Re: [Vo]:An Open Letter
Dear Lennart, Thank you, very nice! Good idea to imply Norse Gods you can see that Athena Zeusdottir is also in friendly terms with those gals and guys. BTW she likes Wagner operas much more than me- see my classic but unread opus about opera: http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2011/03/explaining-opera-music-of-all-noises.html As I wrote the chances of success of the Open Letter are infinitisimal- any support is welcome. I have discovered the PC late, have followed the development of Web search by Google day by day from 1998 but in the glorious days of Windows Microsoft I still was working hard in the chemical industry. If you know somebody who knows somebody who know Bill Gates' cousin...In practice such things do not work well. Now the most serious part I like your website and the organization, I am reading leadership and have taught it to managers here at an US-Romanian universityof Eco Management. I would be very happy to collaborate with you on a friendly basis. If you have time please take a look to my blog's non-LENR writings as those labelled BASIC and PROBLEM SOLVING- possibly you will find something of interest and we will find a formula of working together- obviously if you wish. My problem solving rules are translated in Swedish- by Mats Lewan: http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2012/02/first-translation-of-rules-in-swedish.htm l Selma Lagerlof's wonderful book has introduced me to the geography of your country and I had the privilege to visit it in 1980 (Stockholm and Sundsvall (Kema Nord) Peter On Sat, Feb 8, 2014 at 1:08 AM, Lennart Thornros lenn...@thornros.comwrote: Dear Peter, I like your letter. I am glad Athena has been consulting with you. The problem is that politics is involved. I have tried, for almost as long as you have done work in different areas, to move that hindrance out of the way. However, it seems as if when an organization (in a very generic meaning) grows larger than ten individuals that decease (politics) will take over common sense and then . . . I think that if your letter does not work I will call in Thor and Sleipner:). It might scare someone to action - let me know if you need support. Good Luck. BTW realism is built on dreams. Best Regards , Lennart Thornros www.StrategicLeadershipSac.com lenn...@thornros.com +1 916 436 1899 6140 Horseshoe Bar Road Suite G, Loomis CA 95650 Productivity is never an accident. It is always the result of a commitment to excellence, intelligent planning, and focused effort. PJM On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 9:35 AM, Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote: Dear Friends, I think/hope Big Money is able to help both Deep Science and Savior Technology to achiev their aims and I have written: http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2014/02/open-letter-to-bill-gates.html I am tired of being a realist all the time. Peter -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
[Vo]:An Open Letter
Dear Friends, I think/hope Big Money is able to help both Deep Science and Savior Technology to achiev their aims and I have written: http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2014/02/open-letter-to-bill-gates.html I am tired of being a realist all the time. Peter -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
Re: [Vo]:An Open Letter
Dear Peter, I like your letter. I am glad Athena has been consulting with you. The problem is that politics is involved. I have tried, for almost as long as you have done work in different areas, to move that hindrance out of the way. However, it seems as if when an organization (in a very generic meaning) grows larger than ten individuals that decease (politics) will take over common sense and then . . . I think that if your letter does not work I will call in Thor and Sleipner:). It might scare someone to action - let me know if you need support. Good Luck. BTW realism is built on dreams. Best Regards , Lennart Thornros www.StrategicLeadershipSac.com lenn...@thornros.com +1 916 436 1899 6140 Horseshoe Bar Road Suite G, Loomis CA 95650 Productivity is never an accident. It is always the result of a commitment to excellence, intelligent planning, and focused effort. PJM On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 9:35 AM, Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote: Dear Friends, I think/hope Big Money is able to help both Deep Science and Savior Technology to achiev their aims and I have written: http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2014/02/open-letter-to-bill-gates.html I am tired of being a realist all the time. Peter -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
[Vo]:Re: Open letter from Brian Josephson to Andrea Rossi (Focus.it)
Still, he appears to be selling. He hired SI. He has done a lot of things right. If he succeeds, people will say this business strategy was the stuff of genius. In the future, they will teach his methods at the Harvard Business School. They will teach how to look like a scammer? Indeed a good business model for scammers, a little bit tricky for who want serious investors joins in. -Messaggio originale- From: Jed Rothwell Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 2011 12:08 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Open letter from Brian Josephson to Andrea Rossi (Focus.it) Rossi wrote: We are no more in the mode of public tests, the times of public tests are over. We are manufacturing plants for our Customers, and our Customers will test the plants they have bought. Rossi heroically defies the world, silhouetted by the setting sun. The proposal of Celani is just a provocation, and an insult to all the people that already made tests. Yup, that's what he told me when I said I would bring my own instruments. It would insult Levi et al. He drives me crazy. Still, he appears to be selling. He hired SI. He has done a lot of things right. If he succeeds, people will say this business strategy was the stuff of genius. In the future, they will teach his methods at the Harvard Business School. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Re: Open letter from Brian Josephson to Andrea Rossi (Focus.it)
Mattia Rizzi wrote: In the future, they will teach his methods at the Harvard Business School. They will teach how to look like a scammer? Indeed a good business model for scammers, a little bit tricky for who want serious investors joins in. Success sets the standard. Today, entrepreneurs going to venture capitalists to get funding tend to look like Steve Jobs in his prime. On the West Coast especially, they show up wearing blue jeans with a bad attitude. See the movie The Social Network. The snide attitude portrayed in that movie are probably exaggerated but not by much. That is how people act. That's because Steve Jobs and some other computer 1970s geeks set the standard for what an ambitious young person should act. If someone had done that in the early 1960s, he would have gotten nowhere. The bankers would have laughed at him and called him a hippy. No one would have lent him enough money to buy a car, never mind enough to start a corporation. If Rossi succeeds and becomes the richest man in the world, entrepreneurs in the future will ape him. Thirty years from now they will act in ways that we would consider appropriate for a scammer today. Random things like Jobs' manic personality often make a large impact and change the course of history, and the styles and standards of an era, or at least the styles appropriate to business. Bad ideas get a boost when they happen to be associated with successful people, or when they seem linked to good ideas. - Jed
[Vo]:Musical Open Letter to Andrea Rossi
Not to be missed! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MNwOpSHNIQ4 T
Re: [Vo]:Musical Open Letter to Andrea Rossi
I like it! - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Proposed open letter to Obama
Howdy Jones, Confrontational !!..Challenging.. This can be done by forming a group of people under an entire new banner that has as it's strategy a.. dare hot fusion to prove it.. The hor fusion people have used this strategy with success.. why can't it be turned around? A letter worded.. You people have had 50 years to produce. you have been given billions.. now where's the beef? If you haven't had any provable results to date, It's time to put the research money into LENR programs that have merit and proven results. A separate group can be so bold as to question the motives and the money in such a way as to suggest an investigation. Richard Bold means bold.. Well one bold step would be to suggest the institution of a distinct Office for Low Energy Nuclear Research which is under DoE at the very top level ... but NOT controlled by NRC and not under its influence! There are valid historical reasons for this going back to MIT in 1990, and the deliberate falsification of data. The stakes are too high to allow hot fusion and fission advocates to control and denigrate this research. I would suggest that Peter Hagelstein be appointed the first director and the 'hot fusion' oriented people like Peter Zimmerman be excluded from this side of the aisle, although I am sure he will have a place on other side. Jones
Re: [Vo]:Proposed open letter to Obama
Howdy Jed. SBIR stands for Small Business Innovative Research programs of the US govt. Don't go there.. pure politics. My suggestion is to be both bold and intrusive in your letter. Don't ask.. tell him.. it's time to quit jacking around ( in a nice way of course) and get started on a proven alternate source instead of waiting for the paid pet scientists to make their next excuse. Bold means bold.. Once, my old manager asked me why we weren't selling anything to customer x. I explained I called on him for ages and he never bought anything.. my boss told me to go over and cuss him out.. when I asked why.. he said .. try it.. nothing else you do works. Richard - Original Message - From: Jed Rothwell [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com; vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2008 5:08 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Proposed open letter to Obama Jim Dickenson wrote: Just lurking here - would it be worth mentioning setting up SBIR grants for LENR research to Sen. Obama? I have no idea what an SBIR grant is. I do not think we mention anything but the most pertinent information. The shorter we can make this, the better. I am thinking maybe we should go for something like a haiku version, or something from the original Frankenstein movie: Smoke, good. Fire, go-o-o-o-d. FUSION good. Me want fusion. The technical version concludes: Tritium and helium good. No penetrating radiation, GOOD. Also - any abbreviations or acronyms should be spelled out - a lot of people are not knowledgeable on these things. Good point. Someone else pointed out to me that this is a tad presumptuous because Obama has not, technically, won yet. That's true. But I wasn't planning to upload this until tomorrow at the earliest, and we can change the heading to McCain if necessary. - Jed No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com Version: 8.0.175 / Virus Database: 270.8.6/1765 - Release Date: 11/3/2008 4:59 PM
Re: [Vo]:Proposed open letter to Obama
Mitchell Swartz wrote: Given the long history, your claim is all talk. As proof, I gave an open demo at MIT. I was never able to evaluate the demo, unfortunately. I could not get close to it during the conference, and I never got a chance to read the paper about it. I had some material on it but you ordered me to erase it, which I did. Thank you for at least putting some pictures up at your website. I will put as much information on the website as you send me. You ordered me not to put anything else there. Let me remind you that you threatened to sue me if I uploaded any of your papers. You are the one who is preventing the distribution of your own papers -- not me. Also, I gave you papers in hand, and CD, at Gene's funeral when I gave you a ride back to Boston, and sent a second copy by mail to Edmund and I have the green card, I was unable to read the CD as I have stated countless times. If you would like me upload information, you must first upload it to your own web site, and then you must give me written permission to copy it. I will then copy it. You have to give me written permission because you have often threatened to sue me if I upload any information from you. and later Brian Josephson sent some by email to you. So you can be more honest, Jed, if you take a moment and check the records. In fact, by emails, you told me Edmund Storms censored my work and there was nothing you could do about it. I have censored nothing. I will forward your latest messages to Vortex, Storms and everyone else involved in this dispute. Let me state this once more for the record, as clearly as possible: I have NEVER censored Swartz, or refused to upload his papers. HE has refused to provide them to me, or to upload them to his own web site. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Proposed open letter to Obama
Well, there seems to be no enthusiasm for this proposed letter of mine, so I shall drop the idea. I shall send a message for myself by e-mail and regular mail, rather than posting it on the web site. The president-elect will be receiving millions of messages, so there is no likelihood it will get through or have an impact. I sent the following message to some researchers that I had hoped would sign the letter: I do hope that you people will make efforts to contact the new administration by other means. I recommend you coordinate your efforts, and present a clear message. Let me repeat the key point that I have made here: you must ASK for support, or you will surely fail to get it. I think it is unlikely that any of Obama's people are aware of the status of cold fusion, so of course they will not help us. As you know, Ed thinks they probably are aware. Perhaps he has inside information that I do not know about. To put in a more positive way, quoting Matthew 7:7: Seek and thou shalt find; ask and it shall be given unto thee. . . . Anyway, best of luck to all researchers. I shall get back to editing the ICCF-14 proceedings, after spending a week politicking, and an emotional gratifying night watching the election returns. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Proposed open letter to Obama
- Original Message From: R C Macaulay Bold means bold.. Well one bold step would be to suggest the institution of a distinct Office for Low Energy Nuclear Research which is under DoE at the very top level ... but NOT controlled by NRC and not under its influence! There are valid historical reasons for this going back to MIT in 1990, and the deliberate falsification of data. The stakes are too high to allow hot fusion and fission advocates to control and denigrate this research. I would suggest that Peter Hagelstein be appointed the first director and the 'hot fusion' oriented people like Peter Zimmerman be excluded from this side of the aisle, although I am sure he will have a place on other side. Jones
[Vo]:Proposed open letter to Obama
[Okay, folks. Let's get serious about this. Anyone who would like to sign it, or change it and than sign it, should contact me. I will be a victory celebration party starting at 6:30 p.m., but let's get this uploaded tomorrow. - Jed] Open Letter to President-elect Obama: Cold fusion (the Fleischmann-Pons effect) has been replicated by hundreds of scientists, and these replications have been published in roughly 1000 peer-reviewed papers in mainstream journals. Researchers are confident that this is a nuclear effect because it has produced as much as 10,000 times more energy per gram of fuel than any chemical reaction can, and no chemical ash has ever been discovered in a cell. It can probably produce millions of times more energy than any chemical reaction. It has reached temperatures and power density equal to the core of a conventional fission reactor. At present, the reaction cannot easily be reproduced or controlled, but if researchers learn to control it, it may become a practical source of energy. It will have profound advantages over all other sources of energy: it produces virtually no pollution or radioactive byproducts; the fuel is inexhaustible; and the cost will be far cheaper than any alternative such as coal, nuclear or wind power. We urge the federal government to allocate between $5 and $10 million a year to this research. Many senior researchers at National laboratories and the U. S. Navy would like to perform cold fusion research, but they have not been funded. Technical details about cold fusion, including hundreds of scientific papers, can be found at this website, LENR-CANR.org
Re: [Vo]:Proposed open letter to Obama
I suggest the following wording of the letter: Ed The Honorable Senator Obama, In view of your interest in developing new, nonpolluting energy sources, the undersigned would like to call your attention to a source that has been largely ignored, but has huge potential. Over the last 20 years, a way to causes a fusion reaction between deuterium atoms in solid materials has been explored in laboratories world-wide and found to be much more efficient and cheaper than the usual hot fusion (ITER) method. This method is still not sufficiently understood to be applied, but the potential is so great that we are asking for your support in encouraging government funding to help achieve this understanding. You or your staff can obtain more information at the site www.LENR.org and from many books about the subject that are listed on the site. Your staff may also contact any of the signers of this letter. Respectfully yours, signed On Nov 4, 2008, at 1:07 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: [Okay, folks. Let's get serious about this. Anyone who would like to sign it, or change it and than sign it, should contact me. I will be a victory celebration party starting at 6:30 p.m., but let's get this uploaded tomorrow. - Jed] Open Letter to President-elect Obama: Cold fusion (the Fleischmann-Pons effect) has been replicated by hundreds of scientists, and these replications have been published in roughly 1000 peer-reviewed papers in mainstream journals. Researchers are confident that this is a nuclear effect because it has produced as much as 10,000 times more energy per gram of fuel than any chemical reaction can, and no chemical ash has ever been discovered in a cell. It can probably produce millions of times more energy than any chemical reaction. It has reached temperatures and power density equal to the core of a conventional fission reactor. At present, the reaction cannot easily be reproduced or controlled, but if researchers learn to control it, it may become a practical source of energy. It will have profound advantages over all other sources of energy: it produces virtually no pollution or radioactive byproducts; the fuel is inexhaustible; and the cost will be far cheaper than any alternative such as coal, nuclear or wind power. We urge the federal government to allocate between $5 and $10 million a year to this research. Many senior researchers at National laboratories and the U. S. Navy would like to perform cold fusion research, but they have not been funded. Technical details about cold fusion, including hundreds of scientific papers, can be found at this website, LENR-CANR.org
Re: [Vo]:Proposed open letter to Obama
Edmund Storms wrote: The Honorable Senator Obama, In view of your interest in developing new, nonpolluting energy sources, the undersigned would like to call your attention to a source that has been largely ignored, but has huge potential. I think we need to say right up front that we are talking about cold fusion, the Fleischmann-Pons effect. The reader will discover that after he clicks on the link, and he may be miffed, sensing that we have been holding back and not telling him. He may feel we are playing games and he will lose interest. Plus I think we need to include some of the technical details I listed, such as the fact that it has produced 10,000 times more energy than a chemical reaction, because this information is difficult and time-consuming to dig out of LENR-CANR.org. The problem there is that I cannot feature one author over another. The ones I leave out would be upset, and I think it would be kind of unfair. So the site becomes a large mass of undifferentiated information -- which is an accurate reflection of the status of the field itself. Brian Scanlan just called me and discussed ways to improve this presentation without -- we hope -- ruffling too many feathers. Let me try to graft these two drafts together . . . A shame we did not start on this sooner, but I guess we can do it tomorrow, while True Democrats everywhere sleep late and nurse a hangover. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Proposed open letter to Obama
[Here is a version combining some features from both, with fewer words than the original.] Open Letter to President-elect Obama: The undersigned would like to call your attention to a source of energy that has been largely ignored, but has huge potential: cold fusion (the Fleischmann-Pons effect). This is a fusion reaction between deuterium atoms in solid materials. Over the last 20 years, it has been explored in laboratories world-wide and found to be much more efficient and cheaper than the conventional plasma fusion (ITER) method. It has produced 10,000 times more energy per gram of fuel than any chemical reaction, and it can probably generate millions of times more. It has reached temperatures and power density equal to the core of a conventional fission reactor. This method is still not sufficiently understood to be scaled up or commercialized, but the potential is so great that we are asking for your support in encouraging government funding to help achieve this understanding. Many qualified researchers at National laboratories, the U. S. Navy and at other government laboratories would like to do cold fusion research, but they have not been funded. You can obtain more technical information at LENR-CANR.org, and from many books about the subject that are listed on the site. Or contact any of the signers of this letter. Respectfully yours, signed
Re: [Vo]:Proposed open letter to Obama
Hi, Just lurking here - would it be worth mentioning setting up SBIR grants for LENR research to Sen. Obama? Also - any abbreviations or acronyms should be spelled out - a lot of people are not knowledgeable on these things. Just my comments from the peanut gallery ... - Jim D. On 11/4/08, Jed Rothwell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [Here is a version combining some features from both, with fewer words than the original.] Open Letter to President-elect Obama: The undersigned would like to call your attention to a source of energy that has been largely ignored, but has huge potential: cold fusion (the Fleischmann-Pons effect). This is a fusion reaction between deuterium atoms in solid materials. Over the last 20 years, it has been explored in laboratories world-wide and found to be much more efficient and cheaper than the conventional plasma fusion (ITER) method. It has produced 10,000 times more energy per gram of fuel than any chemical reaction, and it can probably generate millions of times more. It has reached temperatures and power density equal to the core of a conventional fission reactor. This method is still not sufficiently understood to be scaled up or commercialized, but the potential is so great that we are asking for your support in encouraging government funding to help achieve this understanding. Many qualified researchers at National laboratories, the U. S. Navy and at other government laboratories would like to do cold fusion research, but they have not been funded. You can obtain more technical information at LENR-CANR.org, and from many books about the subject that are listed on the site. Or contact any of the signers of this letter. Respectfully yours, signed
Re: [Vo]:Proposed open letter to Obama
Jim Dickenson wrote: Just lurking here - would it be worth mentioning setting up SBIR grants for LENR research to Sen. Obama? I have no idea what an SBIR grant is. I do not think we mention anything but the most pertinent information. The shorter we can make this, the better. I am thinking maybe we should go for something like a haiku version, or something from the original Frankenstein movie: Smoke, good. Fire, go-o-o-o-d. FUSION good. Me want fusion. The technical version concludes: Tritium and helium good. No penetrating radiation, GOOD. Also - any abbreviations or acronyms should be spelled out - a lot of people are not knowledgeable on these things. Good point. Someone else pointed out to me that this is a tad presumptuous because Obama has not, technically, won yet. That's true. But I wasn't planning to upload this until tomorrow at the earliest, and we can change the heading to McCain if necessary. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Proposed open letter to Obama
Hi, SBIR is the Small Business Innovation Research from the federal gov't with web site at: http://www.sbir.gov/ (And I should have spelled out that abbreviation too ;) Just FYI - This is from the web site: The U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) Office of Technology administers the Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) Program and the Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) Program. Through these two competitive programs, SBA ensures that the nation's small, high-tech, innovative businesses are a significant part of the federal government's research and development efforts. Eleven federal departments participate in the SBIR program; five departments participate in the STTR program awarding $2billion to small high-tech businesses. The U.S National Science Foundation administers the SBIR.GOV site on behalf of the federal government. GRANTS.gov GRANTS.gov is your source to FIND and APPLY for federal government grants. Before completing an application, please contact the Agency you are applying to to make sure they use GRANTS.gov - Jim D. On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 6:08 PM, Jed Rothwell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Jim Dickenson wrote: Just lurking here - would it be worth mentioning setting up SBIR grants for LENR research to Sen. Obama? I have no idea what an SBIR grant is. I do not think we mention anything but the most pertinent information. The shorter we can make this, the better. I am thinking maybe we should go for something like a haiku version, or something from the original Frankenstein movie: Smoke, good. Fire, go-o-o-o-d. FUSION good. Me want fusion. The technical version concludes: Tritium and helium good. No penetrating radiation, GOOD. Also - any abbreviations or acronyms should be spelled out - a lot of people are not knowledgeable on these things. Good point. Someone else pointed out to me that this is a tad presumptuous because Obama has not, technically, won yet. That's true. But I wasn't planning to upload this until tomorrow at the earliest, and we can change the heading to McCain if necessary. - Jed
Re: [Vo]: AN OPEN LETTER TO RUSS GEORGE
If Russ does not feel like talking about this, why bother him? What difference does it make? If I were him, I doubt I would want to respond. When this article came out I felt that Steve was making a mountain out of a molehill, and after some consideration I still feel that way. I wish Steve would devote his considerable energy to more important subjects. - Jed
[Vo]: AN OPEN LETTER TO RUSS GEORGE
AN OPEN LETTER TO RUSS GEORGE Dear Mr. George, It's been six months since we published our report in New Energy Times on your work and that of D2Fusion. People in the CMNS community are still asking me as recently as last week if D2Fusion ever provided any form of response, either formal or informal, to our investigation. I tell them that we have not received any communication from you or D2Fusion, that you have not challenged our facts, our context or our representations. Consequently, I've decided to send this open letter to you, by way of the CMNS and VORTEX lists, as I gather that many people are interested in your response to our report. As I believe is well known, I made multiple statements, both to you privately, as well as to the CMNS community, that New Energy Times would afford you with the opportunity to rebut and respond. To date, you have elected not to do so. I hope we all agree that a frank and forthright discussion is in the best interests of the CMNS community. Failing an open response by you to the significant issues raised by New Energy Times, it would seem reasonable and necessary to conclude that you find our investigation and findings rigorous and accurate. Thank you for that and I wish you good luck and success in your endeavors. Sincerely, Steve Krivit Editor, New Energy Times New Energy Times Five-Part Investigation Into D2Fusion: http://newenergytimes.com/news/2006/NET16.htm#d21 http://newenergytimes.com/news/2006/NET16.htm#d22 http://newenergytimes.com/news/2006/NET16.htm#d23 http://newenergytimes.com/news/2006/NET16.htm#d24 http://newenergytimes.com/news/2006/NET16.htm#d25
