Rossi is known to be misleading in his statements -- and for obvious reasons of commercial advantage -- but he seems to be avoiding outright lies about his theory. So what might be "misleading" about his denial of Windom Larson without being a lie?
On Sun, Sep 28, 2014 at 4:34 PM, James Bowery <jabow...@gmail.com> wrote: > I've seen Rossi deny Windom Larson -- which is interesting given that he > says he wants to give no information on the underlying theory -- but I > haven't seen a denial of Mills's GUToCP from Rossi. > > Has he let such a denial slip? > > On Sun, Sep 28, 2014 at 2:27 PM, Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net> wrote: > >> As for the patent which most resembles the Hot-Cat, it is probably >> this one: “Molecular hydrogen laser” US 7773656 to Mills. Of course, >> Rossi’s device is not a laser, but in operation it is closer than you may >> realize - unless you have followed the SPP discussions. >> >> >> >> A picture is worth 1000 words… >> >> >> >> >> http://fusionfroide.ch/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/Rossis-HOT-CAT-reactor.jpg >> >> >> >> … and no, there is no indication that the photons seen here are coherent, >> or even superradiant. No evidence is possible since there is no lens. The >> IR light is coming through and/or heating a stainless steel end-cap. If the >> electrical input power is as low as claimed, then we are probably seeing >> superradiance, at least. >> > >
