Re: [Vo]:Forbes: The Year of Cold Fusion
There may be a small indication of progress at Forbes. The author, Gibbs, called out one of my comments. I believe this is the first time a positive remark called out (featured). I think there are fewer rabid attacks in the comments, but it is hard to judge with only ~20 comments. Also, miracle of miracles, Mary Yugo made a grudging concession that some cold fusion research might be worthwhile. She should consider learning something about it, so that she will some basis for this opinion. I get a sense Gibbs may be thinking what if this really is true?!? He seems a little less dismissive. He may be hedging his bets; thinking he should not go too far out on a limb. This is wise. It is enough to be right in a dispute. There is no point to being so arrogant in victory that people resent you. And no matter how sure you are, it is always a good idea to admit you might be wrong, just in case it turns out you are. - Jed
[Vo]:Forbes: The Year of Cold Fusion
Inconclusive blather. See: http://www.forbes.com/sites/markgibbs/2011/12/31/2012-the-year-of-cold-fusion/
Re: [Vo]:Forbes: The Year of Cold Fusion
On Sun, Jan 1, 2012 at 9:00 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Inconclusive blather. The only thing you can do with inconclusive data -- like Rossi and Defkalion's.
Re: [Vo]:Forbes: The Year of Cold Fusion
I agree, Jed. Forbes has deep enough pockets to send Mark Gibbs, along with a technically sophisticated companion, to a lab claiming CF or LENR anomalous energy or transmutation evidence. He should publicly issue a challenge to CF/LENR researchers to allow him to witness and monitor their experiments. I would be surprised if no one accepted it. That would make a great story. Jed Rothwell wrote: Inconclusive blather. See: http://www.forbes.com/sites/markgibbs/2011/12/31/2012-the-year-of-cold-fusion/
Re: [Vo]:Forbes: The Year of Cold Fusion
On Sun, Jan 1, 2012 at 9:54 AM, pagnu...@htdconnect.com wrote: He should publicly issue a challenge to CF/LENR researchers to allow him to witness and monitor their experiments. If we learned nothing else from the experiences with Rossi, it should be that witness and monitor isn't enough. I suppose it may depend on what monitor means -- that's a bit vague. What's needed is for disinterested (*neutral*) investigators with the appropriate capabilities to replicate the work *independently* of the proponent. Having a reporter look over the shoulder of a scientist is always fun and interesting but it is rarely definitive proof that what is going is real and is being honestly and accurately represented. Especially when claims are unexpectedly robust or when independent verification is long delayed, there needs to be suspicion at least of error and in some rare instances, of fraud.
Re: [Vo]:Forbes: The Year of Cold Fusion
MY, that was a general challenge. Not specific to Rossi or DGT. 2012/1/1 Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com On Sun, Jan 1, 2012 at 9:54 AM, pagnu...@htdconnect.com wrote: He should publicly issue a challenge to CF/LENR researchers to allow him to witness and monitor their experiments. If we learned nothing else from the experiences with Rossi, it should be that witness and monitor isn't enough. I suppose it may depend on what monitor means -- that's a bit vague. What's needed is for disinterested (*neutral*) investigators with the appropriate capabilities to replicate the work *independently* of the proponent. Having a reporter look over the shoulder of a scientist is always fun and interesting but it is rarely definitive proof that what is going is real and is being honestly and accurately represented. Especially when claims are unexpectedly robust or when independent verification is long delayed, there needs to be suspicion at least of error and in some rare instances, of fraud. -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]:Forbes: The Year of Cold Fusion
It would be interesting if a form of X-Prize was set up to reward the group that reaches an important LENR goal. The solving of the energy crisis is at least as important as any of the other prizes awarded. Dave -Original Message- From: pagnucco pagnu...@htdconnect.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Sun, Jan 1, 2012 12:54 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Forbes: The Year of Cold Fusion agree, Jed. Forbes has deep enough pockets to send Mark Gibbs, along with a echnically sophisticated companion, to a lab claiming CF or LENR nomalous energy or transmutation evidence. He should publicly issue a hallenge to CF/LENR researchers to allow him to witness and monitor heir experiments. I would be surprised if no one accepted it. That ould make a great story. ed Rothwell wrote: Inconclusive blather. See: http://www.forbes.com/sites/markgibbs/2011/12/31/2012-the-year-of-cold-fusion/
Re: [Vo]:Forbes: The Year of Cold Fusion
A founder of the US Tokamak program proposed just that in 1995: http://www.oocities.org/jim_bowery/BussardsLetter.html On Sun, Jan 1, 2012 at 12:06 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: It would be interesting if a form of X-Prize was set up to reward the group that reaches an important LENR goal. The solving of the energy crisis is at least as important as any of the other prizes awarded. Dave -Original Message- From: pagnucco pagnu...@htdconnect.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Sun, Jan 1, 2012 12:54 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Forbes: The Year of Cold Fusion I agree, Jed. Forbes has deep enough pockets to send Mark Gibbs, along with a technically sophisticated companion, to a lab claiming CF or LENR anomalous energy or transmutation evidence. He should publicly issue a challenge to CF/LENR researchers to allow him to witness and monitor their experiments. I would be surprised if no one accepted it. That would make a great story. Jed Rothwell wrote: Inconclusive blather. See: http://www.forbes.com/sites/markgibbs/2011/12/31/2012-the-year-of-cold-fusion/
Re: [Vo]:Forbes: The Year of Cold Fusion
pagnu...@htdconnect.com wrote: Forbes has deep enough pockets to send Mark Gibbs, along with a technically sophisticated companion, to a lab claiming CF or LENR anomalous energy or transmutation evidence. He should publicly issue a challenge to CF/LENR researchers to allow him to witness and monitor their experiments. Sure. They could visit U. Missouri, SRI or U. Osaka, for example. The technically sophisticated companion can read their papers beforehand to confirm he or she can understand them. They would have to call ahead to be sure an experiment is actually in progress. Most of the time nothing is happening. They are getting ready to do a test, or evaluating the previous test. It is not all that exciting. Unless you understand calorimetry, it does not look like anything. As Ed Storms says, it is like watching paint dry. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Forbes: The Year of Cold Fusion
Yes, but watching paint dry is ultra-exciting if the payoff is trillion$. Gibbs appears to be happy writing Forbes filler-pieces. He should get more creative. Anyone who has CF/LENR tech that they are confident in would certainly be happy to have it showcased in Forbes. It would be Win-Win-Win. The lab would get invaluable publicity. Forbes would have a story that goes viral. Gibbs would become a star journalist. Jed Rothwell wrote: pagnu...@htdconnect.com wrote: Forbes has deep enough pockets to send Mark Gibbs, along with a technically sophisticated companion, to a lab claiming CF or LENR anomalous energy or transmutation evidence. He should publicly issue a challenge to CF/LENR researchers to allow him to witness and monitor their experiments. Sure. They could visit U. Missouri, SRI or U. Osaka, for example. The technically sophisticated companion can read their papers beforehand to confirm he or she can understand them. They would have to call ahead to be sure an experiment is actually in progress. Most of the time nothing is happening. They are getting ready to do a test, or evaluating the previous test. It is not all that exciting. Unless you understand calorimetry, it does not look like anything. As Ed Storms says, it is like watching paint dry. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Forbes: The Year of Cold Fusion
On Sun, Jan 1, 2012 at 11:56 AM, pagnu...@htdconnect.com wrote: Anyone who has CF/LENR tech that they are confident in would certainly be happy to have it showcased in Forbes. You'd think so. So why has it not happened? Gibbs doesn't seem in any way reluctant to write in detail about LENR and related claims.
Re: [Vo]:Forbes: The Year of Cold Fusion
So why doesn't he throw down the gauntlet? How hard is that?? Mary Yugo wrote: On Sun, Jan 1, 2012 at 11:56 AM, pagnu...@htdconnect.com wrote: Anyone who has CF/LENR tech that they are confident in would certainly be happy to have it showcased in Forbes. You'd think so. So why has it not happened? Gibbs doesn't seem in any way reluctant to write in detail about LENR and related claims.
Re: [Vo]:Forbes: \The Year of Cold Fusion\
I agree Gibbs is just writing filler pieces but the way he bends the facts and creates straw men to aggravate LENR proponents into doing his homework is infuriating, We never said it was fusion or that it was known physics -both of which premises he assumes to support his skeptical platform while ignoring the unexplained transmutations being recorded - I guess data that doesn't fit known physics can't be considered or he might have to earn his paycheck and actually read some of the papers. Fran
Re: [Vo]:Forbes: The Year of Cold Fusion
Forbes is all about business and investing. I've been a subscriber 25 years. This is my take: Gibbs is alerting readers that there is a probability that energy stocks could quickly lose value due to a Cold Fusion device impacting traditional energy demand. Some believe it is a zero percent chance, and others think it approaches 100%. And like Who Shot JR, many people already have significant insider knowledge. Many investors only exposure to new science is through business media. So exposure in a respected business magazine, even insubstantial blather, can cause smart investors to take action. For instance, putting in stop loss orders, buying potential Rossi Partner stocks (GE,LMT,SI,DRC?), or buying long term short positions (LEAPS) on certain sectors. And private research and insider trading will also impact the volatility of energy stocks. Jed's insider has yet to be identified (?) but there are hundreds of companies that employ analysts who might be interested in profiting from the truth or fiction behind LENR. It will be an interesting time for the stock market. Gibbs could give more evidence that LENR is about to go commercial, but only Rossi and DKG have products announced and neither are guaranteed to be successful. - Brad
