Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

On 7/10/17, Jed Rothwell wrote: > > I cannot judge legal standards. ***Then stop using a legal term. It's like saying that by scientific standards and by common sense standards your neighbor is guilty of armed robbery. If there were "scientific standards" to begin

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

Kevin O'Malley wrote: You're probably right. But there is evidence he had a COP > 1 for > some length of time according to the report by the person chosen by > both sides to administer the test. > You mean the report that claims the laboratory was in a perfect vacuum, and

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

On 7/9/17, Jed Rothwell wrote: OJ Simpson... > Obviously he was guilty. ***Then obviously Rossi is Not Guilty of Fraud. You just agreed with the legal standard. > All I did was read the Penon report. That's all it takes. ***Bullshit. Plenty of others have read the

Re: [Vo]:Interest in cold fusion has waned

Che makes a cogent point. The year long test was far more that an attempt to extract money from IH, It was an attempt to verify a commercial product and the attempt failed at least in Rossi's estimation. This attempt at commercial applicability was why the test was so convoluted, inappropriate to

RE: [Vo]:LENR Insights from Proton 21

Jones and Axil— A additional idea in connection with the Proton 21 folks and the Stanford strung theory folks: It may be that after the super heavies formed during inflation, the unstable super superheavies evaporated/exploded and only a reduced of stable super heavies remained, well

Re: [Vo]:LENR Insights from Proton 21

Proton 21 is a science based effort whose out of the box thinking and associated results are not commercially applicable. This is why their results are so valuable to analyze. Their methods and analysis are not constrained by the braindead fixation of producing excess heat as detected by

Re: [Vo]:LENR Insights from Proton 21

bobcook39...@hotmail.com wrote: > PS: What has happened to these folks in the last ten to 15 years? Did > they suffer the same ridicule of being “scientific frauds” as others, > currently and in the past, have in the field of LENR? > > > > Maybe Jed knows? > They

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

You're probably right. But there is evidence he had a COP > 1 for some length of time according to the report by the person chosen by both sides to administer the test. On 7/10/17, H LV wrote: > Rossi was suing IH for millions of dollars, so he had to prove the device >

RE: [Vo]:LENR Insights from Proton 21

Jones— The big bang may still hold, if the super heavies were formed early- on, caused the expansion early-- on (inflation) with repulsive gravity and then changed to attractive gravity after the initial rapid inflation. The big bang (BB) will become the standard of BB models, SOBB. It may

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

On Sun, Jul 9, 2017 at 8:03 PM, Kevin O'Malley wrote: > > I think the key is to just find nuclear products when you throw hydrogen and nickel together. There is no chemical reaction that is supposed to lead to nuclear products. 3 years ago, MFMP found gamma rays and then

Re: [Vo]:Interest in cold fusion has waned

On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 1:01 AM, Lennart Thornros wrote: > The whole discussion after the TRAIL is useless. Accusations between > vorts, discussions trying to determine how Rossi is a fraud or not - all of > counter productive. > Rossi has a small window to show that he has

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

Rossi was suing IH for millions of dollars, so he had to prove the device in Florida worked as he claimed. If the trial proceeded I think it is very likely that the preponderance of the evidence would not support his claim. Harry On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 10:07 AM, Jed Rothwell

[Vo]:2nd Law proved not valid, ignored by West

In the disclosed Maxwell's demon type of experiment from 2012, heat from ambient air was converted completely into electric energy, using a static magnetic field without producing any other effect. The phenomenon proves clearly that the second law of thermodynamics is not universally valid,

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

Kevin O'Malley wrote: The report was credible enough for IH not to move forward on their case. > Unless you took part in the lawyers' negotiations, you do not know that is the reason. It might be because they determined Rossi has no more money. There is no point to suing

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

The report was credible enough for IH not to move forward on their case. I'm glad to see you got a start on delineating all the scientific charlatanism in that report and in the case. On 7/10/17, Jed Rothwell wrote: > Kevin O'Malley wrote: > > You're

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

Jed Rothwell 5:36 PM (5 hours ago) Nope. The legal system does not sue scientists for publishing fraudulent or idiotic reports. ***The legal system brings its resources to bear upon scientists who scam others with fraudulent reports. One reason is that no one can tell fools and frauds apart.

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

Kevin O'Malley wrote: > On 7/9/17, Jed Rothwell wrote: > OJ Simpson... > > Obviously he was guilty. > ***Then obviously Rossi is Not Guilty of Fraud. You just agreed with > the legal standard. > I cannot judge legal standards. By scientific