date:20160407

Russ George  wrote:

You and I agree there is no data from the demo under discussion! So all of
> the chatter about whether Rossi does good or bad work is preposterous
> untimely speculation.
>

Rossi has REPEATEDLY done dreadful work. I have followed his work as
closely as anyone. I met with many people who visited him and worked with
him, such as the people from NASA, and Mat Lewan. I corresponded with Rossi
extensively. I have photos and unpublished data from him, and from people
who worked with him. I know a lot about his work, and his techniques. In my
judgement, and in the judgement of the people at NASA and others, he has
often done terribly sloppy work. He made gross errors. He tends to blow up
when people show him he is making a mistake, for example, when the people
from NASA showed him the reactor outlet was plugged up and the flow rate
was zero. He threw them out.

He is his own worst enemy.

He has also made many contradictory technical claims. I compiled a list and
uploaded it here again recently.

Everyone has faults, but Rossi's faults are extravagant -- larger than
life. They are readily apparent to everyone I know who has worked with him,
and I know lots of people who have worked with him.

> That’s NOT science that is school yard rude behavior.
>

I disagree. I think that a researcher who acts this way should be held
accountable.

>

> As for data on Rossi’s acumen as a smart businessman the data in his legal
> paperwork is clearly demonstrable of his great capability.
>

His lawyer wrote that. I guess he knows how to hire a good lawyer.

> His recent note in response to IH is more solid data on Rossi’s command of
> business and science.
>

That will depend on who is right about the Penon report. If the report
shows convincing evidence of excess heat, Rossi will vindicated and he will
be shown to have command of business and science. If the report shows no
evidence of excess heat, I.H. will be vindicated. If the report is
ambiguous, like the Lugano report, we will all have to decide for ourselves.

- Jed

RE: [Vo]:I.H. press release responding to Rossi

Ever since cold fusion was shown to be so profoundly simple by Fleischmann and 
Pons there has been no chance that ‘when’ it became a reality that the IP could 
be protected and corralled. One reason Rossi is so coy about his trade secrets 
is that they are such simple secrets that no amount of patent protection could 
possibly create ‘barriers to entry’ which the greed oriented VC world demands. 

 

Indeed it is great news for the planet and mankind that the Chinese are balls 
to the wall building E-Cats! 

 

The decades of mis-information campaigns and ‘honey pot’ traps set to catch and 
bury great cold fusion tech seem to have come to an end. Not without some 
howling but that will soon pass. 

 

 

From: Daniel Rocha [mailto:danieldi...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, April 7, 2016 8:56 PM
To: John Milstone
Subject: Re: [Vo]:I.H. press release responding to Rossi

 

The good news is that, according to Rossi, the Chinese are now going to use 
e-cats. So, we will surely have a huge CO2 emission decrease within a few years!

Re: [Vo]:I.H. press release responding to Rossi

The good news is that, according to Rossi, the Chinese are now going to use
e-cats. So, we will surely have a huge CO2 emission decrease within a few
years!

RE: [Vo]:I.H. press release responding to Rossi

You and I agree there is no data from the demo under discussion! So all of the 
chatter about whether Rossi does good or bad work is preposterous untimely 
speculation. That’s NOT science that is school yard rude behavior.

 

As for data on Rossi’s acumen as a smart businessman the data in his legal 
paperwork is clearly demonstrable of his great capability. His recent note in 
response to IH is more solid data on Rossi’s command of business and science. I 
see only scant evidence of Rossi having “peers” on Vortex-l, and as such that 
reinforces my admonition to Vorts to be patient and polite or STFU and wait for 
the data! If you don’t have anything nice to say don’t say anything is age old 
advice that still applies. 

 

From: Jed Rothwell [mailto:jedrothw...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, April 7, 2016 8:41 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:I.H. press release responding to Rossi

 

Russ George  > wrote:

 

What’s objectionable here is to suggest that the governance of Rossi’s year 
long demo has been done without the benefit of hindsight. It’s a particularly 
irksome trait to suggest that Rossi et al were/are so incompetent as to not do 
a good job this time with $10 million in hand to pay for proper resources… 

 

Look, I.H. said that. Not us. No one here has said anything about the quality 
of the one-year test because the Penon report has not been released. It is 
impossible to say anything about the test until you read the report. You can't 
do science by ESP.

 

 

To suggest past efforts reflect on present efforts, even recent past when we 
know money was in short supply one can ought to understand some less than 
perfect work.

 

It could have been done better for the same amount of money. It was sloppy. It 
would have cost nothing to insert an SD card. Many professionals repeatedly 
suggested to Rossi ways that he could improve his tests. He ignored them all.

 

 

This is after all a pioneering field and to sit back in the stockade and shoot 
arrows of criticism into the back of the guy out there hacking a new trail is 
truly shoddy work to say the least.

 

No, it isn't shoddy. This is science. Critiquing work and pointing out mistakes 
and sloppy work is a good thing, not a bad thing.

 

 

It is a trait of the peanut gallery to imagine things out on the frontier are 
more simple than they are and thus deserving of sniping critiques.

 

I see no sniping here. If you call it sniping to point out at Penon should have 
calibrated, you & I define "sniping" differently.

 

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:I.H. press release responding to Rossi

Russ George  wrote:

What’s objectionable here is to suggest that the governance of Rossi’s year
> long demo has been done without the benefit of hindsight. It’s a
> particularly irksome trait to suggest that Rossi et al were/are so
> incompetent as to not do a good job this time with $10 million in hand to
> pay for proper resources…
>

Look, I.H. said that. Not us. No one here has said anything about the
quality of the one-year test because the Penon report has not been
released. It is impossible to say anything about the test until you read
the report. You can't do science by ESP.

> To suggest past efforts reflect on present efforts, even recent past when
> we know money was in short supply one can ought to understand some less
> than perfect work.
>

It could have been done better for the same amount of money. It was sloppy.
It would have cost nothing to insert an SD card. Many professionals
repeatedly suggested to Rossi ways that he could improve his tests. He
ignored them all.

> This is after all a pioneering field and to sit back in the stockade and
> shoot arrows of criticism into the back of the guy out there hacking a new
> trail is truly shoddy work to say the least.
>

No, it isn't shoddy. This is science. Critiquing work and pointing out
mistakes and sloppy work is a good thing, not a bad thing.

> It is a trait of the peanut gallery to imagine things out on the frontier
> are more simple than they are and thus deserving of sniping critiques.
>

I see no sniping here. If you call it sniping to point out at Penon should
have calibrated, you & I define "sniping" differently.

- Jed

RE: [Vo]:I.H. press release responding to Rossi

What’s objectionable here is to suggest that the governance of Rossi’s year 
long demo has been done without the benefit of hindsight. It’s a particularly 
irksome trait to suggest that Rossi et al were/are so incompetent as to not do 
a good job this time with $10 million in hand to pay for proper resources… To 
suggest past efforts reflect on present efforts, even recent past when we know 
money was in short supply one can ought to understand some less than perfect 
work. This is after all a pioneering field and to sit back in the stockade and 
shoot arrows of criticism into the back of the guy out there hacking a new 
trail is truly shoddy work to say the least. It is a trait of the peanut 
gallery to imagine things out on the frontier are more simple than they are and 
thus deserving of sniping critiques. 

 

From: Jed Rothwell [mailto:jedrothw...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, April 7, 2016 7:36 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:I.H. press release responding to Rossi

 

Russ George  > wrote:

 

Clearly many Vorts are attacking Rossi by using such words as ‘scam’ 

 

Jones Beene is the only person here who has said that. The only other use of 
the word is here: ". . . the possibility of him being a scammer is remote."

 

 

and trying to disparage the people Rossi has agreed to work with even though 
both Rossi and IH had to agree to such people’s competence.

 

I am not disparaging Penon by pointing out that he made egregious errors. This 
is a science discussion group. One of the purposes here is to point out errors.

 

Anyone who reads his report will find this error and many others.

 

 

To disparage the competence of Penon based on old work and not the present well 
monitored work is to disparage the competence and/or the credibility of Rossi.

 

Old work? You make it sound like it was from when he was in high school. This 
was in 2012 for crying out loud.

 

Rossi has been incompetent in many of his tests. As I and others have pointed 
out, he did not even realize the unit was plugged up and the flow rate was zero 
during the NASA tests, and when they pointed this out to him, he become 
hysterical and threw them out. In other tests he did not even bother to insert 
and SD card in the thermocouple reader. He is incredibly smart in some ways, 
but his experimental technique is often sloppy.

 

 

In the environment where the word ‘scam’ and ‘scammer’ is so prominent attacks 
of this sort/vort on Penon are clearly meant to be insulting and slanderous to 
Rossi . . .

 

1. These are not attacks. This is science. You are supposed to point out 
mistakes.

 

2. What I clearly mean to do is to point out mistakes. Do not ascribe to me 
motivations I do not have.

 

- Jed

RE: [Vo]:I.H. press release responding to Rossi

Lennart that is good news about Trolls, I’d rather think of them as warm and 
friendly instead of cold and nasty… we need a new word for the denizens of the 
internet who spit their venom so needlessly… I’d call them childish but that is 
not true, they likely are the adult remains of ADHD bully boys. 

From: Lennart Thornros [mailto:lenn...@thornros.com] 
Sent: Thursday, April 7, 2016 7:46 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:I.H. press release responding to Rossi

Troll is a Swedish word, describing a person who is more in contact withnature 
than with humans. That person lives in the forest and has superficial 
capacities. Sometimes not so nice but at least sarcastic.
I grow up thinking trolls were real.  However I believed in St. Nick (Tomten) 
as well so tomtar and trolls. Pick your choice. (Stolen from Elsa Beskow).
Funy to me. You all trolls - great news.

On Apr 7, 2016 7:26 PM, "Craig Haynie"  > wrote:

On 04/07/2016 09:50 PM, Daniel Rocha wrote:

I am actually trying to defend Rossi, because this time is a big deal. 
According to the terms of the contract and IH, Rossi only got 1.5million, and 
nothing from the escrow account. So, for any decent research, well, decent in 
terms of using massive parallel reactors, he must be on shoe strings. 

Rossi: " Yes, Leonardo Corporation has the financial resources necessary to 
make the massive production we need."

http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=892 

=88#comments

Craig

Re: [Vo]:Rossi's customer

2016-04-07 Thread Patrick Ellul

Henry W. Johnson is a lawyer just hiding the actual customer by being
nominated president of the shell company that is owned by a British Company.
Not unlike the Panama Papers business.

On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 1:03 PM, Eric Walker  wrote:

> I see now that Free Energy Scams has connected Henry W. Johnson to
> Leonardo Corp [1]:
>
> Leonardo 03-03-2014 — ANNUAL REPORT
> There were two major changes in this filing:
> • Andrea Rossi became CEO.
> • Henry W. Johnson became President.
>
>
> I do not know how to substantiate this detail.
>
> Eric
>
>
> [1]
> http://freeenergyscams.com/andrea-rossi-ecat-industrial-heat-llc-conclusions-drawn-from-the-n-c-radiation-protection-report/
>

-- 
Patrick

www.tRacePerfect.com
The daily puzzle everyone can finish but not everyone can perfect!
The quickest puzzle ever!

Re: [Vo]:I.H. press release responding to Rossi

2016-04-07 Thread Patrick Ellul

Rossi responds back to IH with 3 strong statements.

Andrea Rossi
April 7, 2016 at 7:27 PM
Dear Janne:
I have to comment the press release of IH, being a press release and not a
forensic act.
They made the Lugano reactor ( they also signed it ) they made many
replications of which we have due record and witnesses, they made multiple
patent applications ( without my authotization ) with their chief engineer
as the co-inventor ( he invented nothing ) , with detailed description of
the replications , they made replications with the attendance of Woodford,
after which they got 50 or 60 millions of dollars from Woodfords’
investors, they made replications with the attendance of Chinese top level
officers, after which they started thanks to the E-Cat they made an R
activity in China in a 200 millions concern, they made replications with an
E-Cat completely made by them under my direction the very day in which the
1 MW plant has been delivered in Raleigh, they made replications that we
have recorded. After the replication they made with the attendance of
Woodford in 2013 Mr Tom Darden said publicly: ” this replication has been
stellar” ( witnesses available). But this is not the place to discuss this.
We have prepared 18 volumes to explain exactly and in detail the activity
of our “Licensee” and his acquaintances from 2013 to now. Until they had to
collect money thanks to the E-Cat, they made replications and have been
happy with the E-Cat; when it turned to have to pay, they discovered that
they never made replications, that the ERV that they had chosen in
agreement with us was not good, that the test on the 1 MW plant, thanks to
which they collected enormous amounts of money from the investors and where
I put at risk my health working 16-18 hours per day was not a good test (
but for all the year of the test they NEVER said a single word of
complaint, even if they had constantly their men in the plant), etc etc.
But the worse has still to come out. The worse is in the 18 volumes we will
present in due time, in due place. A blog is not the right place to discuss
a litigation. This is only a quick answer to the press release made by IH.
Ad majora.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

Hank Mills:
They prepared everything, the charges, the body of the reactor EVERYTHING
!!!.
I just teached to them what to do.
They never used anything pre-prepared by Leonardo Corp.
Now, let me talk to you of a very singular coincidence: Brillouin has
always made only electrolytic apparatuses: go to read all their patent
applications made before their agreement with IH, and you will find
confirmation of what I am saying ( I know their patents by heart, because I
have studied them and probably I know them better than themselves : I wrote
about 100 pages of notes about their patents ). And now the singular
coincidence: they make the agreement with IH in April 2015, and Voilà, they
made a public demo in Capitol Hill ( Washington, DC) with a device that is
the Copy-Cat of something I am familiar with. Nothing that Brillouin has
ever made before the agreement with IH. What a coincidence !!!
Warm Regards,
A.R.

Hank Mills:
In the press release of IH they write that ” for three years they tried to
replicate the Rossi effect, with no avail”: very good, but during those
three years Industrial Heat collected about 60 million dollars from
Woodford, more millions from other sources, exclusively based on my E-Cats
technology. This before making shopping to buy other patents. Now, the
cases are two: either they are lying when they say they didn’t replicate,
or they made a fraud collecting 60 millions from Woodford, more from
others, not to mention Cherokee fund. You had to see Tom Darden and JT
Vaughn dance like ballet etoiles around the investors, showing them the
E-Cats, and telling them that the E-Cats had been built by them! “Stellar”
coherently Darden, in his role of etoile, repeated to the enchanted
attandees, ready to spend 50 millions. Now, that my bill arrived, the E-Cat
had not been replicated , they say. For three years.
Again, I am just answering to a press release of IH.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 12:56 PM, Terry Blanton  wrote:

>
>
> On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 10:47 PM, Jed Rothwell 
> wrote:
>>
>> No, the $10 million is definitely not in escrow.
>>
>
> Indeed, Jed is right.  From the complaint filed by Leonardo:
>
> "58. Upon conclusion of the Validation Test on or about May 2, 2013,the
> ERV certified
> that the E-Cat Unit satisfied each of the Validation requirements within
> the Validation Test period and IH paid to LEONARDO the second payment of
> Ten Million Dollars ($10,000,000.00) in accordance with the terms of the
> License Agreement and amendments thereto."
>

-- 
Patrick

www.tRacePerfect.com
The daily puzzle everyone can finish but not everyone can perfect!
The quickest puzzle ever!

Re: [Vo]:Rossi's customer

2016-04-07 Thread Eric Walker

I see now that Free Energy Scams has connected Henry W. Johnson to Leonardo
Corp [1]:

Leonardo 03-03-2014 — ANNUAL REPORT
There were two major changes in this filing:
• Andrea Rossi became CEO.
• Henry W. Johnson became President.


I do not know how to substantiate this detail.

Eric


[1]
http://freeenergyscams.com/andrea-rossi-ecat-industrial-heat-llc-conclusions-drawn-from-the-n-c-radiation-protection-report/

Re: [Vo]:I.H. press release responding to Rossi

2016-04-07 Thread Terry Blanton

On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 10:47 PM, Jed Rothwell  wrote:
>
> No, the $10 million is definitely not in escrow.
>

Indeed, Jed is right.  From the complaint filed by Leonardo:

"58. Upon conclusion of the Validation Test on or about May 2, 2013,the ERV
certified
that the E-Cat Unit satisfied each of the Validation requirements within
the Validation Test period and IH paid to LEONARDO the second payment of
Ten Million Dollars ($10,000,000.00) in accordance with the terms of the
License Agreement and amendments thereto."

Re: [Vo]:I.H. press release responding to Rossi

Daniel Rocha  wrote:

It is Rossi that says that the test was OK. According to IH, it was not OK,
> because IH says three years without success, not merely 1 year. So, the
> money is still in the escrow.
>

No, the $10 million is definitely not in escrow. The documents filed in
this lawsuit make it clear that the $10 million was paid out. The
additional $89 million was supposed to be paid if the long test was a
success. I.H. claims it was not a success. They say they were not able to
"substantiate" the results:

"Industrial Heat has worked for over three years to substantiate the
results claimed by Mr. Rossi from the E-Cat technology – all without
success."

That is not the same as saying there has been no evidence of heat. I myself
think there is some evidence for Rossi's claims, but it is not very good,
and it has not been replicated. As I said, the first Levi test was good but
flawed. I did not think much of Lugano but other people feel it showed
excess heat. That is a reasonable technical judgement on their part.
Unfortunately, all of this does not add up to clear-cut proof. I think that
is what "substantiate" means in this context.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:I.H. press release responding to Rossi

2016-04-07 Thread Lennart Thornros

Troll is a Swedish word, describing a person who is more in contact
withnature than with humans. That person lives in the forest and has
superficial capacities. Sometimes not so nice but at least sarcastic.
I grow up thinking trolls were real.  However I believed in St. Nick
(Tomten) as well so tomtar and trolls. Pick your choice. (Stolen from Elsa
Beskow).
Funy to me. You all trolls - great news.
On Apr 7, 2016 7:26 PM, "Craig Haynie"  wrote:



On 04/07/2016 09:50 PM, Daniel Rocha wrote:

I am actually trying to defend Rossi, because this time is a big deal.
According to the terms of the contract and IH, Rossi only got 1.5million,
and nothing from the escrow account. So, for any decent research, well,
decent in terms of using massive parallel reactors, he must be on shoe
strings.


Rossi: " Yes, Leonardo Corporation has the financial resources necessary to
make the massive production we need."

http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=892=88#comments

Craig

Re: [Vo]:I.H. press release responding to Rossi

Russ George  wrote:

Clearly many Vorts are attacking Rossi by using such words as ‘scam’
>

Jones Beene is the only person here who has said that. The only other use
of the word is here: ". . . the possibility of him being a scammer is
remote."

> and trying to disparage the people Rossi has agreed to work with even
> though both Rossi and IH had to agree to such people’s competence.
>

I am not disparaging Penon by pointing out that he made egregious errors.
This is a science discussion group. One of the purposes here is to point
out errors.

Anyone who reads his report will find this error and many others.

> To disparage the competence of Penon based on old work and not the present
> well monitored work is to disparage the competence and/or the credibility
> of Rossi.
>

Old work? You make it sound like it was from when he was in high school.
This was in 2012 for crying out loud.

Rossi has been incompetent in many of his tests. As I and others have
pointed out, he did not even realize the unit was plugged up and the flow
rate was zero during the NASA tests, and when they pointed this out to him,
he become hysterical and threw them out. In other tests he did not even
bother to insert and SD card in the thermocouple reader. He is incredibly
smart in some ways, but his experimental technique is often sloppy.

> In the environment where the word ‘scam’ and ‘scammer’ is so prominent
> attacks of this sort/vort on Penon are clearly meant to be insulting and
> slanderous to Rossi . . .
>

1. These are not attacks. This is science. You are supposed to point out
mistakes.

2. What I clearly mean to do is to point out mistakes. Do not ascribe to me
motivations I do not have.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Press Release - Cold Fusion (LENR) Verified - Inventor SuesIndustrial Heat, LLC.


Rossi:

" I have to comment the press release of IH, being a press release and 
not a forensic act.
They made the Lugano reactor ( they also signed it ) they made many 
replications of which we have due record and witnesses, they made 
multiple patent applications ( without my authotization ) with their 
chief engineer as the co-inventor ( he invented nothing ) , with 
detailed description of the replications , they made replications with 
the attendance of Woodford, after which they got 50 or 60 millions of 
dollars from Woodfords’ investors, they made replications with the 
attendance of Chinese top level officers, after which they started 
thanks to the E-Cat they made an R activity in China in a 200 millions 
concern, they made replications with an E-Cat completely made by them 
under my direction the very day in which the 1 MW plant has been 
delivered in Raleigh, they made replications that we have recorded. 
After the replication they made with the attendance of Woodford in 2013 
Mr Tom Darden said publicly: ” this replication has been stellar” ( 
witnesses available). But this is not the place to discuss this. We have 
prepared 18 volumes to explain exactly and in detail the activity of our 
“Licensee” and his acquaintances from 2013 to now. Until they had to 
collect money thanks to the E-Cat, they made replications and have been 
happy with the E-Cat; when it turned to have to pay, they discovered 
that they never made replications, that the ERV that they had chosen in 
agreement with us was not good, that the test on the 1 MW plant, thanks 
to which they collected enormous amounts of money from the investors and 
where I put at risk my health working 16-18 hours per day was not a good 
test ( but for all the year of the test they NEVER said a single word of 
complaint, even if they had constantly their men in the plant), etc etc. 
But the worse has still to come out. The worse is in the 18 volumes we 
will present in due time, in due place. A blog is not the right place to 
discuss a litigation. This is only a quick answer to the press release 
made by IH."


http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=892

Craig

On 04/07/2016 09:56 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:

Robert Dorr > wrote:

I keep seeing that supposedly  I.H. was the one that built the
e-cat used in the Lugano test. As far as I can see that is
completely untrue.


I.H. is mentioned in the Lugano paper three times:


In the course of the year following the previous tests, the E-Cat’s 
technology was transferred to Industrial Heat LLC, United States, 
where it was replicated and improved. . . .


The authors gratefully acknowledge Andrea Rossi and Industrial Heat 
LLC for providing us with the E-cat reactor to perform an independent 
test measurement. . . .


Lastly, our thanks to Industrial Heat LLC (USA) for providing 
financial support for the measurements performed for radiation 
protection purposes.

Re: [Vo]:I.H. press release responding to Rossi




On 04/07/2016 09:50 PM, Daniel Rocha wrote:
I am actually trying to defend Rossi, because this time is a big deal. 
According to the terms of the contract and IH, Rossi only got 
1.5million, and nothing from the escrow account. So, for any decent 
research, well, decent in terms of using massive parallel reactors, he 
must be on shoe strings.




Rossi: " Yes, Leonardo Corporation has the financial resources necessary 
to make the massive production we need."


http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=892=88#comments

Craig

RE: [Vo]:I.H. press release responding to Rossi

Clearly many Vorts are attacking Rossi by using such words as ‘scam’ and trying 
to disparage the people Rossi has agreed to work with even though both Rossi 
and IH had to agree to such people’s competence. To disparage the competence of 
Penon based on old work and not the present well monitored work is to disparage 
the competence and/or the credibility of Rossi. In the environment where the 
word ‘scam’ and ‘scammer’ is so prominent attacks of this sort/vort on Penon 
are clearly meant to be insulting and slanderous to Rossi only it is done is 
such a cowardly way as to make the accusation clouded. 

 

From: Jed Rothwell [mailto:jedrothw...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, April 7, 2016 6:36 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:I.H. press release responding to Rossi

 

Russ George  > wrote:

 

What the free for all attack on Rossi by Vorts . . .

 

No one is attacking Rossi. We are reporting news of a lawsuit, and news that 
I.H. reports they think there is no excess heat. I described errors in the 
previous Penon paper. Those are all legitimate topics here. They are important. 
They are not attacks. No one has taken sides in the lawsuit, or even discussed 
it much, except to clarify a few points such as whether Rossi was already paid 
$10 million.

 

- Jed

RE: [Vo]:I.H. press release responding to Rossi

One has to read outside of the box to try to grasp what is going on. That IH 
entered into the agreement that had milestone payments and met two of those 
milestones seems indisputable… that they failed to honor the third milestone 
payment is also crystal clear. Given they were present during the 350 days out 
of 400 that were the final milestone and agreed to end at the 350 day mark is 
prima facie evidence of their cooperation to that point. Why is there a 
question at all here… IH agreed to end the demo early and then did not deliver 
on the final payment and Rossi has done precisely what he had to do to enforce 
his agreements and right. IH simply ‘blinked’ and did not honor the agreement.

 

From: Daniel Rocha [mailto:danieldi...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, April 7, 2016 7:10 PM
To: John Milstone
Subject: Re: [Vo]:I.H. press release responding to Rossi

 

It is Rossi that says that the test was OK. According to IH, it was not OK, 
because IH says three years without success, not merely 1 year. So, the money 
is still in the escrow.

Re: [Vo]:Press Release - Cold Fusion (LENR) Verified - Inventor SuesIndustrial Heat, LLC.

2016-04-07 Thread Eric Walker

On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 8:49 PM, Craig Haynie 
wrote:

Isn't it also true that one of their observers has been making positive
> remarks during the past year, as well?
>

Fulvio Fabiani was one of the two people engaged by IH to keep tabs on the
test.  But he's basically a Leonardo Corp. employee (see, e.g., [1]).  I
don't know anything about Barry West, the other monitor who was mentioned
in the suit.

Eric

[1]
https://animpossibleinvention.com/2015/11/25/rossis-engineer-i-have-seen-things-you-people-wouldnt-believe/

Re: [Vo]:Press Release - Cold Fusion (LENR) Verified - Inventor SuesIndustrial Heat, LLC.

2016-04-07 Thread Robert Dorr




You will notice it says that Rossi and I.H. 
provided an E-Cat for "a" test measurement (I 
read as a singular measurment) not necessarily 
for the Lugano Test. Possibly to verify any 
ionizing radiation. So many possible ways to read 
all of this rapidly developing information.


Robert Dorr
WA7ZQR


At 06:56 PM 4/7/2016, you wrote:

Robert Dorr <rod...@comcast.net> wrote:
Â
I keep seeing that supposedlyÂ  I.H. was the one 
that built the e-cat used in the Lugano test. As 
far as I can see that is completely untrue.



I.H. is mentioned in the Lugano paper three times:


In the course of the year following the previous 
tests, the E-Catâs technology was transferred 
to Industrial Heat LLC, United States, where it 
was replicated and improved. . . .


The authors gratefully acknowledge Andrea Rossi 
and Industrial Heat LLC for providing us with 
the E-cat reactor to perform an independent test measurement. . . .


Lastly, our thanks to Industrial Heat LLC (USA) 
for providing financial support for the 
measurements performed for radiation protection purposes.

RE: [Vo]:I.H. press release responding to Rossi

If Rossi did indeed receive the $1.5 Million and the $10 million then he has a 
war chest that is more than sufficient to prevail. The fact of the legal tussle 
will attract legions of ‘gozillionaires’ to his door. 

From: Jed Rothwell [mailto:jedrothw...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, April 7, 2016 7:02 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:I.H. press release responding to Rossi

Daniel Rocha  > wrote:

I am actually trying to defend Rossi, because this time is a big deal. 
According to the terms of the contract and IH, Rossi only got 1.5million, and 
nothing from the escrow account.

No, he got the whole $10 million from the escrow account. He is suing them for 
the remaining $90 million. He says they should pay because the 1-year test 
worked. They say the test did not work:

"Industrial Heat has worked for over three years to substantiate the results 
claimed by Mr. Rossi from the E-Cat technology – all without success."

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:I.H. press release responding to Rossi

It is Rossi that says that the test was OK. According to IH, it was not OK,
because IH says three years without success, not merely 1 year. So, the
money is still in the escrow.

Re: [Vo]:I.H. press release responding to Rossi

Daniel Rocha  wrote:

I am actually trying to defend Rossi, because this time is a big deal.
> According to the terms of the contract and IH, Rossi only got 1.5million,
> and nothing from the escrow account.
>

No, he got the whole $10 million from the escrow account. He is suing them
for the remaining $90 million. He says they should pay because the 1-year
test worked. They say the test did not work:

"Industrial Heat has worked for over three years to substantiate the
results claimed by Mr. Rossi from the E-Cat technology – all without
success."

- Jed

RE: [Vo]:Press Release - Cold Fusion (LENR) Verified - Inventor SuesIndustrial Heat, LLC.

Also since Rossi had 400 days in which to carry on his demo and took only 350 
of those days and given that IH was fully engaged and watching this whole time 
then it is quite absurd to suggest that the demo was terminated without consent 
and agreement of all parties…. That clearly suggests IH and Rossi were in 
agreement that success was in hand. The fact that IH then did not then abide by 
the agreement and pay Rossi the remaining $89 million is suddenly where the 
relationship has broken although as Rossi’s legal paper suggests IH was 
engaging in other breaches. I would guess Rossi was giving IH all the slack 
possible on the IP breaches as the $89 million would be an adequate salve to 
treat those wounds. This is simply a case of a game of real hard ball business, 
nothing unusual at all. Rossi is proving to be more of a genius in the business 
arena than in the engineering arena.

 

 

From: Craig Haynie [mailto:cchayniepub...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, April 7, 2016 6:50 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Press Release - Cold Fusion (LENR) Verified - Inventor 
SuesIndustrial Heat, LLC.

 

 

On 04/07/2016 09:36 PM, Jones Beene wrote:

From: Craig Haynie 

 

*  They also paid Rossi $10 million dollars, after validating that the device 
was working…

Not exactly. The logical error is cause and effect. Yes, they paid the 
installment, but elsewhere they clearly state that "Industrial Heat has worked 
for over three years to substantiate the results claimed by Mr. Rossi from the 
E-Cat technology – all without success". Clearly IH never said or implied that 
the device worked, nor did they deny making the installment.

 


Just to clarify, I am only reading the agreement to make this determination. I 
don't have any knowledge as to what actually occurred when IH paid Rossi the 
$10 million. Considering they now claim to be unable to substantiate the 
results, then this is certainly the prudent thing to do after a lawsuit has 
been filed against them. They also are reported to have had two observers 
during the past year, watching, and consulting with the ERV. If there had been 
a serious problem, one would think that they would have made some mention of it 
earlier. Isn't it also true that one of their observers has been making 
positive remarks during the past year, as well?

The agreement says:

"The Validation will be made in the factory of Leonardo within 120 Business 
Days following the date of this Agreement on a date mutually agreed to by the 
Company and Leonardo. "Validation" will be deemed successful and achieved when 
the expert responsible for such validation (ERV) certifies in writing that 
during a 24 hour test period the Plant consistently produces energy that is at 
least six times greater than the energy consumed by the Plant... and the 
temperature of the steam produced by the Plant is consistently 100 degrees 
Celsius or greater... At their respective elections, the Company and the 
Leonardo may have representatives present to observe the Validation process and 
discuss the testing and its results with the ERV."

Craig

Re: [Vo]:Press Release - Cold Fusion (LENR) Verified - Inventor Sues Industrial Heat, LLC.

Jack Cole  wrote:


> I agree with all you say except thinking the first Levi test was good.  It
> was better, but there was no adequate calibration performed.  As such, it
> was wholly inadequate.
>

I agree.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Press Release - Cold Fusion (LENR) Verified - Inventor SuesIndustrial Heat, LLC.

Robert Dorr  wrote:

> I keep seeing that supposedly  I.H. was the one that built the e-cat used
> in the Lugano test. As far as I can see that is completely untrue.
>

I.H. is mentioned in the Lugano paper three times:

In the course of the year following the previous tests, the E-Cat’s
technology was transferred to Industrial Heat LLC, United States, where it
was replicated and improved. . . .

The authors gratefully acknowledge Andrea Rossi and Industrial Heat LLC for
providing us with the E-cat reactor to perform an independent test
measurement. . . .

Lastly, our thanks to Industrial Heat LLC (USA) for providing financial
support for the measurements performed for radiation protection purposes.

Re: [Vo]:I.H. press release responding to Rossi

"According to the terms of the contract and IH, Rossi only got 1.5million",
I meant " According to the terms of the contract and IH version, Rossi only
got 1.5million".

2016-04-07 22:50 GMT-03:00 Daniel Rocha :

> I am actually trying to defend Rossi, because this time is a big deal.
> According to the terms of the contract and IH, Rossi only got 1.5million,
> and nothing from the escrow account. So, for any decent research, well,
> decent in terms of using massive parallel reactors, he must be on shoe
> strings.
>
> He must be really insane, for good or bad to act so aggressively towards
> IH. At least, now, in may mind, the possibility of him being a scammer is
> remote.
>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:I.H. press release responding to Rossi

I am actually trying to defend Rossi, because this time is a big deal.
According to the terms of the contract and IH, Rossi only got 1.5million,
and nothing from the escrow account. So, for any decent research, well,
decent in terms of using massive parallel reactors, he must be on shoe
strings.

He must be really insane, for good or bad to act so aggressively towards
IH. At least, now, in may mind, the possibility of him being a scammer is
remote.

Re: [Vo]:Press Release - Cold Fusion (LENR) Verified - Inventor SuesIndustrial Heat, LLC.




On 04/07/2016 09:36 PM, Jones Beene wrote:


*From:*Craig Haynie

ØThey also paid Rossi $10 million dollars, after validating that the 
device was working…


Not exactly. The logical error is cause and effect. Yes, they paid the 
installment, but elsewhere they clearly state that "Industrial Heat 
has worked for over three years to substantiate the results claimed by 
Mr. Rossi from the E-Cat technology – all without success". Clearly IH 
never said or implied that the device worked, nor did they deny making 
the installment.





Just to clarify, I am only reading the agreement to make this 
determination. I don't have any knowledge as to what actually occurred 
when IH paid Rossi the $10 million. Considering they now claim to be 
unable to substantiate the results, then this is certainly the prudent 
thing to do after a lawsuit has been filed against them. They also are 
reported to have had two observers during the past year, watching, and 
consulting with the ERV. If there had been a serious problem, one would 
think that they would have made some mention of it earlier. Isn't it 
also true that one of their observers has been making positive remarks 
during the past year, as well?


The agreement says:

"The Validation will be made in the factory of Leonardo within 120 
Business Days following the date of this Agreement on a date mutually 
agreed to by the Company and Leonardo. "Validation" will be deemed 
successful and achieved when the expert responsible for such validation 
(ERV) certifies in writing that during a 24 hour test period the Plant 
consistently produces energy that is at least six times greater than the 
energy consumed by the Plant... and the temperature of the steam 
produced by the Plant is consistently 100 degrees Celsius or greater... 
At their respective elections, the Company and the Leonardo may have 
representatives present to observe the Validation process and discuss 
the testing and its results with the ERV."


Craig

Re: [Vo]:I.H. press release responding to Rossi

Russ George  wrote:

What the free for all attack on Rossi by Vorts . . .
>

No one is attacking Rossi. We are reporting news of a lawsuit, and news
that I.H. reports they think there is no excess heat. I described errors in
the previous Penon paper. Those are all legitimate topics here. They are
important. They are not attacks. No one has taken sides in the lawsuit, or
even discussed it much, except to clarify a few points such as whether
Rossi was already paid $10 million.

- Jed

RE: [Vo]:Press Release - Cold Fusion (LENR) Verified - Inventor SuesIndustrial Heat, LLC.

From: Craig Haynie 

 

Ø  They also paid Rossi $10 million dollars, after validating that the device 
was working…

Not exactly. The logical error is cause and effect. Yes, they paid the 
installment, but elsewhere they clearly state that "Industrial Heat has worked 
for over three years to substantiate the results claimed by Mr. Rossi from the 
E-Cat technology – all without success". Clearly IH never said or implied that 
the device worked, nor did they deny making the installment.

There are many reasons why someone would want to pay for a foothold in a 
potentially valuable technology without validating its full factual reality. 
Above this, there are a number of similar logical and semantic problems to 
grasp in this situation. For instance, both of the two items below could be 
true…

1) The “average” COP in Penon’s report is 6

2) COP at times “was as high as 60”

Those can be true and at the same time we must accept the reality that the 
average COP over the entire year, the whole 350 days of a test period, could be 
less than one. That can be true, even when the two items above are true, as the 
complaint alleges. Penon’s report was clearly not based on the full time period 
of 2000 hours.

If you haven’t figured it out by now, the reason that these seemingly 
conflicting statements can all be true - is called “cherry picking” of data. 
Happens all the time - even at the top labs. 

The complaint from Rossi has been carefully worded in legalese to overlook the 
fact that 350 days, in industrial parlance, implies 8-hour days and a minimum 
of 2000 hours. Accordingly, at IH, they will insist if this goes to trial - 
that all of that the full allotted time of the contract must be used as the 
divisor in the final equation – in order to have a meaningful average COP 
instead of a selective  one. 

Rossi and his defenders can claim that the use of cherry-picking pervades all 
of science and moreover – even if the percentage of impressive COP data is low 
based on the full year – it is still meaningful. It may not encompass the full 
term of the experiment but it violates the laws of physics over its own smaller 
span. In that sense, they are correct but it will be next to impossible to find 
a jury which will award damages based on such a lame rationalization.

RE: [Vo]:I.H. press release responding to Rossi

What the free for all attack on Rossi by Vorts is just fine but its wrong to 
disparage those attacking Rossi and everyone around him … now that is the 
epitome of troll behavior.

From: Eric Walker [mailto:eric.wal...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, April 7, 2016 5:26 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:I.H. press release responding to Rossi

On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 6:31 PM, Russ George  > wrote:

yes Lennert, 'real noise ' of course not the banal rumblings of the many trolls 
the likes of which are plentiful in every swirling vortex, alas trolls are 
mostly 'floaters' so they aren't flushed away nearly as often as we might like.

You're the one behaving like a troll, insulting other Vortex members without 
the slightest basis.  I suggest you stop.

Eric

Re: [Vo]:I.H. press release responding to Rossi

2016-04-07 Thread Eric Walker

On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 6:31 PM, Russ George  wrote:

yes Lennert, 'real noise ' of course not the banal rumblings of the many
> trolls the likes of which are plentiful in every swirling vortex, alas
> trolls are mostly 'floaters' so they aren't flushed away nearly as often as
> we might like.

You're the one behaving like a troll, insulting other Vortex members
without the slightest basis.  I suggest you stop.

Eric

Re: [Vo]:Press Release - Cold Fusion (LENR) Verified - Inventor SuesIndustrial Heat, LLC.




On 04/07/2016 08:19 PM, Daniel Rocha wrote:
But now that IH said they could not get Rossi to prove anything, Rossi 
shouldn't have got anything. And note that the claim that the 
experiment prove anything came from Rossi's side. So, we are 
concluding that he got 10 million based on what "Rossi said".




This is IH's best legal position at this time, isn't it? It seems 
obvious to me that since Rossi's claim is extraordinary, and violates 
known physical laws, that this route is the best route to winning the 
lawsuit against them.


I don't know why they didn't close the deal and pay the $89 million, but 
I think it's quite likely that they didn't raise as much money as they 
thought they would during this past year, and had to bail on the agreement.


Craig

Re: [Vo]:Press Release - Cold Fusion (LENR) Verified - Inventor SuesIndustrial Heat, LLC.

But now that IH said they could not get Rossi to prove anything, Rossi
shouldn't have got anything. And note that the claim that the experiment
prove anything came from Rossi's side. So, we are concluding that he got 10
million based on what "Rossi said".

2016-04-07 21:03 GMT-03:00 Craig Haynie :

>
>
> On 04/07/2016 08:00 PM, Daniel Rocha wrote:
>
>> Isnt the 10 million on an escrow account? As far as I understood, IH even
>> bought a unit before completing the reactor.
>>
>> The $10 million was on escrow at the beginning, until IH validated that
> the machine was working, and producing at least 6 COP. Then I understand,
> from the license agreement, that the money was released to Rossi.
>
> Craig
>
>

-- 
Daniel Rocha - RJ
danieldi...@gmail.com

Re: [Vo]:Press Release - Cold Fusion (LENR) Verified - Inventor Sues Industrial Heat, LLC.

2016-04-07 Thread Jack Cole

Jed,

I agree with all you say except thinking the first Levi test was good.  It
was better, but there was no adequate calibration performed.  As such, it
was wholly inadequate.

That is the common problematic thread throughout every ecat test.



On Thu, Apr 7, 2016, 5:03 PM Jed Rothwell  wrote:

> Russ George  wrote:
>
> What a naïve specious comment “an engineer will lose his license” the
>> reality is that license revocations very very rarely happen.
>>
>
> However rare it may be, that is the point of issuing licenses. It is a
> method of guaranteeing the work is done correct, under penalty of the law.
> What other kind of guarantee could there be? If there were no revocations,
> the system would be meaningless. Engineers can lose their licenses for
> negligence, incompetency, misconduct or unprofessional conduct. If an
> engineer measured the Rossi device COP at 50 but it is actually 1 (no
> excess) that would surely be incompetence, and the engineer would be in
> danger of losing his or her license.
>
> file:///C:/Users/Admin/Downloads/200583010610_886.pdf
>
>
>
>> Countless examples of bad engineering are rampant without consequences to
>> the engineers.
>>
>
> Perhaps, but the laws and regulations say there are supposed to be
> consequences. You are saying the laws are not enforced. Samuel Florman say
> these laws are enforced in civil engineering. He is a distinguished author
> and head of a major construction firm. He has published six books and over
> 250 articles on engineering, so I expect he knows more about this than you
> do.
>
>
>
>> This is the problem with Vortex and other social media. They are great
>> places for some good exchange of ideas but so clouded in bullshit that it
>> makes it very difficult.
>>
>
> I have cited specific regulations and distinguished experts. What have you
> cited?
>
>
> Where did the idea of civility disappear to. Those armchair peanut gallery
>> denizens slandering and libeling Rossi here ought to be ashamed but of
>> course the nature . . .
>>
>
> Perhaps I.H. is slandering him, but I am not. I am reporting what they
> said. In their latest press release, they claim there was no heat. We
> cannot judge who is right until we see the report. But there is reason to
> doubt Rossi. I have cited examples of his tests that produced no heat, such
> as the NASA tests in which the device was plugged up but Rossi refused to
> admit that. I cited tests so poorly done it was impossible to say what the
> results were, such as the 1 MW test in Italy. I pointed to severe errors in
> Penon's 2012 test, and similar errors at Lugano. The only test of a Rossi
> device that seems to free of error is the first Levi test. That isn't much.
> There have been no replications of his work as far as I know. You said
> there were, but you did not offer any examples.
>
> So what evidence have you given us? I see nothing but invective so far. If
> anyone lacks civility and a serious attitude here, it is you, not me.
>
> - Jed
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Press Release - Cold Fusion (LENR) Verified - Inventor SuesIndustrial Heat, LLC.




On 04/07/2016 08:00 PM, Daniel Rocha wrote:
Isnt the 10 million on an escrow account? As far as I understood, IH 
even bought a unit before completing the reactor.


The $10 million was on escrow at the beginning, until IH validated that 
the machine was working, and producing at least 6 COP. Then I 
understand, from the license agreement, that the money was released to 
Rossi.


Craig

Re: [Vo]:Press Release - Cold Fusion (LENR) Verified - Inventor SuesIndustrial Heat, LLC.

Isnt the 10 million on an escrow account? As far as I understood, IH even
bought a unit before completing the reactor.

2016-04-07 20:57 GMT-03:00 Craig Haynie :

> You're right. I have made two mistakes in two days. Something's wrong. I'm
> just not concentrating on what I'm writing. :)
>
> Craig
>
>
> On 04/07/2016 07:54 PM, Robert Dorr wrote:
>
>>
>> It wasn't a month long test, it was a 24 hour test performed in Ferrara
>> Italy. I keep seeing that supposedly  I.H. was the one that built the e-cat
>> used in the Lugano test. As far as I can see that is completely untrue.
>>
>> Robert Dorr
>> WA7ZQR
>>
>>
>> At 03:55 PM 4/7/2016, you wrote:
>>
>>> They also paid Rossi $10 million dollars after validating that the
>>> device was working for a month.
>>>
>>> Craig
>>>
>>> On 04/07/2016 06:54 PM, Daniel Rocha wrote:
>>>
 "Industrial Heat has worked for over three years to substantiate the
 results claimed by Mr. Rossi from the E-Cat technology – all without
 success".

 It seems imply that Rossi did not generate any extra heat. I don't
 think they they'd say "without success" if any COP>1 was found, since the
 claim also include cold fusion and(with) COP>=6

>>>
>


-- 
Daniel Rocha - RJ
danieldi...@gmail.com

Re: [Vo]:Press Release - Cold Fusion (LENR) Verified - Inventor SuesIndustrial Heat, LLC.

You're right. I have made two mistakes in two days. Something's wrong. 
I'm just not concentrating on what I'm writing. :)


Craig

On 04/07/2016 07:54 PM, Robert Dorr wrote:


It wasn't a month long test, it was a 24 hour test performed in 
Ferrara  Italy. I keep seeing that supposedly  I.H. was the one that 
built the e-cat used in the Lugano test. As far as I can see that is 
completely untrue.


Robert Dorr
WA7ZQR


At 03:55 PM 4/7/2016, you wrote:
They also paid Rossi $10 million dollars after validating that the 
device was working for a month.


Craig

On 04/07/2016 06:54 PM, Daniel Rocha wrote:
"Industrial Heat has worked for over three years to substantiate the 
results claimed by Mr. Rossi from the E-Cat technology – all without 
success".


It seems imply that Rossi did not generate any extra heat. I don't 
think they they'd say "without success" if any COP>1 was found, 
since the claim also include cold fusion and(with) COP>=6

Re: [Vo]:Press Release - Cold Fusion (LENR) Verified - Inventor SuesIndustrial Heat, LLC.

2016-04-07 Thread Robert Dorr



It wasn't a month long test, it was a 24 hour 
test performed in Ferrara  Italy. I keep seeing 
that supposedly  I.H. was the one that built the 
e-cat used in the Lugano test. As far as I can see that is completely untrue.


Robert Dorr
WA7ZQR


At 03:55 PM 4/7/2016, you wrote:
They also paid Rossi $10 million dollars after 
validating that the device was working for a month.


Craig

On 04/07/2016 06:54 PM, Daniel Rocha wrote:
"Industrial Heat has worked for over three 
years to substantiate the results claimed by 
Mr. Rossi from the E-Cat technology  all without success".


It seems imply that Rossi did not generate any 
extra heat. I don't think they they'd say 
"without success" if any COP>1 was found, since 
the claim also include cold fusion and(with) COP>=6

Re: [Vo]:I.H. press release responding to Rossi

yes Lennert, 'real noise ' of course not the banal rumblings of the many
trolls the likes of which are plentiful in every swirling vortex, alas
trolls are mostly 'floaters' so they aren't flushed away nearly as often as
we might like. As an experimentalist with years at the bench measuring heat
in cold fusion it is a constant wonder at the pontification by those who
have never paid their dues at the lab bench.  The bs and hard knocks about
'credentials' is almost always connected to those without the hard knock
experience.


On Thursday, 7 April 2016, Lennart Thornros  wrote:

> I agree with you Russ. The same goes for investors and VC firms. Noise
> creates interest.
>
> Best Regards ,
> Lennart Thornros
>
>
> lenn...@thornros.com
> +1 916 436 1899
>
> Whatever you vividly imagine, ardently desire, sincerely believe and
> enthusiastically act upon, must inevitably come to pass. (PJM)
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 1:02 PM, Russ George  > wrote:
>
>> By the by it’s the best news ever for the field of cold fusion to have a
>> nice juicy lawsuit, nothing the brainless media likes better than being led
>> by the hand to understand stories and be able to fabricate all manner of
>> imagined story elements… all under the supposed watchful eye of a judge who
>> can be blamed for anything that goes awry.
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Robert Dorr [mailto:rod...@comcast.net
>> ]
>> *Sent:* Thursday, April 7, 2016 12:55 PM
>> *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
>> 
>> *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:I.H. press release responding to Rossi
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Good old "Tit for Tat". I.H. is obviously disputing the results of the
>> year long test based on lack of scientific rigor. One of these years maybe
>> we will find out who has the better lawyer.
>>
>> Robert Dorr
>> WA7ZQR
>>
>>
>> On 4/7/2016 12:29 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
>>
>> See:
>>
>>
>> http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/industrial-heat-statement-on-meritless-litigation-from-leonardo-corporation-and-andrea-rossi-300248066.html?tc=eml_cleartime
>>
>> Here is the complete text:
>>
>>
>>
>> Industrial Heat Statement on Meritless Litigation from Leonardo
>> Corporation and Andrea Rossi
>>
>> 15:15 ET from Industrial Heat, LLC
>>
>> RESEARCH TRIANGLE, N.C., April 7, 2016 /PRNewswire/ -- We are aware of
>> the lawsuit filed by Andrea Rossi and Leonardo Corporation against
>> Industrial Heat. Industrial Heat rejects the claims in the suit. They are
>> without merit and we are prepared to vigorously defend ourselves against
>> this action. Industrial Heat has worked for over three years to
>> substantiate the results claimed by Mr. Rossi from the E-Cat technology –
>> all without success. Leonardo Corporation and Mr. Rossi also have
>> repeatedly breached their agreements. At the conclusion of these
>> proceedings we are confident that the claims of Mr. Rossi and Leonardo
>> Corporation will be rejected.
>>
>> Industrial Heat continues to be focused on a scientifically rigorous
>> approach that includes thorough, robust and accurate testing of promising
>> LENR technologies. Our goal remains to deliver clean, safe and affordable
>> energy.
>>
>>
>>
>> No virus found in this message.
>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>> Version: 2016.0.7497 / Virus Database: 4545/11981 - Release Date: 04/07/16
>>
>>
>>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:I.H. press release responding to Rossi

2016-04-07 Thread Lennart Thornros

I agree with you Russ. The same goes for investors and VC firms. Noise
creates interest.

Best Regards ,
Lennart Thornros


lenn...@thornros.com
+1 916 436 1899

Whatever you vividly imagine, ardently desire, sincerely believe and
enthusiastically act upon, must inevitably come to pass. (PJM)


On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 1:02 PM, Russ George  wrote:

> By the by it’s the best news ever for the field of cold fusion to have a
> nice juicy lawsuit, nothing the brainless media likes better than being led
> by the hand to understand stories and be able to fabricate all manner of
> imagined story elements… all under the supposed watchful eye of a judge who
> can be blamed for anything that goes awry.
>
>
>
> *From:* Robert Dorr [mailto:rod...@comcast.net]
> *Sent:* Thursday, April 7, 2016 12:55 PM
> *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
> *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:I.H. press release responding to Rossi
>
>
>
>
>
> Good old "Tit for Tat". I.H. is obviously disputing the results of the
> year long test based on lack of scientific rigor. One of these years maybe
> we will find out who has the better lawyer.
>
> Robert Dorr
> WA7ZQR
>
>
> On 4/7/2016 12:29 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
>
> See:
>
>
> http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/industrial-heat-statement-on-meritless-litigation-from-leonardo-corporation-and-andrea-rossi-300248066.html?tc=eml_cleartime
>
> Here is the complete text:
>
>
>
> Industrial Heat Statement on Meritless Litigation from Leonardo
> Corporation and Andrea Rossi
>
> 15:15 ET from Industrial Heat, LLC
>
> RESEARCH TRIANGLE, N.C., April 7, 2016 /PRNewswire/ -- We are aware of the
> lawsuit filed by Andrea Rossi and Leonardo Corporation against Industrial
> Heat. Industrial Heat rejects the claims in the suit. They are without
> merit and we are prepared to vigorously defend ourselves against this
> action. Industrial Heat has worked for over three years to substantiate the
> results claimed by Mr. Rossi from the E-Cat technology – all without
> success. Leonardo Corporation and Mr. Rossi also have repeatedly breached
> their agreements. At the conclusion of these proceedings we are confident
> that the claims of Mr. Rossi and Leonardo Corporation will be rejected.
>
> Industrial Heat continues to be focused on a scientifically rigorous
> approach that includes thorough, robust and accurate testing of promising
> LENR technologies. Our goal remains to deliver clean, safe and affordable
> energy.
>
>
>
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2016.0.7497 / Virus Database: 4545/11981 - Release Date: 04/07/16
>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Press Release - Cold Fusion (LENR) Verified - Inventor SuesIndustrial Heat, LLC.

They also paid Rossi $10 million dollars after validating that the 
device was working for a month.


Craig

On 04/07/2016 06:54 PM, Daniel Rocha wrote:
"Industrial Heat has worked for over three years to substantiate the 
results claimed by Mr. Rossi from the E-Cat technology – all without 
success".


It seems imply that Rossi did not generate any extra heat. I don't 
think they they'd say "without success" if any COP>1 was found, since 
the claim also include cold fusion and(with) COP>=6

Re: [Vo]:Press Release - Cold Fusion (LENR) Verified - Inventor SuesIndustrial Heat, LLC.

This is the link:
http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/industrial-heat-statement-on-meritless-litigation-from-leonardo-corporation-and-andrea-rossi-300248066.html

2016-04-07 19:54 GMT-03:00 Daniel Rocha :

> "Industrial Heat has worked for over three years to substantiate the
> results claimed by Mr. Rossi from the E-Cat technology – all without
> success".
>
> It seems imply that Rossi did not generate any extra heat. I don't think
> they they'd say "without success" if any COP>1 was found, since the claim
> also include cold fusion and(with) COP>=6
>



-- 
Daniel Rocha - RJ
danieldi...@gmail.com

Re: [Vo]:Press Release - Cold Fusion (LENR) Verified - Inventor SuesIndustrial Heat, LLC.

"Industrial Heat has worked for over three years to substantiate the
results claimed by Mr. Rossi from the E-Cat technology – all without
success".

It seems imply that Rossi did not generate any extra heat. I don't think
they they'd say "without success" if any COP>1 was found, since the claim
also include cold fusion and(with) COP>=6

Re: [Vo]:Press Release - Cold Fusion (LENR) Verified - Inventor Sues Industrial Heat, LLC.

Russ George  wrote:

What a naïve specious comment “an engineer will lose his license” the
> reality is that license revocations very very rarely happen.
>

However rare it may be, that is the point of issuing licenses. It is a
method of guaranteeing the work is done correct, under penalty of the law.
What other kind of guarantee could there be? If there were no revocations,
the system would be meaningless. Engineers can lose their licenses for
negligence, incompetency, misconduct or unprofessional conduct. If an
engineer measured the Rossi device COP at 50 but it is actually 1 (no
excess) that would surely be incompetence, and the engineer would be in
danger of losing his or her license.

file:///C:/Users/Admin/Downloads/200583010610_886.pdf

> Countless examples of bad engineering are rampant without consequences to
> the engineers.
>

Perhaps, but the laws and regulations say there are supposed to be
consequences. You are saying the laws are not enforced. Samuel Florman say
these laws are enforced in civil engineering. He is a distinguished author
and head of a major construction firm. He has published six books and over
250 articles on engineering, so I expect he knows more about this than you
do.

> This is the problem with Vortex and other social media. They are great
> places for some good exchange of ideas but so clouded in bullshit that it
> makes it very difficult.
>

I have cited specific regulations and distinguished experts. What have you
cited?

Where did the idea of civility disappear to. Those armchair peanut gallery
> denizens slandering and libeling Rossi here ought to be ashamed but of
> course the nature . . .
>

Perhaps I.H. is slandering him, but I am not. I am reporting what they
said. In their latest press release, they claim there was no heat. We
cannot judge who is right until we see the report. But there is reason to
doubt Rossi. I have cited examples of his tests that produced no heat, such
as the NASA tests in which the device was plugged up but Rossi refused to
admit that. I cited tests so poorly done it was impossible to say what the
results were, such as the 1 MW test in Italy. I pointed to severe errors in
Penon's 2012 test, and similar errors at Lugano. The only test of a Rossi
device that seems to free of error is the first Levi test. That isn't much.
There have been no replications of his work as far as I know. You said
there were, but you did not offer any examples.

So what evidence have you given us? I see nothing but invective so far. If
anyone lacks civility and a serious attitude here, it is you, not me.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Re: Copy of Rossi's civil complaint

2016-04-07 Thread Alan Fletcher

So IH had Fulvio Fabiani reporting to them on the 1MW test. 

He should be an interesting witness: 

https://animpossibleinvention.com/2015/11/25/rossis-engineer-i-have-seen-things-you-people-wouldnt-believe/
 



“As a skeptic I started there, and in the beginning Rossi wouldn’t let me see 
any data. Gradually he gained confidence since I solved a few problems. And 
after some time I found myself with the truth in my hands, having made some 
calculations, and I was amazed. I made the same calculations twenty times and I 
tried to find the error, but there was no error. 




“Now after seeing everything that Rossi is doing, and the levels at which we 
have arrived, there really is no error, but already at that time he saw things 
that ordinary people were not yet able to see. 

... 




We have it all filmed, which still cannot be disclosed. We have photographs of 
creatures that emit pure light that have completely melted the reactor down, 
all in a very quiet way. You just turn off the stimuli system and the reaction 
is switched off. It’s impressive. 




... 




(1MW test) “My ‘baby’ as I call it, because I and my colleagues put it all 
together, I see my baby walking every day, and now I can even feel her breath, 
as I call it. You feel it when she produces steam and bubbles. We have learned 
to identify some moments of the reaction as a function of the type of boiling 
inside. Just try to imagine. Now we really know what she’s doing by the ear. 
And everyday I collect about 1.5 million records. And it is impressive.” 




...

[Vo]:Interesting..yet simple...Rossi-IH lawsuit website

2016-04-07 Thread Ron Kita

Greetings Vortex-l.

It is difficult to sort thru all of the comments on Vortex. I found this
website most interesting ...for its summary.
http://www.drboblog.com/better-call-saul-andrea-rossi-vs-darden-co/

Ron Kita, Chiralex
Doylestown PA.Dr Mallove a late...old friend...from Temple University
Frontier Scienceshe would have loved these times.

RE: [Vo]:I.H. press release responding to Rossi

By the by it’s the best news ever for the field of cold fusion to have a nice 
juicy lawsuit, nothing the brainless media likes better than being led by the 
hand to understand stories and be able to fabricate all manner of imagined 
story elements… all under the supposed watchful eye of a judge who can be 
blamed for anything that goes awry.

 

From: Robert Dorr [mailto:rod...@comcast.net] 
Sent: Thursday, April 7, 2016 12:55 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:I.H. press release responding to Rossi

 



Good old "Tit for Tat". I.H. is obviously disputing the results of the year 
long test based on lack of scientific rigor. One of these years maybe we will 
find out who has the better lawyer.

Robert Dorr
WA7ZQR 


On 4/7/2016 12:29 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: 

See:

http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/industrial-heat-statement-on-meritless-litigation-from-leonardo-corporation-and-andrea-rossi-300248066.html?tc=eml_cleartime

Here is the complete text: 



Industrial Heat Statement on Meritless Litigation from Leonardo Corporation and 
Andrea Rossi

15:15 ET from Industrial Heat, LLC

RESEARCH TRIANGLE, N.C., April 7, 2016 /PRNewswire/ -- We are aware of the 
lawsuit filed by Andrea Rossi and Leonardo Corporation against Industrial Heat. 
Industrial Heat rejects the claims in the suit. They are without merit and we 
are prepared to vigorously defend ourselves against this action. Industrial 
Heat has worked for over three years to substantiate the results claimed by Mr. 
Rossi from the E-Cat technology – all without success. Leonardo Corporation and 
Mr. Rossi also have repeatedly breached their agreements. At the conclusion of 
these proceedings we are confident that the claims of Mr. Rossi and Leonardo 
Corporation will be rejected.

Industrial Heat continues to be focused on a scientifically rigorous approach 
that includes thorough, robust and accurate testing of promising LENR 
technologies. Our goal remains to deliver clean, safe and affordable energy.

 

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com  
Version: 2016.0.7497 / Virus Database: 4545/11981 - Release Date: 04/07/16

RE: [Vo]:I.H. press release responding to Rossi

The story of cold fusion is a sure fire way to bring out the trolls and 
nere-do-wells as evidenced in quintessentially trollish commentary that is 
raging. More important it also brings out those with earnest and honest hearts. 
Of course the main points of 'cold fusion' are more about the promise and 
threat that this transformational technology delivers. On one hand had 'cold 
fusion' been accepted and developed starting more than 25years ago, today the 
world would be without the trials and tribulations of fossil fuels, millions of 
lives would have been saved, more whose health has been harmed by carbon 
emission taken care of, and the world would be one of hope not hostility as 
wars over oil would not be occurring. Of course those gorging themselves at the 
global pork barrels of oil, high energy physics, and to a lesser degree the 
mere trillion dollar 'climate change’ research field would need to have found a 
more peaceful and beneficial path for their lives! here's another tidbit of 
history 
http://atom-ecology.russgeorge.net/2016/04/07/cold-fusion-historical-fueds-kowalski/

 

From: Robert Dorr [mailto:rod...@comcast.net] 
Sent: Thursday, April 7, 2016 12:55 PM 
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:I.H. press release responding to Rossi

 



Good old "Tit for Tat". I.H. is obviously disputing the results of the year 
long test based on lack of scientific rigor. One of these years maybe we will 
find out who has the better lawyer.

Robert Dorr
WA7ZQR 


On 4/7/2016 12:29 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: 

See:

http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/industrial-heat-statement-on-meritless-litigation-from-leonardo-corporation-and-andrea-rossi-300248066.html?tc=eml_cleartime

Here is the complete text: 



Industrial Heat Statement on Meritless Litigation from Leonardo Corporation and 
Andrea Rossi

15:15 ET from Industrial Heat, LLC

RESEARCH TRIANGLE, N.C., April 7, 2016 /PRNewswire/ -- We are aware of the 
lawsuit filed by Andrea Rossi and Leonardo Corporation against Industrial Heat. 
Industrial Heat rejects the claims in the suit. They are without merit and we 
are prepared to vigorously defend ourselves against this action. Industrial 
Heat has worked for over three years to substantiate the results claimed by Mr. 
Rossi from the E-Cat technology – all without success. Leonardo Corporation and 
Mr. Rossi also have repeatedly breached their agreements. At the conclusion of 
these proceedings we are confident that the claims of Mr. Rossi and Leonardo 
Corporation will be rejected.

Industrial Heat continues to be focused on a scientifically rigorous approach 
that includes thorough, robust and accurate testing of promising LENR 
technologies. Our goal remains to deliver clean, safe and affordable energy.

 

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com  
Version: 2016.0.7497 / Virus Database: 4545/11981 - Release Date: 04/07/16

Re: [Vo]:I.H. press release responding to Rossi

2016-04-07 Thread Robert Dorr

Good old "Tit for Tat". I.H. is obviously disputing the results of the
year long test based on lack of scientific rigor. One of these years
maybe we will find out who has the better lawyer.

Robert Dorr
WA7ZQR

On 4/7/2016 12:29 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:

See:

http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/industrial-heat-statement-on-meritless-litigation-from-leonardo-corporation-and-andrea-rossi-300248066.html?tc=eml_cleartime

Here is the complete text:

Industrial Heat Statement on Meritless Litigation from Leonardo
Corporation and Andrea Rossi

15:15 ET from Industrial Heat, LLC

RESEARCH TRIANGLE, N.C., April 7, 2016 /PRNewswire/ -- We are aware of
the lawsuit filed by Andrea Rossi and Leonardo Corporation against
Industrial Heat. Industrial Heat rejects the claims in the suit. They
are without merit and we are prepared to vigorously defend ourselves
against this action. Industrial Heat has worked for over three years
to substantiate the results claimed by Mr. Rossi from the E-Cat
technology – all without success. Leonardo Corporation and Mr. Rossi
also have repeatedly breached their agreements. At the conclusion of
these proceedings we are confident that the claims of Mr. Rossi and
Leonardo Corporation will be rejected.

Industrial Heat continues to be focused on a scientifically rigorous
approach that includes thorough, robust and accurate testing of
promising LENR technologies. Our goal remains to deliver clean, safe
and affordable energy.

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2016.0.7497 / Virus Database: 4545/11981 - Release Date: 04/07/16

[Vo]:I.H. press release responding to Rossi

See:

http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/industrial-heat-statement-on-meritless-litigation-from-leonardo-corporation-and-andrea-rossi-300248066.html?tc=eml_cleartime

Here is the complete text:


Industrial Heat Statement on Meritless Litigation from Leonardo Corporation
and Andrea Rossi

15:15 ET from Industrial Heat, LLC

RESEARCH TRIANGLE, N.C., April 7, 2016 /PRNewswire/ -- We are aware of the
lawsuit filed by Andrea Rossi and Leonardo Corporation against Industrial
Heat. Industrial Heat rejects the claims in the suit. They are without
merit and we are prepared to vigorously defend ourselves against this
action. Industrial Heat has worked for over three years to substantiate the
results claimed by Mr. Rossi from the E-Cat technology – all without
success. Leonardo Corporation and Mr. Rossi also have repeatedly breached
their agreements. At the conclusion of these proceedings we are confident
that the claims of Mr. Rossi and Leonardo Corporation will be rejected.

Industrial Heat continues to be focused on a scientifically rigorous
approach that includes thorough, robust and accurate testing of promising
LENR technologies. Our goal remains to deliver clean, safe and affordable
energy.

Re: [Vo]:Problems with 2012 Penon report

Thanks to the wonders of voice input I wrote:

> He should have sorted out which apotheosis is correct, by calibration.
>

Apotheosis: "the elevation of someone to divine status; deification."

Yeah verily, here in The Divine Church of Rossi the First (last and only).
[Chanting heard in background.]

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Problems with 2012 Penon report

 wrote:

Perhaps you just misinterpret what he said. It could also be taken to mean:-

"the output varied between 2.5 and 3.7 kW" rather than that there was a
> large
> error in the measurement.

I do not think so. Look at the first table on page 14. The column headings
are "First hypothesis" (2.5 kW) and "Second hypothesis" (3.7 kW). The two
hypotheses are listed on page 13:

"* that the temperature of the inner cylinder is equal to that of the outer
cylinder. This is the worst-case hypothesis;

* that the power irradiated by the inner cylinder is equal to that
irradiated by the outer cylinder."

He should have sorted out which apotheosis is correct, by calibration.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Production plans and report will be published

2016-04-07 Thread Blaze Spinnaker

Well, might want to spend those resources on a slightly more experienced
lawyer than.  The guy they got for this has just a few years under his belt
and UFL is ranked about 46/201

Considering Darden graduated from yale, Rossi might be a bit outlcassed
here.

On Thursday, April 7, 2016, a.ashfield  wrote:

> Janne: ".. I hope you will have other sources of MASSIVE financing…"
>
> "Andrea Rossi April 7, 2016 at 9:17 AM
> Janne:
> We are stronger than you can imagine.
> Warm Regards,
> A.R."
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Production plans and report will be published

2016-04-07 Thread a.ashfield


Janne: ".. I hope you will have other sources of MASSIVE financing…"

"Andrea Rossi April 7, 2016 at 9:17 AM
Janne:
We are stronger than you can imagine.
Warm Regards,
A.R."

RE: [Vo]:Press Release - Cold Fusion (LENR) Verified - Inventor Sues Industrial Heat, LLC.

The re-read it. 

 

Apparently you missed the part about using unnecessary profanity to label an 
honest observation by someone you disagree with. 

 

From: Russ George 

 

Here’s a good paper on Anti-Social behavior on the internet… should be required 
reading for those of us with the obvious predilection to internet addiction  
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3217592/

RE: [Vo]:Press Release - Cold Fusion (LENR) Verified - Inventor Sues Industrial Heat, LLC.

Russ George sounds like the troll in this exchange. 

 

Rossi’s petulant and child-like bursts of anger are well-documented…

 

From: Russ George 

 

Your branding of Rossi by saying  ‘his burst of anger’ is just plain bullshit. 
By definition of all the standards in what a Troll does that is a troll’s 
comment!  Here’s a reference to support my statement 
http://sciencecommunicationmedia.com/constructively-dealing-with-trolls-in-science-communication/

 

Vortex needs to clean up its act and stop the trolling. 

 

From: Daniel Rocha 

 

The document says IH raised 50 million from investors. That's not a lot 
considering the importance of the invention. It could be that, due skepticism, 
they couldn't reach the full 90 million, and couldn't fulfill their part. Or at 
least they did, but no so much to do anything useful on a large scale. So, 
Rossi went into a burst of anger and accused IH of keeping the invention for 
themselves.

RE: [Vo]:Press Release - Cold Fusion (LENR) Verified - Inventor Sues Industrial Heat, LLC.

Here’s a good paper on Anti-Social behavior on the internet… should be required 
reading for those of us with the obvious predilection to internet addiction  
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3217592/

From: Jed Rothwell [mailto:jedrothw...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, April 7, 2016 7:48 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Press Release - Cold Fusion (LENR) Verified - Inventor Sues 
Industrial Heat, LLC.

Lennart Thornros  > wrote:

Once again it is not judging about how well it worked for you. Just saying that 
there is no guarantee coming from being licensed.

Yes, there is an explicit guarantee. If a licensed HVAC engineer publishes an 
evaluation with a mistake, he will lose his license. That is his livelihood. As 
I said before, he will go from being an upper-middle-class professional to 
working at McDonald's. That means he has to conduct the test with the proper 
instruments in place, according to methods approved by law in the state of 
Florida. These methods are extremely reliable. There is no question that if you 
do things according to the book you will get the right answer.

The regulations for Florida are not online at present. The state of Florida 
website links do not work. Here are regulations for Utah, which are similar:

http://laborcommission.utah.gov/media/pdfs/boilerelevatormine/pubs/Boiler%20Compliance%20Manual.pdf

A 1 MW reactor is 3.4 million BTU/h.

The regs basically say you have to certify the boiler complies with NFPA 85 
BOILER AND COMBUSTION SYSTEMS HAZARDS CODE, which is a book available here:

http://www.nfpa.org/codes-and-standards/document-information-pages?mode=code 

 =85

Here is a brief description. Does this sound easy to master? Would you trust 
some guy who has not passed certification testing to deal with these issues?

NFPA 85: DOCUMENT SCOPE

1.1* Scope. This code applies to the following: A.1.1 Technological advances in 
recent years and, in particular, the pervasiveness of microprocessor-based 
hardware make it even more important that only highly qualified individuals be 
employed in applying the requirements of this code to operating systems. Each 
type of hardware has its own unique features and operational modes. It is vital 
that the designer of the safety system be completely familiar with the features 
and weaknesses of the specific hardware and possess a thorough understanding of 
this code and its intent. It is not possible for this code to encompass all 
specific hardware applications, nor should this code be considered a “cookbook” 
for the design of a safety system. In applying any type of equipment to a 
safety system, the designer should consider carefully all the possible failure 
modes and the effect that each might have on the integrity of the system and 
the safety of the unit and personnel. In particular, no single point failure 
should result in an unsafe or uncontrollable condition or a masked failure of a 
microprocessor-based system that could result in the operator unwittingly 
taking action that could lead to an unsafe condition. In this code, the 
sections that apply to all fuels should be used in conjunction with those 
sections covering the specific fuel utilized. (1) Single burner boilers, 
multiple burner boilers, stokers, and atmospheric fluidized bed boilers with a 
fuel input rating of 3.7 MWt (12.5 million Btu/hr) or greater (2) Pulverized 
fuel systems at any heat input rate (3) Fired or unfired steam generators used 
to recover heat from combustion turbines [heat recovery steam generators 
(HRSGs)] and other combustion turbine exhaust systems at any heat input rate 
1.1.1 This code covers design, installation, operation, maintenance, and 
training. 1.1.2 This code covers strength of the structure, operation and 
maintenance procedures, combustion and draft control equipment, safety 
interlocks, alarms, trips, and other related controls that are essential to 
safe equipment operation. 1.1.3 This code does not cover process heaters used 
in chemical and petroleum manufacture in which steam generation is incidental 
to the operation of a processing system. 1.1.4 Chapter 5 covers single burner 
boilers that fire the following fuels: (1) Fuel gas as defined in 3.3.74. 
(2)*Other gas having a calorific value and characteristics similar to natural 
gas A.1.1.4(2) This can include some heavier-than-air gases. (3) Fuel oil as 
defined in 3.3.73.3 (4) Fuel gas and fuel oil that are fired simultaneously for 
fuel transfer (5) Fuel gas and fuel oil that are fired simultaneously and 
continuously 1.1.5 Chapter 6 covers multiple burner boilers firing one or more 
of the following: (1) Fuel gas, as defined in 3.3.74 (2) Fuel oil, as defined 
in 3.3.73.3 (3) Pulverized coal, as defined in 3.3.73.2.1 (4) Simultaneous 
firing of more than one of the fuels stated in

Re: [Vo]:Press Release - Cold Fusion (LENR) Verified - Inventor Sues Industrial Heat, LLC.

2016-04-07 Thread Terry Blanton

On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 11:58 PM, Eric Walker  wrote:
>
>
>- Rossi is sure that IH have transferred trade secrets to Brillouin.
>
>
Worse.  I believe Industrial Heat and Magic have transferred trade secrets
to the Chinese.  And that the Chinese are already in production of LENR
powered units.  AR will be long dead before he can recover the monies that
will be lost in China.  Lookit, China is an emerging economy in great need
of clean energy.  It will be like solar power and Germany, lots of LENR
devices will be sold to those who are desperate to replace infrastructure.
Although the US is a great user of energy our accountants will be slow to
adopt LENR.

The Chinese don't care as much about patents.  They sliced the Intel 8080
layer by layer to reconstruct the masks.

RE: [Vo]:Press Release - Cold Fusion (LENR) Verified - Inventor Sues Industrial Heat, LLC.

Your branding of Rossi by saying  ‘his burst of anger’ is just plain bullshit. 
By definition of all the standards in what a Troll does that is a troll’s 
comment!  Here’s a reference to support my statement 
http://sciencecommunicationmedia.com/constructively-dealing-with-trolls-in-science-communication/

 

Vortex needs to clean up its act and stop the trolling. 

 

From: Daniel Rocha [mailto:danieldi...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, April 7, 2016 9:27 AM
To: John Milstone
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Press Release - Cold Fusion (LENR) Verified - Inventor Sues 
Industrial Heat, LLC.

 

The document says IH raised 50 million from investors. That's not a lot 
considering the importance of the invention. It could be that, due skepticism, 
they couldn't reach the full 90 million, and couldn't fulfill their part. Or at 
least they did, but no so much to do anything useful on a large scale. So, 
Rossi went into a burst of anger and accused IH of keeping the invention for 
themselves.

Re: [Vo]:Press Release - Cold Fusion (LENR) Verified - Inventor Sues Industrial Heat, LLC.

The document says IH raised 50 million from investors. That's not a lot
considering the importance of the invention. It could be that, due
skepticism, they couldn't reach the full 90 million, and couldn't fulfill
their part. Or at least they did, but no so much to do anything useful on a
large scale. So, Rossi went into a burst of anger and accused IH of keeping
the invention for themselves.

[Vo]:perhaps too much ado for a LENR lawsuit, results promisng

2016-04-07 Thread Peter Gluck

Dear Friends,
I add my opinion to many, this lawsuit is an Event! But excess heat more
important.
PLEASE READ PAPERS 11) and 12) De Ninno and Kowalski- classic LENR.

http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2016/04/apr-7-2016-lenr-report-details-coming.html


Peter
-- 
Dr. Peter Gluck
Cluj, Romania
http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com

RE: [Vo]:Press Release - Cold Fusion (LENR) Verified - Inventor Sues Industrial Heat, LLC.

What a naïve specious comment “an engineer will lose his license” the reality 
is that license revocations very very rarely happen. There is even a clause is 
PEng society rules that says ‘no brother shall criticize a brother’ meaning 
that PEng’s are prohibited from criticizing other PEng’s. Countless examples of 
bad engineering are rampant without consequences to the engineers. 

 

This is the problem with Vortex and other social media. They are great places 
for some good exchange of ideas but so clouded in bullshit that it makes it 
very difficult. Not at all different from the rest of human society of course 
but alas we engage in ‘social media’ in the intimacy of our closest personal 
space. 

 

Where did the idea of civility disappear to. Those armchair peanut gallery 
denizens slandering and libeling Rossi here ought to be ashamed but of course 
the nature of Trolls is that reaction to their bile is what they seek, any 
reaction. Get a life. Do a real experiment. 

 

From: Jed Rothwell [mailto:jedrothw...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, April 7, 2016 7:48 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Press Release - Cold Fusion (LENR) Verified - Inventor Sues 
Industrial Heat, LLC.

 

Lennart Thornros  wrote:

 

Once again it is not judging about how well it worked for you. Just saying that 
there is no guarantee coming from being licensed.

 

Yes, there is an explicit guarantee. If a licensed HVAC engineer publishes an 
evaluation with a mistake, he will lose his license. That is his livelihood. As 
I said before, he will go from being an upper-middle-class professional to 
working at McDonald's. That means he has to conduct the test with the proper 
instruments in place, according to methods approved by law in the state of 
Florida. These methods are extremely reliable. There is no question that if you 
do things according to the book you will get the right answer.

 

The regulations for Florida are not online at present. The state of Florida 
website links do not work. Here are regulations for Utah, which are similar:

 

http://laborcommission.utah.gov/media/pdfs/boilerelevatormine/pubs/Boiler%20Compliance%20Manual.pdf

 

A 1 MW reactor is 3.4 million BTU/h.

The regs basically say you have to certify the boiler complies with NFPA 85 
BOILER AND COMBUSTION SYSTEMS HAZARDS CODE, which is a book available here:

http://www.nfpa.org/codes-and-standards/document-information-pages?mode=code 

 =85

 

Here is a brief description. Does this sound easy to master? Would you trust 
some guy who has not passed certification testing to deal with these issues?

 

NFPA 85: DOCUMENT SCOPE

1.1* Scope. This code applies to the following: A.1.1 Technological advances in 
recent years and, in particular, the pervasiveness of microprocessor-based 
hardware make it even more important that only highly qualified individuals be 
employed in applying the requirements of this code to operating systems. Each 
type of hardware has its own unique features and operational modes. It is vital 
that the designer of the safety system be completely familiar with the features 
and weaknesses of the specific hardware and possess a thorough understanding of 
this code and its intent. It is not possible for this code to encompass all 
specific hardware applications, nor should this code be considered a “cookbook” 
for the design of a safety system. In applying any type of equipment to a 
safety system, the designer should consider carefully all the possible failure 
modes and the effect that each might have on the integrity of the system and 
the safety of the unit and personnel. In particular, no single point failure 
should result in an unsafe or uncontrollable condition or a masked failure of a 
microprocessor-based system that could result in the operator unwittingly 
taking action that could lead to an unsafe condition. In this code, the 
sections that apply to all fuels should be used in conjunction with those 
sections covering the specific fuel utilized. (1) Single burner boilers, 
multiple burner boilers, stokers, and atmospheric fluidized bed boilers with a 
fuel input rating of 3.7 MWt (12.5 million Btu/hr) or greater (2) Pulverized 
fuel systems at any heat input rate (3) Fired or unfired steam generators used 
to recover heat from combustion turbines [heat recovery steam generators 
(HRSGs)] and other combustion turbine exhaust systems at any heat input rate 
1.1.1 This code covers design, installation, operation, maintenance, and 
training. 1.1.2 This code covers strength of the structure, operation and 
maintenance procedures, combustion and draft control equipment, safety 
interlocks, alarms, trips, and other related controls that are essential to 
safe equipment operation. 1.1.3 This code does not cover process heaters used 
in chemical and petroleum manufacture in which steam generation is incidental 
to

Re: [Vo]:Press Release - Cold Fusion (LENR) Verified - Inventor Sues Industrial Heat, LLC.

I agree; the $10 million was paid. Sorry for the confusion.

On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 11:39 AM, Blaze Spinnaker 
wrote:

>
>
> On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 8:21 AM, Craig Haynie 
> wrote:
>
>> See section 3.2(b). The $10,000,000 is held in escrow.
>>
>>
>> http://www.sifferkoll.se/sifferkoll/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Rossi_et_al_v_Darden_et_al__flsdce-16-21199__0001.2.pdf
>>
>>
>>
> That's just saying it went into escrow first as part of the agreement.
> That's standard for sure.  The complaint says it got paid.  Look at #58 of
> the complaint
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bz7lTfqkED9WZ2JPbkQtWEd4dVk/view
>

Re: [Vo]:Press Release - Cold Fusion (LENR) Verified - Inventor Sues Industrial Heat, LLC.

2016-04-07 Thread Blaze Spinnaker

On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 8:21 AM, Craig Haynie 
wrote:

> See section 3.2(b). The $10,000,000 is held in escrow.
>
>
> http://www.sifferkoll.se/sifferkoll/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Rossi_et_al_v_Darden_et_al__flsdce-16-21199__0001.2.pdf
>
>
>
That's just saying it went into escrow first as part of the agreement.
That's standard for sure.  The complaint says it got paid.  Look at #58 of
the complaint
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bz7lTfqkED9WZ2JPbkQtWEd4dVk/view

Re: [Vo]:Press Release - Cold Fusion (LENR) Verified - Inventor Sues Industrial Heat, LLC.

Craig Haynie  wrote:

See section 3.2(b). The $10,000,000 is held in escrow.
>
>
> http://www.sifferkoll.se/sifferkoll/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Rossi_et_al_v_Darden_et_al__flsdce-16-21199__0001.2.pdf
>
>
I think this means the $10 million was held in escrow until Rossi informed
IH that the plant was "complete and ready for Validation."

It says the money will be paid "immediately after (i) Validation is
achieved as provided in Section 4 hereof." Section 4 describes an ERV test
of 24 hours. Okay, maybe it passed that test, and the test described in
section 5, lasting 350 days, is the bone of contention.

So, he got the first payment, and the lawsuit is about the rest of the
money. That's my impression. I don't know though.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Press Release - Cold Fusion (LENR) Verified - Inventor Sues Industrial Heat, LLC.

See section 3.2(b). The $10,000,000 is held in escrow.

http://www.sifferkoll.se/sifferkoll/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Rossi_et_al_v_Darden_et_al__flsdce-16-21199__0001.2.pdf


On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 8:22 AM, Blaze Spinnaker 
wrote:

> "I think the fight is over the $10 million in escrow, which looks like it
> may go back to IH if the deal falls through."
>
> I saw nothing saying the money is in escrow.   Pretty sure it's been paid
> to leonardo.  See line 58
>

[Vo]:Re: Copy of Rossi's civil complaint

2016-04-07 Thread Bob Cook

If Rossi’s Hot Cat works and produces direct electricity, it may be that that 
associated IP is not licensed, since it is a separate invention.  The key 
question is did any of the IH team contribute to the Hot Cat direct electricity 
invention and/or who paid for the ideas.  Its not my impression that Rossi as 
chief scientist of IH was restricted to doing his own thinking and inventing. 

It seemed that his invention of the small quark entity he has talked about may 
have been separate from his function as chief scientist of IH.  It would be 
interesting to know if Rossi was paid as chief scientist at IH.  The other 
question is who owned the separate office/lab that Rossi occupied at the 
customer’s place where the year long test happened?  It seemed the Agreement 
between Rossi, IH etal did not require Rossi’s assistance in running the low 
temperature E-Cat for ever.   I think he had only a two year period he was on 
the hook, so to speak.  He may have quit as chief scientist once the year long 
testing was done or before that at the end of the 2 year period.

As far as IH is concerned it seems to me that their claiming the IP as their 
property has no merit, and their formation of different companies to distance 
IH from the agreement liabilities is suspicious. I wonder what the arrangement 
with the various Chinese entities is with respect to the sharing of trade 
secrets of the E-Cat? and/or quark.  Paying Rossi $89M may not be enough to 
correct other wrongs associated with the agreement provisions.  

I was also happy to see Rossi’s quick action to defend his inventions IP and 
the associated patents.  I doubt his new patents (some 100 or so) per his 
comments include IH  as an inventor.  Does anyone know?

Bob Cook 

From: Roarty, Francis X 
Sent: Thursday, April 07, 2016 3:53 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com 
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Copy of Rossi's civil complaint

Russ, nice assessment – I agree that letting IH back in would be worst case for 
Rossi but he may have to allow it if they cry honest mistake and immediately 
make good on the original agreement… Rossi is probably in negotiations already 
with larger industries that could roll his inventions out much faster if he can 
disengage himself from IH, Really obliging of Darden et all to release their 
rights so easily at this time when the IP valuation just soared through the 
roof. 

Thank you IH!

Fran 

 

From: Russ George [mailto:russ.geo...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2016 8:40 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: EXTERNAL: RE: [Vo]:Copy of Rossi's civil complaint

 

That is a very straight legal case Rossi reveals that points to the failure of 
IH to honor its contract. Rossi is clearly going to win this unless IH pays up 
the $89 million. Rossi is in the catbird seat as he is being seen to enforce 
his IP and license agreements which is a vital task under IP law. The courts 
usually take a very simple view of such matters if the payments are not made 
and infringements are shown then Rossi gets ALL his IP back and IH loses any 
licenses. 

 

Since Rossi has now proven his tech works and IH has proven that big money will 
invest, aka Woodward funds, Rossi will find it simple to raise similar sums. 
Good for him he has played very cool and straight with IH and it seems clear IH 
has not done the same. We shall have to see what the courts say but in the 
meantime Rossi owns it all and can move ahead. Worst case scenario for Rossi is 
IH pays up to retain the license. 

 

Given the obvious leaks that have been out prior to this document saying Rossi 
and IH were having difficulties someone on the inside has been playing a dark 
game against Rossi by feeding the trolls. 

 

From: Jed Rothwell [mailto:jedrothw...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, April 6, 2016 5:11 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: [Vo]:Copy of Rossi's civil complaint

 

See:

 

http://www.e-catworld.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Leonardosuit01-main.pdf

[Vo]:Production plans and report will be published

2016-04-07 Thread a.ashfield


Kurt Turden
April 7, 2016 at 1:29 AM

Dr Andrea Rossi:
So the program to manufacture the E-Cat in massive quantities goes on, 
even if this litigation will take long, as usual?

Godspeed,
Kurt
Translate

Andrea Rossi
April 7, 2016 at 9:23 AM

Kurt Turden:
Yes.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

Andrea
April 7, 2016 at 3:30 AM

Dear Dr. Rossi,
What’s going to happen to the pubblication of the report, with the 
recent litigation on course ?

Regards
Andrea Rossi
April 7, 2016 at 9:20 AM

Andrea:
We are going to publish it as soon as my attorney gives me green light. 
I am sure 100% it will be published.

Warm Regards,
A.R.

Re: [Vo]:Press Release - Cold Fusion (LENR) Verified - Inventor Sues Industrial Heat, LLC.

Lennart Thornros wrote:

Once again it is not judging about how well it worked for you. Just saying
> that there is no guarantee coming from being licensed.
>

Yes, there is an explicit guarantee. If a licensed HVAC engineer publishes
an evaluation with a mistake, he will lose his license. That is his
livelihood. As I said before, he will go from being an upper-middle-class
professional to working at McDonald's. That means he has to conduct the
test with the proper instruments in place, according to methods approved by
law in the state of Florida. These methods are extremely reliable. There is
no question that if you do things according to the book you will get the
right answer.

The regulations for Florida are not online at present. The state of Florida
website links do not work. Here are regulations for Utah, which are similar:

http://laborcommission.utah.gov/media/pdfs/boilerelevatormine/pubs/Boiler%20Compliance%20Manual.pdf

A 1 MW reactor is 3.4 million BTU/h.

The regs basically say you have to certify the boiler complies with NFPA 85
BOILER AND COMBUSTION SYSTEMS HAZARDS CODE, which is a book available here:

http://www.nfpa.org/codes-and-standards/document-information-pages?mode=code=85

Here is a brief description. Does this sound easy to master? Would you
trust some guy who has not passed certification testing to deal with these
issues?

NFPA 85: DOCUMENT SCOPE

1.1* Scope. This code applies to the following: A.1.1 Technological
advances in recent years and, in particular, the pervasiveness of
microprocessor-based hardware make it even more important that only highly
qualified individuals be employed in applying the requirements of this code
to operating systems. Each type of hardware has its own unique features and
operational modes. It is vital that the designer of the safety system be
completely familiar with the features and weaknesses of the specific
hardware and possess a thorough understanding of this code and its intent.
It is not possible for this code to encompass all specific hardware
applications, nor should this code be considered a “cookbook” for the
design of a safety system. In applying any type of equipment to a safety
system, the designer should consider carefully all the possible failure
modes and the effect that each might have on the integrity of the system
and the safety of the unit and personnel. In particular, no single point
failure should result in an unsafe or uncontrollable condition or a masked
failure of a microprocessor-based system that could result in the operator
unwittingly taking action that could lead to an unsafe condition. In this
code, the sections that apply to all fuels should be used in conjunction
with those sections covering the specific fuel utilized. (1) Single burner
boilers, multiple burner boilers, stokers, and atmospheric fluidized bed
boilers with a fuel input rating of 3.7 MWt (12.5 million Btu/hr) or
greater (2) Pulverized fuel systems at any heat input rate (3) Fired or
unfired steam generators used to recover heat from combustion turbines
[heat recovery steam generators (HRSGs)] and other combustion turbine
exhaust systems at any heat input rate 1.1.1 This code covers design,
installation, operation, maintenance, and training. 1.1.2 This code covers
strength of the structure, operation and maintenance procedures, combustion
and draft control equipment, safety interlocks, alarms, trips, and other
related controls that are essential to safe equipment operation. 1.1.3 This
code does not cover process heaters used in chemical and petroleum
manufacture in which steam generation is incidental to the operation of a
processing system. 1.1.4 Chapter 5 covers single burner boilers that fire
the following fuels: (1) Fuel gas as defined in 3.3.74. (2)*Other gas
having a calorific value and characteristics similar to natural gas
A.1.1.4(2) This can include some heavier-than-air gases. (3) Fuel oil as
defined in 3.3.73.3 (4) Fuel gas and fuel oil that are fired simultaneously
for fuel transfer (5) Fuel gas and fuel oil that are fired simultaneously
and continuously 1.1.5 Chapter 6 covers multiple burner boilers firing one
or more of the following: (1) Fuel gas, as defined in 3.3.74 (2) Fuel oil,
as defined in 3.3.73.3 (3) Pulverized coal, as defined in 3.3.73.2.1 (4)
Simultaneous firing of more than one of the fuels stated in 1.1.5(1)
through 1.1.5(3) 1.1.6 Chapter 7 covers atmospheric fluidized bed boilers.
1.1.7* Chapter 8 covers HRSG systems and other combustion turbine exhaust
systems. A.1.1.7 It is not possible for this code to encompass the specific
hardware applications, nor should it be considered a cookbook for the
design of a safe HRSG system. A HRSG is a complex system, often involving
numerous components, multiple steam pressure levels, emission control
systems, and augmented air or supplementary firing. The simplest combined
cycle plant automatically has certain hazards that are common to all
designs. Coupling various

Re: [Vo]:Press Release - Cold Fusion (LENR) Verified - Inventor Sues Industrial Heat, LLC.

2016-04-07 Thread Lennart Thornros

Jed,
I think you are correct in who would be more qualified in one regard;
experience and training is valuable if you want really objective scientific
measures.
However, in the real world it is a number of factors involved. We just do
not have the full picture to evaluate what would have been a better
solution taking all aspects into consideration.
The real game here seems to be about money and investment capacity. It is
of course possible that IH will come back with a rebuttal that claims the
test was not professional and the result is not proven. Then your point
will come to play.
Personally I believe this will enhance the possibilities that LENR get the
funding it deserves. The squeaky wheel story.

Best Regards ,
Lennart Thornros

lenn...@thornros.com
+1 916 436 1899

Whatever you vividly imagine, ardently desire, sincerely believe and
enthusiastically act upon, must inevitably come to pass. (PJM)

On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 7:00 AM, Jed Rothwell  wrote:

> Alain Sepeda  wrote:
>
> about Penon "non independence", except having an italian name and having
>> done a previous test, is there any relationship established with rossi
>> predating the Ferrara test ?
>>
>
> They have been working together for many years.
>
> It seems to me that an independent test should be conducted by someone you
> have not worked with, who has not measured the performance of your previous
> devices. Also, as I said, it should be someone fully qualified and licensed
> to render a professional evaluation of an industrial-scale boiler in
> Florida. $100 million is at stake! You cannot even get a license to operate
> this kind of machine without approval from a certified, licensed engineer.
> You sure would not pay $100 million without that level of proof. It would
> be insane.
>
> - Jed
>
>

RE: [Vo]:Is there a Johnson Matthey connection?

Speaking of coincidences.

Perhaps it is randomly coincidental that J has been promoting their new
nanocatalyst which is known as "heterogeneous Pd/C"  - which appears to be
very much like the Arata catalyst with nano-palladium supported by carbon.
As they say: "highly dispersed, very active, and the best use of expensive
metals." 

Possibly there is a connection of Rossi to JM Chemical as a supplier of a
catalyst which works well with nickel in the low temperature ecat. But . as
we have seen, so many details in the unfolding story - simply do not add up
-- the chances of this being accurate are slim.  

But the coincidences definitely appeal to the older set of observers who
were around two decades ago. What if it turns out that Rossi is also using
heavy water?

Wow. mind boggling. and full circle, no?

Johnson Matthey is a name which goes back to the early days of cold fusion.
They supplied the active palladium for P They are one of the largest
producers of metal catalysts and precious metals in the world.

Apparently, there is mention in one of the online documents of the Lawsuit -
that JM Chemical is in fact a subsidiary of Johnson Matthey. 

Small world, if true. The implications are many.

Re: [Vo]:Press Release - Cold Fusion (LENR) Verified - Inventor Sues Industrial Heat, LLC.

Alain Sepeda  wrote:

about Penon "non independence", except having an italian name and having
> done a previous test, is there any relationship established with rossi
> predating the Ferrara test ?
>

They have been working together for many years.

It seems to me that an independent test should be conducted by someone you
have not worked with, who has not measured the performance of your previous
devices. Also, as I said, it should be someone fully qualified and licensed
to render a professional evaluation of an industrial-scale boiler in
Florida. $100 million is at stake! You cannot even get a license to operate
this kind of machine without approval from a certified, licensed engineer.
You sure would not pay $100 million without that level of proof. It would
be insane.

- Jed

[Vo]:Is there a Johnson Matthey connection?

Johnson Matthey is a name which goes back to the early days of cold fusion.
They supplied the active palladium for P They are one of the largest
producers of metal catalysts and precious metals in the world.

Apparently, there is mention in one of the online documents of the Lawsuit -
that JM Chemical is in fact a subsidiary of Johnson Matthey. 

Small world, if true. The implications are many.

Re: [Vo]:Press Release - Cold Fusion (LENR) Verified - Inventor Sues Industrial Heat, LLC.

2016-04-07 Thread Blaze Spinnaker

"I think the fight is over the $10 million in escrow, which looks like it
may go back to IH if the deal falls through."

I saw nothing saying the money is in escrow.   Pretty sure it's been paid
to leonardo.  See line 58

Re: [Vo]:Rossi's customer

2016-04-07 Thread Patrick Ellul

"JMC is owned by an entity formed in the United Kingdom and none of
Leonardo, Dr. Andrea Rossi, Henry W. Johnson nor any of their respective
subsidiaries, directors, officers, agents, employees, affiliates.
significant others, or relatives by blood or marriage has any ownership
interest in JMC."
someone suggests it might be british http://chemicals.matthey.com/

On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 2:19 PM, Frank Acland  wrote:

> I think this might be the same Henry Johnson:
>
> http://hwjlaw.net/who-we-are.html
>
> On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 11:12 PM, Eric Walker 
> wrote:
>
>> This link [1] suggests that Henry Johnson is possibly a lawyer, i.e.,
>> someone you would expect to register unrelated companies:
>>
>> "Note - registrations for dissimilar business entities suggest the
>> registered agent is a lawyer or third party filing on behalf of the
>> business owner(s)"
>>
>> Eric
>>
>>
>> [1] https://www.statelog.com/j-m-chemical-products-inc-boca-raton-fl
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 11:07 PM, Alan Fletcher  wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> https://www.corporationwiki.com/Florida/Coral-Springs/henry-w-johnson-14210.aspx
>>>
>>> Coral Springs, FL — President for Bellwether Global Corporation
>>>
>>> Henry Johnson has been associated with forty-three companies, according
>>> to public records. The companies were formed over a forty-five year period
>>> with the most recent being incorporated one year ago in March of 2015.
>>> Fifteen of the companies are still active while the remaining twenty-eight
>>> are now listed as inactive.
>>>
>>> Including :
>>>
>>>
>>> https://www.corporationwiki.com/Florida/Miami-Beach/leonardo-corporation/66632333.aspx
>>>
>>> Johnson President, Rossi CEO
>>>
>>>
>>> https://www.corporationwiki.com/Florida/Miami-Beach/refc-real-estate-corp/137192381.aspx
>>>
>>> Johnson President, Rossi CEO
>>> --
>>> *From: *"Eric Walker" 
>>> *To: *"vortex-l" 
>>> *Sent: *Wednesday, April 6, 2016 8:18:22 PM
>>> *Subject: *Re: [Vo]:Rossi's customer
>>>
>>> Interestingly, that looks like a normal business park:
>>>
>>> https://goo.gl/V4AOLX
>>>
>>> I noticed this registration information for JM Chemical Products in Boca
>>> Raton:
>>> https://www.statelog.com/j-m-chemical-products-inc-boca-raton-fl
>>>
>>> The registration took place in July 2014.  According to the lawsuit, IH
>>> and IPH were delinquent in finding a facility to test the 1MW E-Cat, and
>>> Rossi had to find one himself.  Here is what the suit then says:
>>>
>>> 63. Despite IH's and IPH's continued failure to secure an adequate
>>> testing facility, ROSSI took it upon himself to locate and secure a
>>> location in which to conduct the Guaranteed Performance Test, as well as
>>> obtain the requisite regulatory approvals for the operation of the ECat
>>> Unit.
>>> 64. On or before August 13,2014, ROSSI and LEONARDO located a customer
>>> in Miami, Florida, who agreed to allow its facility to be used for the
>>> Guaranteed Performance Test and even agreed to pay IH up to One Thousand
>>> Dollars ($1,000.00) per day for the energy produced by the E-Cat Unit
>>> during the Guaranteed Performance Test
>>>
>>>
>>> So the company where the test took place (JM Chemical Products) was
>>> located on or before August 2014.
>>>
>>> Eric
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Frank Acland
> Publisher, E-Cat World 
>
>



-- 
Patrick

www.tRacePerfect.com
The daily puzzle everyone can finish but not everyone can perfect!
The quickest puzzle ever!

RE: [Vo]:Copy of Rossi's civil complaint

2016-04-07 Thread Roarty, Francis X

Russ, nice assessment – I agree that letting IH back in would be worst case for 
Rossi but he may have to allow it if they cry honest mistake and immediately 
make good on the original agreement… Rossi is probably in negotiations already 
with larger industries that could roll his inventions out much faster if he can 
disengage himself from IH, Really obliging of Darden et all to release their 
rights so easily at this time when the IP valuation just soared through the 
roof.
Thank you IH!
Fran

From: Russ George [mailto:russ.geo...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2016 8:40 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: EXTERNAL: RE: [Vo]:Copy of Rossi's civil complaint

That is a very straight legal case Rossi reveals that points to the failure of 
IH to honor its contract. Rossi is clearly going to win this unless IH pays up 
the $89 million. Rossi is in the catbird seat as he is being seen to enforce 
his IP and license agreements which is a vital task under IP law. The courts 
usually take a very simple view of such matters if the payments are not made 
and infringements are shown then Rossi gets ALL his IP back and IH loses any 
licenses.

Since Rossi has now proven his tech works and IH has proven that big money will 
invest, aka Woodward funds, Rossi will find it simple to raise similar sums. 
Good for him he has played very cool and straight with IH and it seems clear IH 
has not done the same. We shall have to see what the courts say but in the 
meantime Rossi owns it all and can move ahead. Worst case scenario for Rossi is 
IH pays up to retain the license.

Given the obvious leaks that have been out prior to this document saying Rossi 
and IH were having difficulties someone on the inside has been playing a dark 
game against Rossi by feeding the trolls.

From: Jed Rothwell [mailto:jedrothw...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 6, 2016 5:11 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: [Vo]:Copy of Rossi's civil complaint

See:

http://www.e-catworld.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Leonardosuit01-main.pdf

RE: [Vo]:Copy of Rossi's civil complaint

2016-04-07 Thread Roarty, Francis X


Wow! I would hope Rossi’s lawyer has actual evidence for these claims, if so 
Rossi may be short cutting their play and force an amicable settlement in 
everyone’s best interest.

[snip]Among other things, DARDEN, VAUGHN, IH and IPH have (a) disclosed the ECat
IP to LEONARDO's competitors; (b) attempted to utilize ROSSI and LEONARDO's 
trade
secrets outside of the scope ofthe limited License Agreement; and (c) attempted 
to misappropriate
the trade secrets by requesting a patent for ROSSI and LEONARDO's intellectual 
property in their
own name.” [/snip]

From: Jed Rothwell [mailto:jedrothw...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2016 8:11 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:Copy of Rossi's civil complaint

See:

http://www.e-catworld.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Leonardosuit01-main.pdf

Re: [Vo]:Press Release - Cold Fusion (LENR) Verified - Inventor Sues Industrial Heat, LLC.

2016-04-07 Thread Alain Sepeda

about Penon "non independence", except having an italian name and having
done a previous test, is there any relationship established with rossi
predating the Ferrara test ?

for the rest I agree, a good HVAC engineer would do it better.

2016-04-07 4:06 GMT+02:00 Jed Rothwell :

> Lennart Thornros  wrote:
>
>
>> 1. Based on his previous work, Penon is not qualified to do calorimetry. I
>> have no clue about how well you know this guys qualifications except you
>> read a report you think was flawed. If the COP was 50, then I (and I am not
>> good at calorimetry) could give the answer that at least COP6 was reached.
>>
>
> As it happens, I just posted a message describing some of the reasons I am
> not impressed.
>
> If you read the report, and you were impressed, I think you need to learn
> a little more about calorimetry. It was as bad as the Lugano report. Some
> of the same mistakes were in both.
>
>
>
>> 3. He is not licensed in Florida to do this kind of measurement. Sorry
>> but license is just an issue of passing a simple exam and pay the fees. I
>> know there is probably some experience required but that can always be
>> fixed - believe me.BTW if he is licensed anywhere would that make a
>> difference.
>>
>
> A license and the proper procedures can be the difference between life and
> death. The exams are NOT simple. I have seen them, and I am sure I would
> fail them.
>
> I have never worked with large industrial equipment. But I have been in
> factories, and in ship engine rooms. I have talked to OSHA inspectors and
> HVAC engineers. My late father was fireman first class in the engine room
> of a steamship built around 1910, and he told me a lot about it. He did
> that for 6 years until his arm was crushed in an accident. There are not
> one, not two, but DOZENS of ways you can kill yourself, blow up the
> building or sink the ship when you make a mistake with a boiler. Even
> today, with all the automatic controls, it is still dangerous. And yes, you
> can confuse 200 kW with 1 MW (or vice versa) by doing it wrong. That is why
> boilers blow up. Look at Defkalion for an example of how badly you can make
> a mistake doing industrial scale calorimetry.
>
>
>
>> 4. I. H. said they disagree with the result. They know more about
>> calorimetry than Penon does, so I am inclined to believe them. Now you
>> are way out of line. IH does not know anything.
>>
>
> I have met with those people at conferences. I can judge their knowledge.
>
> - Jed
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Press Release - Cold Fusion (LENR) Verified - Inventor Sues Industrial Heat, LLC.