess heat. Rossi claims it produces 50 times input. They

RE: [Vo]:Let's continue to think about passive vs active approach to LENR 's existentil problems

I don’t know what to make of the Rossi soap opera but I always found it strange that critics were so relaxed in dismissing an effect that resembles Langmuir’s atomic hydrogen experiments. I mean there must be something weird going on there.

Re: [Vo]:Let's continue to think about passive vs active approach to LENR 's existentil problems

Bob well said. Jed, quick to judgment because you decide who is right before you have the facts and to no value. What you believe does not propel the issue forward. Instead your hints that you know it all is doing the opposite. Better capacity for measuring does say nothing. If yoI do not. If you

Re: [Vo]:Let's continue to think about passive vs active approach to LENR 's existentil problems

Just a remark- calorimetry is a lab size measurement. When it is about kW we can speak heat balance measurement. Jed, when have you heard the first time from IH that the plant does not work- in which form was this expressed? We cannot substantiate...? Rossi cannot substantiate, produce heat at

Re: [Vo]:Let's continue to think about passive vs active approach to LENR 's existentil problems

Lennart Thornros wrote: Jed, why so quick to judgment. > I am not quick to judgement. I heard many months ago that the I.H. and Rossi disagreed about the calorimetry. They did not say why. I was hoping the problems (whatever they are) would be addressed by the end of the

Re: [Vo]:Let's continue to think about passive vs active approach to LENR 's existentil problems

Nothing I have seen reported, has *proven* Rossi has no technology now and never had any. Maybe it is not as good as Rossi claims. Maybe even Rossi is deceiving himself. Maybe Rossi has "guilded the lilly" - has deceptively over reported his results. I don't believe Focardi was deceived - I

Re: [Vo]:Let's continue to think about passive vs active approach to LENR 's existentil problems

Jed, why so quick to judgment. All parties are in this mess. I am sure that someone will dig themselves out of the mess. I am amazed that IH has not found someone to get a solution. I have been in IH position I am sure they want result and clarity so they can go on. Evaluation of different peoples

Re: [Vo]:Let's continue to think about passive vs active approach to LENR 's existentil problems

a.ashfield wrote: > > "I refer to first-hand statements by I.H., especially in their press > release:" > > I thought you were more interested in facts than what people said. Obviously, I assume these people are reporting a fact. They are saying they evaluated the

Re: [Vo]:Let's continue to think about passive vs active approach to LENR 's existentil problems

Jed, "I refer to first-hand statements by I.H., especially in their press release:" I thought you were more interested in facts than what people said. Seems that facts are thin on the ground right now. Either of us could be right. The point is we don't know yet.

Re: [Vo]:Let's continue to think about passive vs active approach to LENR 's existentil problems

Maybe it is not so important. DGT and Rossi triggered something, pushing rational people to look at rational science done before. The irrational part of those two stories (I'm less sure Rossi have nothing, but innovation is more than just technology), unlocked the irrational latch against past

Re: [Vo]:Let's continue to think about passive vs active approach to LENR 's existentil problems

Patrick Ellul wrote: > So it's not IH as such that you trust as having more expertise, but > Rossi's competitors. > No, I am talking about the people in I.H., not the others they are working with. > You obviously know and are in contact with some of these

Re: [Vo]:Let's continue to think about passive vs active approach to LENR 's existentil problems

Lennart Thornros wrote: I actually said that negotiations maybe under way. I certainly cannot prove > the negative so here is what I said. > "Maybe it is underway in a silent format.". > Ah, I see what you are saying. - Jed

Re: [Vo]:Let's continue to think about passive vs active approach to LENR 's existentil problems

Hi Jed, I actually said that negotiations maybe under way. I certainly cannot prove the negative so here is what I said. "Maybe it is underway in a silent format.". Best Regards , Lennart Thornros lenn...@thornros.com +1 916 436 1899 Whatever you vividly imagine, ardently desire, sincerely

Re: [Vo]:Let's continue to think about passive vs active approach to LENR 's existentil problems

Thanks for posting that. It reinforces my recent viewpoint that this area is now ripe for fraud and fantastic magicians who know of a great chemical trick that confounds trained observers. But I take heart in Houdini's magic trick when he visited Tunisia to fight piracy and challenged their

Re: [Vo]:Let's continue to think about passive vs active approach to LENR 's existentil problems

> There is one thing known for sure. I.H. says it does not work, whereas > Rossi says it does. I can judge which side is probably right, based on > their track records. I am not jumping to conclusions. I think that I.H. has > credibility and expertise. > > Jed, IH was created to buy out Rossi. IH

Re: [Vo]:Let's continue to think about passive vs active approach to LENR 's existentil problems

a.ashfield wrote: > I don't find unofficial third party reports on a case this large to be > very convincing. > I refer to first-hand statements by I.H., especially in their press release: "Industrial Heat has worked for over three years to substantiate the results

Re: [Vo]:Let's continue to think about passive vs active approach to LENR 's existentil problems

Jed wrote: "In recent years, Rossi has in fact done what he said he would do. Not a chance. Just looking at the facility you know there cannot be a 1 MW heat source in it. It would cook everyone in that part of the building. That is enough heat for 100 dry cleaning machines. You couldn't

Re: [Vo]:Let's continue to think about passive vs active approach to LENR 's existentil problems

Lennart Thornros wrote: It is in my opinion rather poorly handled in general. Why after several > weeks are there no negotiations going on? > How do you know there are no negotiations going on? Where did you learn this? - Jed

Re: [Vo]:Let's continue to think about passive vs active approach to LENR 's existentil problems

Hi guys, I see no reason to decide the outcome just a few weeks before the proof will be there. One way or the other. Yes, I understand the disappointment as most of us would have expected a clear situation by now. I am also optimistic. Who is more believable? There are too much money involved to

Re: [Vo]:Let's continue to think about passive vs active approach to LENR 's existentil problems

a.ashfield wrote: > In recent years, Rossi has in fact done what he said he would do. > Not a chance. Just looking at the facility you know there cannot be a 1 MW heat source in it. It would cook everyone in that part of the building. That is enough heat for 100 dry

Re: [Vo]:Let's continue to think about passive vs active approach to LENR 's existentil problems

Frank Znidarsic, I think you are being unfair to Rossi. It has not been "A very long time" to develop what is a completely new technology. In recent years, Rossi has in fact done what he said he would do. You have no proof that the 1 MW plant didn't work and I remain optimistic about new

Re: [Vo]:Let's continue to think about passive vs active approach to LENR 's existentil problems

Peter Gluck wrote: > Re your statement "COLD FUSION IS DEAD" this means two things: > a) as you say, if Rossi E-Cat does not work, the cause is lost. > That's silly. Why would it be lost? There are many other fruitful approaches and good experiments. Rossi and Defkalion

Re: [Vo]:Let's continue to think about passive vs active approach to LENR 's existentil problems

Frank Znidarsic wrote: > With the latest failure of Rossi nothing has come of the very long effort. > Only Rossi was involved in this "effort." Most researchers ignored Rossi. > Jed is not even saying so much any more. It is true there isn't much to report. On the

Re: [Vo]:Let's continue to think about passive vs active approach to LENR 's existentil problems

Frank needs to tune in on the Holmlid experiments. Like Jones, he can do his pwn experimentation to check out his own theories. Frank, go for those muons. On Sun, May 8, 2016 at 9:22 AM, Frank Znidarsic wrote: > Just last week someone arranged a meeting with me and two one

Re: [Vo]:Let's continue to think about passive vs active approach to LENR 's existentil problems

Yes, and we have been here before with Eneco, IESI, Russ George, The Cincinnati Group, CETI, Rossi, NEDO, the first DOE audit the second DOE audit, and the list goes on. Now we have a new list of players. It reminds me a an episode of hit show here The big Bang Theory. Sheldon has

Re: [Vo]:Let's continue to think about passive vs active approach to LENR 's existentil problems

Dear Frank Thank you for writing an answer to my blog editorial! First a small correction- I started to work on LENR on March 24,1989 then working at an institute of chemistry- I have visited the neighboring institute of physics and have poarticipated at discussions re two lines of replications

Re: [Vo]:Let's continue to think about passive vs active approach to LENR 's existentil problems

Peter you and I have been working on this thing since we both took a trip to Los Alamos Labs in 1996. With the latest failure of Rossi nothing has come of the very long effort. Jed is not even saying so much any more. It's over, cold fusion is dead, and its time to move on. -Original