Rossi does not have any obligations to anyone except probably Darden because he invested in his technology development. He is an entrepreneur and not somebody who is payed by society. What he tells us and what he doesn’t tell us is up to him.
The field he is trying to explore is unique and started by pure experimenting things. Some of his findings contradict conclusions on earlier ones. Some find that amateuristic and unreliable but in fact it is quite understandable if you think about it for a moment. >From what currently has been shared by Rossi it’s very clear that the core principle of creating LENR his way is extremely simple compared to what the ITR community is doing. Rossi understands very well that it will be very hard for him to control the market with his technology. Secondly he, in the mean time, also knows that this technology is so new and not well understood that his progression is mainly based on trial and error, so sharing all details will compromise his reputation if there is lot of contradiction in his shared insights. An example of that can be noticed from the patent applications he has filed so far. Originally he indicated that nickel powder requires a catalyst, later he claims that nickel powder is the catalyst. This shows he’s still building up knowledge. I bet there will be completely new claims to follow that may contradict some of his earlier ones. Give Rossi a bit more credit on what he shares and what he doesn’t share. >From his angle it very understandable. On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 11:02 PM, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> wrote: > Russ George <russ.geo...@gmail.com> wrote: > > What part of my qualifying word about Rossi’s test “as openly” did you not >> understand. >> > > I understand perfectly, but I disagree. He has not been very open. He has > repeatedly withheld critical details. He has refused to answer questions, > or to allow qualified people to attend his demonstrations. Other > researchers have been more open than this. > > As I said, he has no obligation to be open. No one could object if he kept > everything secret. But, if you are going to be open, and you wish to > establish credibility, I think you should be more forthcoming than he has > been. Assuming the machine works as claimed, it would not be difficult to > do a definitive test with many qualified witnesses. Of course it might not > work on the day you try to do a test. In that case, you try again some > other day. > > I do not see the point of doing a demonstration if you do not wish to > establish credibility. I think you should either do a good job, or do > nothing. > > > >> I see no complaints about Rossi’s work coming from those who have a >> history of work at the lab bench as opposed to the keyboards. >> > > Many professional and academic scientists in this field have complained > about Rossi. Most of them have the same objections I do: the tests are > often sloppy and poorly documented. > > > >> I am all for an open society, let’s begin with the revelation of all >> computer code everywhere. >> > > Open source code is very popular these days. > > Rossi is engaged in commercial development, so obviously he cannot reveal > technical details before he files a patent application. However, there is > no need to reveal such details. IBM, Intel and many other companies > demonstrate products in a convincing fashion without revealing technical > details. Rossi could easily convince expert observers by doing good > calorimetry with a black-box device. Many people have urged him to do that, > but he refuses. > > McKubre speculates that Rossi does not want to establish credibility. He > wants there to be a margin of doubt about his work, to reduce competition. > Perhaps that is true. I wouldn't know, and I will not speculate about the > reasons. But I am sure this is deliberate. Rossi told me repeatedly that he > will not allow "tests" but only demonstrations. He told me he will do > nothing to improve the calorimetry. Many qualified people have recommended > improvements. He categorically refused to consider these suggestions. > Again, let me reaffirm that he has every right to do things his way, and to > refuse advice, but his credibility suffers because of it. > > I am talking about the calorimetry in his public demonstrations. I have no > knowledge of the calorimetry in his lab or in the 1-year test. > > - Jed > >
