The Lugano test used Rossi's fuel and it did not produce commercial levels of excess heat. There is more to Rossi's reactor than just the fuel mix.
On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 4:41 PM, Bob Cook <[email protected]> wrote: > I do not consider it would be good faith to claim OWNERSHIP OF E-CAT IP > rather than licensee to use it to provide products in the license domain. > IH has had advertised substantial involvement with various entities in > China. > > The question in my mind is whether or not IH has kept Rossi’s trade > secrets of his fuel formula, secret? > > If IH has not maintained the secret, then I would question the suggestion > by Robert Lynn that they are in good faith adherence to the agreement. > Rossi raised this issue in his recent complaint. > > I can imagine that the Chinese entities involved, as well as the Chinese > Government, would want to know the fuel parameters that work, and IH, in > order to get them onboard, obliged, even though it did “secret sauce” was > not a listed IP associated with the agreement. > > Maybe the actual science of the LENR will remain as cloudy as ever. But > as has been suggested, reverse engineering with testing aimed at gaining > reasonable understanding involving accepted empirical physical constants, > and consistent with a reasonable extension of “current scientific > theories” or validated new ones, will happen more readily in China than > elsewhere, IMHO. > > Bob Cook > > > > *From:* Jones Beene <[email protected]> > *Sent:* Friday, April 08, 2016 7:25 AM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* RE: [Vo]:I.H. press release responding to Rossi > > > *From:* Robert Lynn > > Ridiculous to assert that IH have not acting in good faith - if the demo > worked they would be the happiest people in the world and would be on track > to make vast amounts of money even if they had to hand over 90million they > would be doing so with a big smile on their face. > > I am glad to see someone recognizing the obvious dynamic in this situation, > whereas the Rossi shills are lost in space, as usual. > > If the device really works, Rossi does not need IH – they are actually a > burden - and the solution is to cancel their license. The lawsuit itself > is an admission that either it does not work, or else the real scam is > that IH is in fact double-dealing with the Chinese. Rossi will not > present well to a jury, and has little chance of succeeding in a trial > unless there is evidence of such a ploy. > > Terry could be right that IH has a secretive plan to bypass Rossi and go > direct to the big market, which is China – but is there any proof of that? > There is no doubt that China needs this far more than anyone else, and > that an e-cat may never be viable in the USA. That could be the big picture > dynamic. > > It just gets curiouser and curiouser…. > > > >
