RE: [Vo]:Transparent glass like piece attracted by magnet

[Jones Beene]

Could have been a broken push pin - one of these:

 

http://www.amazon.com/Clear-Magnetic-Push-Pins-Whiteboards/dp/B0168YC5OA/ref=sr_1_27?s=office-products=UTF8=1462763985=1-27-spons=magnetic+glass=1

 

From: H Ucar 

 

I hope these links to pictures of the item will work.


   https://goo.gl/photos/nPhqELc8WufQMen2A
   https://goo.gl/photos/oHn3eETYbzmPfpvx6   
   https://goo.gl/photos/71g3uqYPpddQAShv7

Re: [Vo]:Let's continue to think about passive vs active approach to LENR 's existentil problems

[Patrick Ellul]

> There is one thing known for sure. I.H. says it does not work, whereas
> Rossi says it does. I can judge which side is probably right, based on
> their track records. I am not jumping to conclusions. I think that I.H. has
> credibility and expertise.
>
>
Jed, IH was created to buy out Rossi. IH and Rossi are highly intertwined
when it comes to credibility at least. Since then they also bought out some
of Rossi's competitors. So it's not IH as such that you trust as having
more expertise, but Rossi's competitors. You obviously know and are in
contact with some of these competitors. Best regards.

Re: [Vo]:Let's continue to think about passive vs active approach to LENR 's existentil problems

[Jed Rothwell]

a.ashfield  wrote:


> I don't find unofficial third party reports on a case this large to be
> very convincing.
>

I refer to first-hand statements by I.H., especially in their press release:

"Industrial Heat has worked for over three years to substantiate the
results claimed by Mr. Rossi from the E-Cat technology – all without
success."

I asked them what that means. They said it means the machine did not
produce excess heat.



>   Why would IH show it off to Woodford if it were just a sham?  Why would
> Rossi sue IH knowing that the details would come out in court?
>

I know nothing about these issues. I do not think they are relevant to
calorimetry. This dispute is about calorimetry and *nothing else*.



> Why would IH wait a year and not just shut it down if it didn't work?  Etc.
>

I have no idea. However, long before the test ended, I heard that I.H. was
not happy with the calorimetry.


There are just too many unknowns to jump to conclusions, particularly when
> we will have more data in a month or so.
>

There is one thing known for sure. I.H. says it does not work, whereas
Rossi says it does. I can judge which side is probably right, based on
their track records. I am not jumping to conclusions. I think that I.H. has
credibility and expertise. Rossi has zero credibility and his calorimetry
up until now has ranged from bad to abysmal.

The fact that the machine is large and the apparent heat is 1 MW does not
rule out a mistake. People can make stupid mistakes on any scale.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Let's continue to think about passive vs active approach to LENR 's existentil problems

[a.ashfield]

Jed wrote:

   "In recent years, Rossi has in fact done what he said he would do.


Not a chance. Just looking at the facility you know there cannot be a 1 
MW heat source in it. It would cook everyone in that part of the 
building. That is enough heat for 100 dry cleaning machines. You 
couldn't fit that many in such a small area, never mind operating them.


  You have no proof that the 1 MW plant didn't work and I remain
   optimistic about new developments.


I.H. says they have proof. Based on my experience dealing with I.H. and 
Rossi, I find I.H. far more believable."


I don't find unofficial third party reports on a case this large to be 
very convincing.  How do you know that was the site?  Why would IH show 
it off to Woodford if it were just a sham?  Why would Rossi sue IH 
knowing that the details would come out in court?  Why would IH wait a 
year and not just shut it down if it didn't work?  Etc.
There are just too many unknowns to jump to conclusions, particularly 
when we will have more data in a month or so.

Re: [Vo]:Let's continue to think about passive vs active approach to LENR 's existentil problems

[Jed Rothwell]

Lennart Thornros  wrote:

It is in my opinion rather poorly handled in general. Why after several
> weeks are there no negotiations going on?
>

How do you know there are no negotiations going on? Where did you learn
this?

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Let's continue to think about passive vs active approach to LENR 's existentil problems

[Lennart Thornros]

Hi guys,
I see no reason to decide the outcome just a few weeks before the proof
will be there. One way or the other. Yes, I understand the disappointment
as most of us would have expected a clear situation by now.
I am also optimistic.
Who is more believable?
There are too much money involved to  believe that anyone is forthcoming.
I agree with that  IH has a lot to lose  if they do not play within the
rules and that is the fact that I have a little doubt.
It is in my opinion rather poorly handled in general. Why after several
weeks are there no negotiations going on?
If IH are seriously believers in LENR then they certainly would have found
a mediator who could talk to Rossi and then continue there own path in
LENR. Rossi cannot just sit back as that will eliminate his lawsuit.
We can agree something is fishy and it should be taken care of - old fish
smells.
Maybe it is underway in a silent format.

Best Regards ,
Lennart Thornros


lenn...@thornros.com
+1 916 436 1899

Whatever you vividly imagine, ardently desire, sincerely believe and
enthusiastically act upon, must inevitably come to pass. (PJM)


On Sun, May 8, 2016 at 2:40 PM, Jed Rothwell  wrote:

> a.ashfield  wrote:
>
>
>> In recent years, Rossi has in fact done what he said he would do.
>>
>
> Not a chance. Just looking at the facility you know there cannot be a 1 MW
> heat source in it. It would cook everyone in that part of the building.
> That is enough heat for 100 dry cleaning machines. You couldn't fit that
> many in such a small area, never mind operating them.
>
>
>
>>   You have no proof that the 1 MW plant didn't work and I remain
>> optimistic about new developments.
>>
>
> I.H. says they have proof. Based on my experience dealing with I.H. and
> Rossi, I find I.H. far more believable.
>
> - Jed
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Let's continue to think about passive vs active approach to LENR 's existentil problems

[Jed Rothwell]

a.ashfield  wrote:


> In recent years, Rossi has in fact done what he said he would do.
>

Not a chance. Just looking at the facility you know there cannot be a 1 MW
heat source in it. It would cook everyone in that part of the building.
That is enough heat for 100 dry cleaning machines. You couldn't fit that
many in such a small area, never mind operating them.



>   You have no proof that the 1 MW plant didn't work and I remain
> optimistic about new developments.
>

I.H. says they have proof. Based on my experience dealing with I.H. and
Rossi, I find I.H. far more believable.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Let's continue to think about passive vs active approach to LENR 's existentil problems

[a.ashfield]

Frank Znidarsic,
I think you are being unfair to Rossi.  It has not been "A very long 
time" to develop what is a completely new technology.
In recent years, Rossi has in fact done what he said he would do. You 
have no proof that the 1 MW plant didn't work and I remain optimistic 
about new developments.  He sued IH not the other way around.


me356 said it well in his recent report.

"Now I understand perfectly why Rossi is working on the e-cat so long. 
You have something that is working, you have a prototypes and you are 
nearly ready for mass production. Then you will find something amazing, 
that can increase the excess heat significantly so that previous work is 
not important anymore. But there are again many difficulties and unknown 
things that it can take a few years to get a fully working prototype 
based on the new discoveries, but it is surely worth. You can continue 
endlessly, because LENR is opening doors of something completely unknown 
and much more. not just energy conversion. It is possible that in 10 
years, everything will be completely different."

Re: [Vo]:Let's continue to think about passive vs active approach to LENR 's existentil problems

[Jed Rothwell]

Peter Gluck  wrote:


> Re your statement "COLD FUSION IS DEAD" this means two things:
> a) as you say, if Rossi E-Cat does not work, the cause is lost.
>

That's silly. Why would it be lost? There are many other fruitful
approaches and good experiments.

Rossi and Defkalion were the only ones who claimed to have scaled up. It
turns out they only scaled up mistakes. A gigantic mistake is still zero.
The scale of an experiment has no bearing at all on how good it is, or
whether it will lead to a practical source of energy. Real discoveries are
perfected on a lab benchtop scale before anyone tries to make a big device.
The only exception I know of is the tokamak plasma fusion reactor which
supposedly does not work on a small scale. It does not seem promising to me.


But here is a big IF, are you certain it does not work and why are you
> certain? Because IH says it, after 3 years?
>

IH says it for good reason. They know much more about calorimetry than
Rossi does. Rossi never published any results, good or bad. Not a single
graph or set of numbers. His demonstrations ranged from badly done amateur
tests to ridiculous tests. The first set of tests by Levi were pretty good
but the Lugano tests were a waste of time.

Forget about Rossi.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Let's continue to think about passive vs active approach to LENR 's existentil problems

[Jed Rothwell]

Frank Znidarsic  wrote:


> With the latest failure of Rossi nothing has come of the very long effort.
>


Only Rossi was involved in this "effort." Most researchers ignored Rossi.



> Jed is not even saying so much any more.


It is true there isn't much to report. On the other hand, Industrial Heat
is funding more research than we have seen since the 1990s.



>  It's over, cold fusion is dead, and its time to move on.
>

That's silly. Scientific truth remains true forever. Cold fusion is as
viable now as it ever was.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Let's continue to think about passive vs active approach to LENR 's existentil problems

[Axil Axil]

Frank needs to tune in on the Holmlid experiments. Like Jones, he can do
his pwn experimentation to check out his own theories. Frank, go for those
muons.

On Sun, May 8, 2016 at 9:22 AM, Frank Znidarsic  wrote:

> Just last week someone arranged a meeting with me and two one star
> generals from the NAVY and the Army.  They took my book and said that they
> would have it reviewed.  The one said,  "If I tell them to read it they
> will read it!"  My fiancée said,  "I cant believe what just went down!
> How did that happen?"  I replied,  "I have experience in this area.
> Nothing will come of it."  She accepted that answer.  Today, I am working
> on digging out a stump and looking for a new direction.  My apps only sold
> one.
>
>
> http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss_2?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text=%22znidarsic+science+books%22=n%3A133140011%2Ck%3A%22znidarsic+science+books%22
>
> Don't hold your breath waiting for the generals.
>
> Frank
>
>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Transparent glass like piece attracted by magnet

[H Ucar]

I hope these links to pictures of the item will work.
   https://goo.gl/photos/nPhqELc8WufQMen2A
   https://goo.gl/photos/oHn3eETYbzmPfpvx6   
   https://goo.gl/photos/71g3uqYPpddQAShv7

[Vo]:Sunday- a puzzle - difficult, much to read about LENR asndaround

[Peter Gluck]

http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2016/05/may-08-2016-puzzle-and-something-to.html

What else should I say? Expecting an information-rich new week.

Peter
-- 
Dr. Peter Gluck
Cluj, Romania
http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com

Re: Fwd: [Vo]:Let's continue to think about passive vs active approach to LENR 's existentil problems

[Bob Cook]

Frank--

Edsels only sold a few copies, but cars did not go out of style.

The following link is instructive as to marketing something:

http://www.businessinsider.com/lessons-from-the-failure-of-the-ford-edsel-2015-9

Bob Cook

From: Frank Znidarsic 
Sent: Sunday, May 08, 2016 6:22 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com 
Subject: Fwd: [Vo]:Let's continue to think about passive vs active approach to 
LENR 's existentil problems

Just last week someone arranged a meeting with me and two one star generals 
from the NAVY and the Army.  They took my book and said that they would have it 
reviewed.  The one said,  "If I tell them to read it they will read it!"  My 
fiancée said,  "I cant believe what just went down!  How did that happen?"  I 
replied,  "I have experience in this area.  Nothing will come of it."  She 
accepted that answer.  Today, I am working on digging out a stump and looking 
for a new direction.  My apps only sold one. 

http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss_2?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text=%22znidarsic+science+books%22=n%3A133140011%2Ck%3A%22znidarsic+science+books%22


Don't hold your breath waiting for the generals.

Frank 

Fwd: [Vo]:Let's continue to think about passive vs active approach to LENR 's existentil problems

[Frank Znidarsic]

Just last week someone arranged a meeting with me and two one star generals 
from the NAVY and the Army.  They took my book and said that they would have it 
reviewed.  The one said,  "If I tell them to read it they will read it!"  My 
fiancée said,  "I cant believe what just went down!  How did that happen?"  I 
replied,  "I have experience in this area.  Nothing will come of it."  She 
accepted that answer.  Today, I am working on digging out a stump and looking 
for a new direction.  My apps only sold one.



http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss_2?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text=%22znidarsic+science+books%22=n%3A133140011%2Ck%3A%22znidarsic+science+books%22


Don't hold your breath waiting for the generals.


Frank 

Re: [Vo]:Let's continue to think about passive vs active approach to LENR 's existentil problems

[Frank Znidarsic]

Yes, and we have been here before with Eneco, IESI, Russ George, The Cincinnati 
Group, CETI, Rossi, NEDO, the first DOE audit the second DOE audit, and the 
list goes on.
Now we have a new list of players.




It reminds me a an episode of hit show here The big Bang Theory.  Sheldon has 
been working on string theory for a long time with nothing to show for it.  He 
realizes that it will all come to nothing and searches for a new direction for 
his life.  He is confounded,  That's were we are.


Frank

Re: [Vo]:Transparent glass like piece attracted by magnet

[H Ucar]

Working link for the image.
https://goo.gl/photos/nPhqELc8WufQMen2A


-- Original message--From: H UcarDate: Fri, May 6, 2016 22:00To: 
vortex-l@eskimo.com;Cc: Subject:[Vo]:Transparent glass like piece attracted by 
magnet

https://photos.google.com/photo/AF1QipNhhKH8uXidTN7sg6_dYlkVgfChaH-dXVB42oI0

I noticed this a 6mm length plastic or glass tiny piece has been sticked to a 
magnet dropped on the floor in my working room. Although some microscopic non 
transparent elements are present, I think they would not provide enough force 
to stick the piece to a N35 Nd magnet at distance of 1 cm. 
I have no idea about the origin of this piece. Only the dropped magnet has been 
broken less than 1 second ago.

Re: [Vo]:Let's continue to think about passive vs active approach to LENR 's existentil problems

[Peter Gluck]

Dear Frank

Thank you for writing an answer to my blog editorial!

First a small correction- I started to work on LENR on March 24,1989
then working at an institute of chemistry- I have visited the neighboring
institute of physics and have poarticipated at discussions re two lines of
replications of the Fleischmann Pons experiment- we were hunting first of
all- neutrons.

Re your statement "COLD FUSION IS DEAD" this means two things:
a) as you say, if Rossi E-Cat does not work, the cause is lost. But here is
a big IF, are you certain it does not work and why are you certain? Because
IH says it, after 3 years?

b) The Rossiless part of LENR cold Fusion is also dead, so what is doing
ENEA, SKINR and many others is in vain, sentenced to failure?

Please explain a bit your POV's,my old friend!

Very truly yours,
Peter



On Sun, May 8, 2016 at 6:03 AM, Frank Znidarsic  wrote:

> Peter you and I have been working on this thing since we both took a trip
> to Los Alamos Labs in 1996.  With the latest failure of Rossi nothing has
> come of the very long effort.  Jed is not even saying so much any more.
> It's over, cold fusion is dead, and its time to move on.
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Peter Gluck 
> To: Arik El Boher ; Bo Hoistadt <
> bo.hois...@physics.uu.se>; Brian Ahern ; CMNS <
> c...@googlegroups.com>; Dagmar Kuhn ; David Daggett <
> david.l.dagg...@gmail.com>; doug marker ; Dr. Braun
> Tibor ; eCatNews ; Gabriel
> Moagar-Poladian ; Gary ; Haiko
> Lietz ; jeff aries ; Mark Tsirlin <
> tsirlin.m...@hotmail.com>; Nicolaie N. Vlad ;
> Peter Bjorkbom ; Peter Mobberley <
> petermobber...@hotmail.com>; Pierre Clauzon ;
> Roberto Germano ; Roy Virgilio ;
> Steve Katinski ; Sunwon Park ;
> Valerio Ciampoli ; vlad ; VORTEX <
> vortex-l@eskimo.com>
> Sent: Sat, May 7, 2016 1:03 pm
> Subject: [Vo]:Let's continue to think about passive vs active approach to
> LENR 's existentil problems
>
>
> http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2016/05/may-07-2016-passive-vs-active-approach.html
>
> I will continue but please help me!
> Peter
>
> --
> Dr. Peter Gluck
> Cluj, Romania
> http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
>



-- 
Dr. Peter Gluck
Cluj, Romania
http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com