Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

Frank Is it 1.094 MHz? On Jul 19, 2017 10:12, "Frank Znidarsic" wrote: > > > > > On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 7:13 AM, Brian Ahern > wrote: > > > > There are no room temperature superconductors. They are theoretically > > impossible. > >/snip > > > This is

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

> > On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 7:13 AM, Brian Ahern wrote: > > There are no room temperature superconductors. They are theoretically > impossible. >/snip This is exactly what I expected. Terra hertz radiation forms a vibrationally reinforced Bose condensate (a

RE: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 12:43 AM, Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com <mailto:kevmol...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 7:13 AM, Brian Ahern <ahern_br...@msn.com > <mailto:ahern_br...@msn.com> > wrote:

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1411.6822 Exciton-polariton condensates Tim Byrnes,1 Na Young Kim,2 and Yoshihisa Yamamoto1, 2 1National Institute of Informatics, 2-1-2 Hitotsubashi, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo 101-8430, Japan 2E. L. Ginzton Laboratory, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305 (Dated: November 26,

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 3:04 AM, Che wrote: > > > On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 3:02 AM, Axil Axil wrote: > >> I'm no fyzicist, but BECs are the quantum state of matter absolutely >> requiring the least possible amount of energy in the system as is

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 3:02 AM, Axil Axil wrote: > I'm no fyzicist, but BECs are the quantum state of matter absolutely > requiring the least possible amount of energy in the system as is possible > > This is not an absolute. When polaritons are confined in an optical cavity

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

try linear Bose Einstin condensate On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 2:59 AM, Che wrote: > > Looking up 'linear BEC' I'm getting battery circuits... wtf. > :P > > On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 2:56 AM, Che wrote: > >> >> >> On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 2:35

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

I'm no fyzicist, but BECs are the quantum state of matter absolutely requiring the least possible amount of energy in the system as is possible This is not an absolute. When polaritons are confined in an optical cavity over time, FANO interference forces the waveform into a soliton. In other

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

Looking up 'linear BEC' I'm getting battery circuits... wtf. :P On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 2:56 AM, Che wrote: > > > On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 2:35 AM, Kevin O'Malley > wrote: > >> Wouldn't that be fascinating if High Temp Superconductors were >>

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 2:35 AM, Kevin O'Malley wrote: > Wouldn't that be fascinating if High Temp Superconductors were > generating linear BECs? I can see they might be Luttinger Liquids, > but let's say it went one step further, not into a solid state of > matter but

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

The Ideal shape of the LENR active nanoparticles is the nanowire. [image: tumblr_inline_nklod0IHqf1rpydpj.gif] (Simulation of the continuous polarization dependence of the photoinduced surface plasmon polaritons field distribution in a silver nanoresonator of 5.7 μm length and 67 nm radius

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

Wouldn't that be fascinating if High Temp Superconductors were generating linear BECs? I can see they might be Luttinger Liquids, but let's say it went one step further, not into a solid state of matter but into the Condensate state of matter.Are there telltale signs of a BEC? On 7/18/17,

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 12:43 AM, Kevin O'Malley wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 7:13 AM, Brian Ahern wrote: > > There are no room temperature superconductors. They are theoretically > impossible. > > ***Someone should tell the guys who are working

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 7:13 AM, Brian Ahern wrote: > > > There are no room temperature superconductors. They are theoretically impossible. All reports of them have never been corroborated. > The explanation would take hours, but Keith Johnson solved the problem in 1983 in

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

gt; they do not share all of the attributes. >> >> -- >> *From:* Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> >> *Sent:* Monday, July 17, 2017 1:56 PM >> *To:* Vortex >> *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled >>

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

ct, but > they do not share all of the attributes. > > -- > *From:* Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> > *Sent:* Monday, July 17, 2017 1:56 PM > *To:* Vortex > *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled > > I wrote: > > &g

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

that seem like a Meisner Effect, but they do not share all of the attributes. From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, July 17, 2017 1:56 PM To: Vortex Subject: Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled I wrote: I do not

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 7:45 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > Che wrote: > > >> This is what I am not getting. Why are we even talking about 'cold >> fusion' as a reality, when initial (wild?) success always seems to end up >> in a dead-end -- where

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 7:35 PM, Axil Axil wrote: > We shoud not be talking about 'cold fusion'. We should be talking about > proton decay. > I *totally* disagree. 'Cold Fusion' is clearly a term with mucho popularizing potential... and most importantly: **it is NOT all that

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

Che wrote: > This is what I am not getting. Why are we even talking about 'cold fusion' > as a reality, when initial (wild?) success always seems to end up in a > dead-end -- where people can get away with SAYING this sort of thing..? > The results are not a bit

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

We shoud not be talking about 'cold fusion'. We should be talking about proton decay. On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 6:31 PM, Che wrote: > > > On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 9:45 AM, Brian Ahern wrote: > > > > > > Axil's pronouncements seem to indicate well

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

d always below C.  Particles may move at a higher velocity than light in a medium, but not in empty space—all this is standard physics today.   Bob Cook   From: Kevin O'Malley Sent: Monday, July 17, 2017 1:55 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled   On 7/1

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 9:45 AM, Brian Ahern wrote: > > > Axil's pronouncements seem to indicate well established experimental evidence. There is none. > > Inviting superconductivity into LENR has no more validity than bringing in a witch doctor to lead the discussion. > >

RE: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

<mailto:kevmol...@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, July 17, 2017 1:55 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com<mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com> Subject: Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled On 7/17/17, bobcook39...@hotmail.com <bobcook39...@hotmail.com> wrote: Bremsstrahlung is associated with the slo

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

I mean by the mainstream relativists, "they" have got it wrong when "they" teach it On Monday, 17 July 2017, 22:58, ROGER ANDERTON wrote: all based on misunderstanding relativity due to translation errors as I shall point out in my next physics talks.

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

all based on misunderstanding relativity due to translation errors as I shall point out in my next physics talks. On Monday, 17 July 2017, 22:55, Kevin O'Malley wrote: On 7/17/17, bobcook39...@hotmail.com wrote:   Bremsstrahlung is

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

On 7/17/17, bobcook39...@hotmail.com wrote: Bremsstrahlung is associated with the slowing of a charged > particle which enters a substance at a velocity greater than the speed of > light in the medium. Velocity greater than C? I thought there was nothing that could

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

On 7/17/17, Brian Ahern wrote: > > The sad reality is that nobody has succeeded in producing 1.0 watts of > excess energy with a COP > 1.5 on a repeatable and demonstrated platform. > ***What about the NANOR? And also, what about those 153 peer reviewed replications of

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

owlife that demands their teaching for free. From: Brian Ahern [mailto:ahern_br...@msn.com] Sent: Monday, July 17, 2017 9:46 AM To: vortex-l Subject: Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled Axil's pronouncements seem to indicate well established experimental evidence. There i

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

My MS thesis showed the SC in PdD and PdH in 1975. It works every time at 11K and 9K respectively. From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, July 17, 2017 11:25 AM To: Vortex Subject: Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled Brian

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

I wrote: > I do not think there is experimental evidence for this, I suppose because > it would be difficult to test for. > Difficult because, presumably, in the cathode only microscopic domains of nuclear-active spots superconduct. Not the whole cathode. I think that finding a tiny amount of

RE: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

To: vortex-l@eskimo.com<mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com> Subject: RE: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled Brian’s words are very true. The amount of experimental based wisdom found here is very rare indeed while there is a super abundance of pundiprophecy, aka bullshit. Alas this is not a matte

RE: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

or an experimental reference may help clarify. Bob Cook From: Axil Axil<mailto:janap...@gmail.com> Sent: Sunday, July 16, 2017 6:14 PM To: vortex-l<mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com> Subject: Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled When the meissner effect associated with Hole supercondu

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

Brian Ahern wrote: Inviting superconductivity into LENR has no more validity than bringing in > a witch doctor to lead the discussion. > Martin Fleischmann and others suggested that the hydrogen in a highly loaded palladium hydride might be superconducting. Cryogenic

RE: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

their teaching for free. From: Brian Ahern [mailto:ahern_br...@msn.com] Sent: Monday, July 17, 2017 9:46 AM To: vortex-l Subject: Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled Axil's pronouncements seem to indicate well established experimental evidence. There is none. Inviting

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

energy with a COP > 1.5 on a repeatable and demonstrated platform. From: Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> Sent: Sunday, July 16, 2017 10:14 PM To: vortex-l Subject: Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled When the meissner effect associated with Hole supercon

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

; > Bob Cook > > > > *From: *Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> > *Sent: *Tuesday, July 11, 2017 5:45 PM > *To: *vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com> > *Subject: *Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled > > > > Gamma's were also seen at reaction shutdown. What produc

RE: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

or react with production of gammas or the 0.51 Mev EM radiation associated with the reaction of a electron and a positron. Bob Cook From: Axil Axil<mailto:janap...@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2017 5:45 PM To: vortex-l<mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com> Subject: Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

ed problem of some LENR reactions, > however. I consider energetic neutrons, if produced, would be readily > observed. > > > > Bob Cook > > *From: *Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> > *Sent: *Tuesday, July 11, 2017 5:45 PM > *To: *vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com> >

RE: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

vortex-l<mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com> Subject: Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled Gamma's were also seen at reaction shutdown. What produces those gammas? On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 9:35 PM, Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com<mailto:kevmol...@gmail.com>> wrote: I beli

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

You want the last word? Make another useless email reply. On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 3:38 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > Che wrote: > > >> What? You calling me a liar? >>> >>> Okay, have it your way: you're a liar. Now tell us who sneered. >>> >>

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 7:46 PM, ROGER ANDERTON wrote: > > 5 Jul at 5:50 PM said : So much drama for nothing... > > > does that count as sneering? No, actually. In this sense here, it is sneering when it is in fact _unwarranted_, and _gratuitously_ dismissive.

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

Che wrote: > What? You calling me a liar? >>> >> >> Okay, have it your way: you're a liar. Now tell us who sneered. >> > > > Nyah, nyah, nyhah, petit-bourgeois swell-head engineer. > Hey, you asked me to call you that! Make up your mind. > And for the record: the

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 7:34 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > Che wrote: > > >> Who sneered? Who are "they"? >>> >>> - Jed >>> >>> >> What? You calling me a liar? >> > > Okay, have it your way: you're a liar. Now tell us who sneered. > Nyah, nyah,

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

Fusion events, and other nuclear exchanges. On 7/11/17, Axil Axil wrote: > Gamma's were also seen at reaction shutdown. What produces those gammas? > > On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 9:35 PM, Kevin O'Malley > wrote: > >> I believe gammas are generated and then

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

Gamma's were also seen at reaction shutdown. What produces those gammas? On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 9:35 PM, Kevin O'Malley wrote: > I believe gammas are generated and then absorbed into the BEC, sliced > and diced into X rays. That is, the vast majority of the gammas. >

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

I believe gammas are generated and then absorbed into the BEC, sliced and diced into X rays. That is, the vast majority of the gammas. Some poke their heads through, especially in the initial phase where it's an endothermic reaction starting the whole thing. That's why Celani saw Gammas at

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

5 Jul at 5:50 PM  said :   So much drama fornothing... does that count as sneering? On Wednesday, 12 July 2017, 0:35, Jed Rothwell wrote: Che wrote:  Who sneered? Who are "they"? - Jed What? You calling me a liar? Okay, have it

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

Che wrote: > Who sneered? Who are "they"? >> >> - Jed >> >> > What? You calling me a liar? > Okay, have it your way: you're a liar. Now tell us who sneered. > Go read the thread. > I don't see it. - Jed

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 3:37 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > Che wrote: > > >> > Not so - no one here that I am aware of - sneers at MFMP. Or if they do - >>> they are misguided. >>> >> >> Well they have. Right here. Recently. >> > > Who sneered? Who

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

Gamma rays are not generated in LENR reactions because the reaction energy is completely drained by the entanglement of the SPP BEC that is in place on the nanoparticles that produce the LENR reaction. On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 6:30 PM, Kevin O'Malley wrote: > I have thought

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

I have thought for a long time that there have been multiple LENR reactions. When you let loose a gamma inside a lattice and it hits those other nickel (or palladium) atoms, it generates fission reactions. The ash analysis results have been all over the board. On 7/11/17, Axil Axil

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

The gamma ray finding of MFMP was replicated within 48 hours by Hans Biberian. And then they just faded away onto whatever it is they've been doing for 4 years. On 7/10/17, Che wrote: > On Sun, Jul 9, 2017 at 8:03 PM, Kevin O'Malley wrote: >>

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

You sound like someone who doesn't want to see LENR succeed. Seems about the right position, for a communist. On 7/11/17, Che wrote: > On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 7:12 PM, Kevin O'Malley wrote: >> >> Mary Yugo said he was contacted by investors

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

That's the whole point of having an independent 3rd party. Apparently Rossi has the ability to change reality perception when he's around, similar to Steve Jobs. On 7/11/17, H LV wrote: > If that is true then Rossi either lacks the ability to interpret his own > data or he

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

That would be just like him. On 7/11/17, Jones Beene wrote: > > Wait a minute. There is still Randell Mills to deal with, and he says he > can not only heat up a cup of coffee but evaporate it in a burst of > hydrinos in seconds. He has better credentials than any of us, and

RE: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

ect: Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled Rossi was suing IH for millions of dollars, so he had to prove the device in Florida worked as he claimed. If the trial proceeded I think it is very likely that the preponderance of the evidence would not support his claim. Harry On Mon, Jul 10, 2

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

days. > > > > From: Jed Rothwell [mailto:jedrothw...@gmail.com] > Sent: Monday, July 10, 2017 9:03 PM > To: Vortex > Subject: Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled > > > > Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com <mailto:kevmol...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

Che wrote: > Not so - no one here that I am aware of - sneers at MFMP. Or if they do - >> they are misguided. >> > > Well they have. Right here. Recently. > Who sneered? Who are "they"? - Jed

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 9:16 AM, Jones Beene wrote: > Che wrote > > People here sneer at the likes of the Martin Fleischmann Memorial > Project.. but say what you will: its very OPEN [Source] nature is what > *will* at least keep it out of the grubby clutches of

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 7:12 PM, Kevin O'Malley wrote: > > Mary Yugo said he was contacted by investors looking to verify Rossi. He told them what to test for, and Rossi never had anything to do with them. The only way Rossi is going to find an investor now is to have the

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

Now that Rossi has much more free time, I expect him to have bold strides in making new devices. The bad times are now past!

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

I now believe that there is multiple LENR reaction types. For example, Rossi has developed a low temperature LENR reaction and has tested it in the yearlong IH test. The mechanism for this type of LENR reaction is based on magnetic flux line focusing by the hexagonal based lattice of mica. This

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

If that is true then Rossi either lacks the ability to interpret his own data or he intentionally misrepresented his data. Harry On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 3:55 PM, Kevin O'Malley wrote: > You're probably right. But there is evidence he had a COP > 1 for > some length of

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

Wait a minute. There is still Randell Mills to deal with, and he says he can not only heat up a cup of coffee but evaporate it in a burst of hydrinos in seconds. He has better credentials than any of us, and he has followers who are more loyal than Rossi's. Prediction: Very soon, Mills will

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

R Mills is producing a teacup full of self sustaining 3000C plasma. Don't worry be happy. On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 11:05 AM, Frank Znidarsic wrote: > > endless spewing of hate > > > > > That's where this has all come to. No device was developed to heat a cup > of coffee, as

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

I agree with Frank's assessment. From: Frank Znidarsic <fznidar...@aol.com> Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2017 11:05 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled endless spewing of hate That's where this has al

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

Russ George wrote: Obscenity is also the endless spewing of hate that comes from your mouth. > Your hate mongering is amongst the most obscene that takes place on Vortex. > I suggest you block my messages. If you wish to know why I am opposed to Rossi, I suggest you read

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

endless spewing of hate That's where this has all come to. No device was developed to heat a cup of coffee, as Mallove was requested to produce. 27 years later there is no cup of warm coffee. I worked on this technology hard for some time. I felt it was coming. I am now

RE: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

from their arm chairs. Get a real life. From: Jed Rothwell [mailto:jedrothw...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2017 9:37 AM To: Vortex Subject: Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled Russ George <russ.geo...@gmail.com <mailto:russ.geo...@gmail.com> > wrote:

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

Russ George wrote: This endless trollification by the unflushable malcontents that did not get > their free feed in the trial are festering into a terrible stench. Give it > a f*ckng break or at least go see your doctors and get some new meds, there > are remarkably good

RE: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

see your doctors and get some new meds, there are remarkably good meds for senile agitation these days. From: Jed Rothwell [mailto:jedrothw...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, July 10, 2017 9:03 PM To: Vortex Subject: Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

On 7/10/17, Jed Rothwell wrote: > Unless you took part in the lawyers' negotiations, you do not know that is > the reason. ***You don't have to be involved at that level. If the report was a slam dunk either way it would have compelled the outcome of the case. It wasn't

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

Kevin O'Malley wrote: The report was credible enough for IH not to move forward on their case. > Unless you took part in the lawyers' negotiations, you do not know that is the reason. It might be because they determined Rossi has no more money. There is no point to suing

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

The report was credible enough for IH not to move forward on their case. I'm glad to see you got a start on delineating all the scientific charlatanism in that report and in the case. On 7/10/17, Jed Rothwell wrote: > Kevin O'Malley wrote: > > You're

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

Kevin O'Malley wrote: You're probably right. But there is evidence he had a COP > 1 for > some length of time according to the report by the person chosen by > both sides to administer the test. > You mean the report that claims the laboratory was in a perfect vacuum, and

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

On 7/10/17, Jed Rothwell wrote: > > I cannot judge legal standards. ***Then stop using a legal term. It's like saying that by scientific standards and by common sense standards your neighbor is guilty of armed robbery. If there were "scientific standards" to begin

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

You're probably right. But there is evidence he had a COP > 1 for some length of time according to the report by the person chosen by both sides to administer the test. On 7/10/17, H LV wrote: > Rossi was suing IH for millions of dollars, so he had to prove the device >

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

On Sun, Jul 9, 2017 at 8:03 PM, Kevin O'Malley wrote: > > I think the key is to just find nuclear products when you throw hydrogen and nickel together. There is no chemical reaction that is supposed to lead to nuclear products. 3 years ago, MFMP found gamma rays and then

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

Rossi was suing IH for millions of dollars, so he had to prove the device in Florida worked as he claimed. If the trial proceeded I think it is very likely that the preponderance of the evidence would not support his claim. Harry On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 10:07 AM, Jed Rothwell

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

Kevin O'Malley wrote: > On 7/9/17, Jed Rothwell wrote: > OJ Simpson... > > Obviously he was guilty. > ***Then obviously Rossi is Not Guilty of Fraud. You just agreed with > the legal standard. > I cannot judge legal standards. By scientific

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

On 7/9/17, Jed Rothwell wrote: OJ Simpson... > Obviously he was guilty. ***Then obviously Rossi is Not Guilty of Fraud. You just agreed with the legal standard. > All I did was read the Penon report. That's all it takes. ***Bullshit. Plenty of others have read the

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

Jed Rothwell 5:36 PM (5 hours ago) Nope. The legal system does not sue scientists for publishing fraudulent or idiotic reports. ***The legal system brings its resources to bear upon scientists who scam others with fraudulent reports. One reason is that no one can tell fools and frauds apart.

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

Kevin O'Malley wrote: > You would have to show intent and various legal proof that I do not >> understand. >> > ​***If you don't understand it then you're just as bad as these people you > rail against for not reading the Penon report. > I don't claim to understand the

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

Kevin O'Malley wrote: > The Penon report?!? >> > ​***ALL of it. The Penon report, the supposed heat exchanger, all of it. > If the Penon report is as fraudulent as you make it out to be, then > Rossi would be up on charges for that. > Nope. The legal system does not

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

I think the key is to just find nuclear products when you throw hydrogen and nickel together. There is no chemical reaction that is supposed to lead to nuclear products. 3 years ago, MFMP found gamma rays and then just blithely started chasing ghosts. On Sun, Jul 9, 2017 at 4:32 PM, Jed

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

On Sun, Jul 9, 2017 at 4:29 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > ​ > > The Penon report?!? > ​***ALL of it. The Penon report, the supposed heat exchanger, all of it. If the Penon report is as fraudulent as you make it out to be, then Rossi would be up on charges for that. All

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

Kevin O'Malley wrote: > As soon as they verify a LENR experiment that many who have the means can > do in our garages, the cat is out of the bag. > That may never happen. It may be that cold fusion is inherently difficult, like making a fuel cell or performing an

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

Kevin O'Malley wrote: It is proof that he isn't a fraud. > The Penon report?!? Either you haven't read it or your interpretation of it is the extreme opposite or what Murray, Smith and I think of it. I have never seen such blatant, in-your-face fraud. If this report does

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

It is proof that he isn't a fraud. All the evidence is there, tagged and bagged, ready to go for the police to file charges. All it takes is for someone to drop a dime on Rossi. Maybe you'll get some kind of reward for it. On Sun, Jul 9, 2017 at 1:37 PM, Jed Rothwell

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

On Fri, Jul 7, 2017 at 7:09 PM, Kevin O'Malley wrote: > > Rossi is the latest LENR guy who has $signs in his eyes. Patterson was a solid example of that. I like the hope that MFMP offers to circumvent that problem. As soon as they verify a LENR experiment that many who

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

Kevin O'Malley wrote: If Rossi's report proves he is a thief then he would be up on charges. Only if it were a serious crime. Most crimes are not even investigated, for lack of police personnel. Also, the police would have to understand the report. I doubt many of them do.

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

Woodford Investments probably does not want Industrial Heat pursuing the matter. Harry On Sat, Jul 8, 2017 at 2:03 AM, Kevin O'Malley wrote: > If Rossi's report proves he is a thief then he would be up on charges. > > On Friday, July 7, 2017, Jed Rothwell

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

If Rossi's report proves he is a thief then he would be up on charges. On Friday, July 7, 2017, Jed Rothwell wrote: > Axil Axil > wrote: > > I don't remember writing a post that personally attacked

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

The Gamma Ray thing happened in 2013, that was the link I posted. I am glad to see someone at MFMP taking this seriously. On Friday, July 7, 2017, Mark Jurich wrote: > I wrote: > > Yes, we (MFMP) did pursue the “Gamma Ray Thing” (we made an > unsuccessful replication

RE: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

I wrote: Yes, we (MFMP) did pursue the “Gamma Ray Thing” (we made an unsuccessful replication attempt, and I myself have not given up on it), and we cannot say there was excess heat, because the apparent excess heat was less than the error of the crude calorimeter measurement… …

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

Axil Axil wrote: I don't remember writing a post that personally attacked Jed. > Yeah? Who the hell are you accusing of "spin, astroturfing and propaganda produced by I.H." if not me? Who else? If you are not accusing me, you are accusing other people who support I.H., which

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

This is not how a socialist talks. This is all due capitalism, name calling different times in the class struggle. These are all synonyms, made by those who are afraid of seeking revolution. 2017-07-07 18:02 GMT-03:00 Che : > > > Neoliberal age of oligarchic

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

I don't remember writing a post that personally attacked Jed. If I did, let anybody please repost it here. Jed does tend to get excessively emotional and carried away. I would like to remember if I deserve such a lambasting. Both Rossi and IH descended into a war of words, IH more effectively

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

The last time a battle of this magnitude took place, it was the Wright brothers and all the slimy weasels like Curtiss who were trying to steal their IP. It went on for a long time with no end in sight until the guvmint stepped in for the sake of the war effort in Europe, so we could make

  1   2   >