Yes, that fits in with the relaxed innocence with which he waved the black hose against Focardi's black sweater to reveal the wisps of visible water mist -- since then he's been more and more panicked, like the warlord in Kurosawa's version of Macbeth, being pinned against the castle wall by volleys of huge arrows from his own disgusted troops -- I wonder too if he is caught up in trying to impress his lovely wife, an expert physicist at CERN -- I wonder what she is thinking by now -- they really need help and support from the people they most trust -- full disclosure would take the target off his back -- the world could reconsider various possibilities for LENR research -- he could write a book and sell the media rights and give lectures -- legitimate income for genuine contributions -- he too could be a victim of scammers moving in --
Rich Murray On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 5:55 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax <a...@lomaxdesign.com> wrote: > As many Vorticians know, I've followed the Rossi affair since early 2011. I > found, fairly quickly, reasons to think that the demonstrations were not > conclusive, that they may have shown anything from no excess heat, mild > excess heat, to strong excess heat. > > From certain evidence (asserted most notably by Mr. Krivit), I came to think > that, as well, some level of deliberate deception was involved, though it > might be rationalized by Rossi as allowing fools to believe what he hasn't > actually stated. Did Rossi anywhere state that, during the Mats Lewan demo, > where he was seen apparently manipulating the power input -- it's unclear, > but he looks like the cat that just ate the canary -- that he had *not* > changed the input power (at a point where the output seems to change?) I'm > suspecting that there are many questions that Rossi hasn't been directly > asked by some of the prominent reporters. > > After all, they could be considered rude. > > If the questions were asked, he may have successfully avoided answering > them. > > In any case, one thing is clear: Rossi promised that it would all be plainly > obvious by October of 2011. It wasn't. Given his secrecy and the obvious > failure, we can't trust what he sais about what will happen in the future. > > Why was Rossi accepted by many in the LENR community? I should note that > many did not accept him, and that the LENR community of researchers includes > many who think Rossi is a scammer or the like. But he was accepted partly > because there were researchers who thought that the NiH line of approach had > promise, it did not surprise them that someone would claim results with NiH, > and, unlike many other scientists, they know that LENR is real, that there > is no specific, clear theoretical impossibility there. This isn't a "free > energy" scam, even though it may still be a scam. (Some claimed > *explanations* of NiH results might indeed be impossible; I'm speaking > generally. Once one knows that low energy nuclear reactions are possible, > it's no longer wise to reject LENR reports out of hand, and the researchers > know this, being generally familiar with the evidence.) > > What was truly surprising about the Rossi reports was not NiH excess heat. > That had been reported before. What was surprising was the level of heat, > far above what had been achieved by others, and the implied claim of > reliability. Others have, as with much in LENR research, found quite > variable results. Especially it's been found that material that produces > results, as to excess heat, may not continue to do so. It works for a while, > then stops working. > > So an obvious posibility is that Rossi did indeed find a reaction that > *sometimes* produces significant excess heat. But that only does so for some > time. That would mean that he might set up demos, and some of them might > work, and he believes, then, that he's just around the corner from making it > work reliably for a long time. And then, because sometimes it doesn't work, > well, he can't let people think it doesn't work, so he, perhaps, fudges the > demos a bit. They're all snakes anyway, out to steal his secrets.... > > A LENR device that produces power for a few hours or a few days isn't > practical. It might indeed be of interest, and someone, someday, might > figure out how to make something like this reliable, but Rossi might not > even be close. His approach might be too crude. > > But, he'd think, it's just around the corner, if he just tweaks this or > that, surely it will work. > > This is just a hypothesis, but it does explain a lot, if true. >
