RE: [Vo]:Storms comments on Rossi
At 06:37 PM 3/3/2011, you wrote: BTW - If you haven't seen it, here is the preliminary WIPO rejection notice of most of the claims of the Rossi patent http://www.newenergytimes.com/v2/news/2011/36/Rossi-Patent-Application-WO-2009-125444-PrelimReport.pdf Just not surprising at all. My hypothesis would be that Rossi expected this, and filed the patent only to create publicity. The disclosures in the patent were not adequate, at all.
Re: [Vo]:Storms comments on Rossi
Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: Just not surprising at all. My hypothesis would be that Rossi expected this, and filed the patent only to create publicity. Bad publicity. Frankly, it makes him look stupid. I cannot think of any reason why he would want to do that. The disclosures in the patent were not adequate, at all. They were not. Why not assume that things are as they appear to be? Why not take things at face value? Rossi does a poor job expressing himself in his blog. I suppose he wrote a bad patent because he is not good at writing patents. He often publishes sloppy mistakes such as the wrong name of the company in Greece, and he makes weird claims such as having a PhD from a defunct diploma mill. It seems clear to me that he is bad at public relations. He does not care about PR, his image, or people's opinions. He may have a good business strategy but effective communication is not part of it. I don't think he is playing mind games. I think he is a technical genius but that does not mean he is good at PR or business strategy. Beware of ascribing multiple talents to people who happen to excel in one particular area. - Jed
[Vo]:Storms comments on Rossi
Here is a message Ed sent to Abd and me, reprinted with permission -- This debate of whether to believe Rossi ignores two very important facts. We now know that chemically assisted nuclear reactions are possible, thanks to the CF work. This not like the claims for over unity based on odd electric circuits or motors. Second, Rossi has been working with people who have published evidence for excess energy and nuclear products using Ni and H2. Consequently, he has not come out of left field with a novel claim. His contribution is the increase in magnitude. Given the state of CF these days, a person would gain no advantage by creating a fake. First of all, no one would believe it and when it was exposed, the game would be over. So, Rossi has shown all the characteristics of a real claim. The fact that he does not take the path that Jed advocates means nothing. If I had such a discovery that did not have patent protection, I would take the same path. Rossi's goal is to keep people confused so that no one discovers his secret until he gets a patent. I suspect a lot is going on under the radar using NDA that allow Rossi to contact investors and the US patent office. As for the 1 MW device, I expect it has been delivered and is being tested right now. By Oct. the device will be well under control and will have a history of performance as Rossi claims. I expect by then, his patent will be granted. The man is no fool and obviously has talented people working with him. He is doing exactly what a rational person would do under the circumstances. Ed My response: I do not advocate any action that would endanger Rossi's intellectual property, or his chances of getting a patent. I do not know much about patents. If the actions I advocate would endanger the patent I hereby un-advocate them. I do not have as much respect for Rossi's business acumen as Ed does. - Jed
RE: [Vo]:Storms comments on Rossi
BTW - If you haven't seen it, here is the preliminary WIPO rejection notice of most of the claims of the Rossi patent http://www.newenergytimes.com/v2/news/2011/36/Rossi-Patent-Application-WO-20 09-125444-PrelimReport.pdf
