Re: [Vo]:The Rossi Saga Part 1

yes, dear Harry- in principle. But the Dismiss document is Information too These accusations also. Why has IH accepted unsuitable instruments? Only the answer to this is genuine information? I do not get the logic of this... peter On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 6:12 PM, H LV

Re: [Vo]:Running on lava

I particularly like the bit toward the end, where he steps off the flow, and as he's taking the last step, he lifts up his foot, and the sole of his shoe is flaming. (Easier to see in the slo-mo replay.) On 06/01/2016 11:51 PM, Daniel Rocha wrote: See:

[Vo]:LENR- complex legal issues developing

http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2016/06/june-03-2016-lenr-complex-legal-issues.html a new stage of the Rossi-Industrial Heat dispute IH's status is not enviable, I think they will have lots to explain peter -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com

Re: [Vo]:The Rossi Saga Part 1

Peter Gluck wrote: *i have just been writing my answer to this assertion:* > Who made this assertion? > *Announced a year ago this could be an argument but even then how could > Rossi depart from the test plan; how many reactors were "inoperable" and in > which sense?*

Re: [Vo]:The Rossi Saga Part 1

Peter, this is how private R works. Neither Leonardo Corp. nor IH owe the public any information. Harry On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 10:37 AM, Peter Gluck wrote: > *dear Jed,* > *i have just been writing my answer to this assertion:* > > *Announced a year ago this could be an

Re: [Vo]:The Rossi Saga Part 1

I gather IH's response is more of a legal formality. Trying to dismiss the case so they can get it ruled on by a judge rather than a jury. My reading of the statement puts IH in a rather poor light. It's as if they set out to delay the 1 MW plant test on purpose because they just wanted the

Re: [Vo]:The most mysterious star in the universe

On May 30, 2016 6:38 PM, wrote: > > In reply to H LV's message of Mon, 30 May 2016 15:11:52 -0400: > Hi, > [snip] > > 1) I wonder if they have considered the possibility that the output of the star > itself is simply variable? Given what is known about how stars work they

Re: [Vo]:Running on lava

"Welcome to Hell" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ETCM90yHiY A British view of Hell ;-) Harry On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 11:47 AM, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: > I particularly like the bit toward the end, where he steps off the flow, > and as he's taking the last step, he lifts

Re: [Vo]:The Rossi Saga Part 1

Dear Jed, can you tell when had IH not accepted the instruments? (during the 1 year test)? How long has Rosi and the ERV worked with instruments denied by IH and did this not lead to a major conflict including stopping of the test? Do you consider what you say here as plausible? You have never

[Vo]:Elon Musk thinks we're in a simulation.

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/news/elon-musk-ai-artificial-intelligence-computer-simulation-gaming-virtual-reality-a7060941.html He's parroting Bostrom here, that the only chance we're not in a simulation is that civilizations blow themselves up before they get to a

Re: [Vo]:The Rossi Saga Part 1

Peter Gluck wrote: can you tell when had IH not accepted the instruments? (during the 1 year > test)? > I heard about it early in the test. I do not recall when. The problems were obvious, so I.H. knew about them from the beginning. As I wrote here, several times, I was

Re: [Vo]:The Rossi Saga Part 1

Peter Gluck wrote: Dear Jed, > suppose I sign an NDA with you, can you then expaln me how was the > calorimetry- heat measurement so very flawed and has it transformed COP<1 > in COP 50-60 > You need to ask Rossi or I.H. Now that the lawsuit has begun, I doubt they will

Re: [Vo]:The Rossi Saga Part 1

Dear Jed, suppose I sign an NDA with you, can you then expaln me how was the calorimetry- heat measurement so very flawed and has it transformed COP<1 in COP 50-60 Technically please I am a chemical engineer nd have made many such measurements in the plants and pilot plants Excuse me but without

Re: [Vo]:The Rossi Saga Part 1

How do you know what I know and what not? Do you can give examples of unfounded nonsense and absurd mistakes I have made in this IH Rossi discussion.? Re false accusations I have not climed that you are simply lying re the instrumentation dispute between the parts and also have not said that you

Re: [Vo]:The Rossi Saga Part 1

Peter Gluck wrote: > Excuse me but without any details what you claim is just slogans. > YOU of all people have no right to say this! You know nothing about these tests, yet you have written blog entry after entry full of unfounded nonsense, false accusations and absurd

Re: [Vo]:COP < 1 should not be negative evidence for cold fusion (thinking in general, not about Rossi)

It seems that loading and deloading several times do increase the reproducibility. But maybe both cases are OK. My idea is that some metals come with irregularity in structure. For example, the lattice is not perfect, it has domains where the layers have different orientation. The zone may play

RE: [Vo]:The Rossi Saga Part 1

From: Peter Gluck Do you think you are convincing many people here? Peter, Duh! Your question about JR convincing the important technologists in the field is almost silly, IMO. Because of his extended reputation in LERN over many years, his International connections, his dedication to the

RE: [Vo]:The most mysterious star in the universe

In reply to  H LV's message of Fri, 3 Jun 2016 15:16:16 -0400: Hi, [snip] On May 30, 2016 6:38 PM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote: In reply to  H LV's message of Mon, 30 May 2016 15:11:52 -0400: Hi, [snip] 1) I wonder if they have considered the possibility that the output of the star itself

Re: [Vo]:The most mysterious star in the universe

In reply to H LV's message of Fri, 3 Jun 2016 15:16:16 -0400: Hi, [snip] >On May 30, 2016 6:38 PM, wrote: >> >> In reply to H LV's message of Mon, 30 May 2016 15:11:52 -0400: >> Hi, >> [snip] >> >> 1) I wonder if they have considered the possibility that the output of >the

Re: [Vo]:The Rossi Saga Part 1

dear Adrian, today being Rossi's 66 birthday "Rossi resurrected cold fusion from near death only about five years ago. As a result several universities and several *countries* are now working on LENR." would make a nice Motto on my blog, if you give permission to cite you. thanks, peter On Thu,

Re: [Vo]:The Rossi Saga Part 1

Peter Gluck wrote: How do you know what I know and what not? > I can tell by reading your blog. Do you can give examples of unfounded nonsense > and absurd mistakes I have made in this IH Rossi discussion.? > I gave you some examples, right in your blog. You and your

Re: [Vo]:The Rossi Saga Part 1

No, Jed. There are no facts. You have decided the outcome and then you make statements based on facts you say are secret. The labeling of people is totally unsubstantiated and very biased plus unnecessary rude. Wait and see or substantiate your claims. IH has not played there hand very wisely,

Re: [Vo]:The Rossi Saga Part 1

Jones Beene wrote: > However, it is difficult to believe that he has nothing to show for many > years of effort and millions spent, in a field where there has been prior > success by others. > He did seem to have had positive results at various times. Certainly Rossi can

Re: [Vo]:The Rossi Saga Part 1

On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 9:34 PM, Lennart Thornros wrote: IH has not played there hand very wisely, which surprise me. What are they > hiding? If you have had a chance to read IH's reply to Rossi's complaint, which of the original claims to you believe to survive the reply?

Re: [Vo]:The Rossi Saga Part 1

Lennart Thornros wrote: > The difference between you and me is that: > I do wait and see before I decide. > No you do not! That's outrageous. Here you are blathering on about Rossi, making assumption after assumption, even though you know practically nothing about his

Re: [Vo]:COP < 1 should not be negative evidence for cold fusion (thinking in general, not about Rossi)

Daniel Rocha wrote: Any process has waste. So, for example, if the input is 1W and the output > is 0.9W it doesn't mean there wasn't CF. The yield could be like 1mW and > the remaining 0.099 wasted in other means. > With a laboratory calorimeter, you calibrate extensively

Re: [Vo]:COP < 1 should not be negative evidence for cold fusion (thinking in general, not about Rossi)

This is why I am suggesting other methods to measure cold fusion, like finding what is the frequency of the photon emission, if this is the case. Not measuring excess heat by calorimetry is not the same of not having cold fusion. 2016-06-03 22:55 GMT-03:00 Jed Rothwell : >

Re: [Vo]:The Rossi Saga Part 1

Eric, I have not even read their (IH) reply. From my experience I think they are more vague than I expected from a professional investor. That saddens me a bit. They have not denied the accusations about using positive results from Rossi to attract capital, which I had expected. Jed, you are

Re: [Vo]:The Rossi Saga Part 1

Lennart Thornros wrote: > No, Jed. > There are no facts. > Yes, there are. Rossi himself gave them to you. He said the I.H. expert insisted on seeing the customer site, but he did not allow it. If you think that points to anything other than fraud, you are a poor judge of

Re: [Vo]:COP < 1 should not be negative evidence for cold fusion (thinking in general, not about Rossi)

Daniel Rocha wrote: This is why I am suggesting other methods to measure cold fusion, like > finding what is the frequency of the photon emission, if this is the case. > Not measuring excess heat by calorimetry is not the same of not having cold > fusion. > I disagree. I

Re: [Vo]:The Rossi Saga Part 1

Lennart Thornros wrote: > > Jed, you are repeating your argument and the one about not giving IH > access to the customers facility is rather weak. Could be many reasons for > that. > No, there could not be many reasons for that. There is only one plausible reason: Rossi did

Re: [Vo]:The Rossi Saga Part 1

Jones Beene: "Their opinions are* de minimis..." * Jones Beene must be a lawyer of at least work with them alot. My lawyer oftentimes describes aspects of my case as *de minimis* *https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_minimis * On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 9:32

Re: [Vo]:COP < 1 should not be negative evidence for cold fusion (thinking in general, not about Rossi)

I did not deny that. Photons beteen 10

Re: [Vo]:The Rossi Saga Part 1

Peter Gluck wrote: But the Dismiss document is Information too > These accusations also. Why has IH accepted unsuitable instruments? > I.H. did not accept them! They objected strongly. They said there is no excess heat. They said Rossi used "flawed measurements" and

Re: [Vo]:The Rossi Saga Part 1

Ross's attorney has issued a public statement saying that the license between Leonardo Corp and Industrial Heat has been terminated due to IH's failure to make payment for it. http://ecat.com/news/pressrelease-industrial-heat-loses-license-for-rossis-e-cat

RE: [Vo]:New Mizuno Patent, with clear descriptions of nanostructured material and plasma reactor...

Yep, super catalysis and elements of Casimir geometry all. Fran From: alain.coetm...@gmail.com [mailto:alain.coetm...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Alain Sepeda Sent: Thursday, June 02, 2016 7:49 AM To: Vortex List Subject: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:New Mizuno Patent, with clear

Re: [Vo]:The Rossi Saga Part 1 Legal issues

They cite to much jurisprudence!!! US law is way too confusing. There should be a patent lawyer to comment this. 2016-06-02 23:51 GMT-03:00 Bob Cook : > > > > If I were In IH’s shoes, I would be worried. > > >

Re: [Vo]:The Rossi Saga Part 1

IH has apparently sent Krivit a copy of their legal response to the court case. From a quick scan it doesn’t look like they have stated the E-Cat doesn’t work, but complain about the delay in starting the 1 MWtest, the instrumentation used and complain about the old E-Cats on stand-by not

Re: [Vo]:The Rossi Saga Part 1

There's nothing in the dispute which hinges on whether the device works, or not. That point may never be brought up. Craig On 06/03/2016 10:04 AM, a.ashfield wrote: IH has apparently sent Krivit a copy of their legal response to the court case. From a quick scan it doesn’t look like they

Re: [Vo]:The Rossi Saga Part 1

a.ashfield wrote: > IH has apparently sent Krivit a copy of their legal response to the court > case. > I expect he found it by some other means. >From a quick scan it doesn’t look like they have stated the E-Cat doesn’t > work . . . > It says this on p. 2, in the

Re: [Vo]:The Rossi Saga Part 1

IH's motion to dismiss the lawsuit, filed with the federal court in Florida, is now available: http://newenergytimes.com/v2/sr/RossiECat/Rossi-vs-Darden/20160602-Darden-et-al-Motion-to-Dismiss.pdf Eric

Re: [Vo]:The Rossi Saga Part 1

I left out part of the footnote. It says: 1. Because Defendants are not permitted to introduce facts outside the Complaint and its Exhibits, this motion does not address, for example, the numerous errors in Plaintiffs’ purported “Guaranteed Performance Test” that the Complaint purposely ignores

Re: [Vo]:The Rossi Saga Part 1

*dear Jed,* *i have just been writing my answer to this assertion:* *Announced a year ago this could be an argument but even then how could Rossi depart from the test plan; how many reactors were "inoperable" and in which sense? Flawed measurements have to be reported immediately and what