Just a remark- calorimetry is a lab size measurement. When it is about kW we can speak heat balance measurement. Jed, when have you heard the first time from IH that the plant does not work- in which form was this expressed? We cannot substantiate...? Rossi cannot substantiate, produce heat at all?
My US friends have never herad any negative gossip till the trial, sorry. Possibly you are better informed. You are using generously "silly" or "at the intelligence level of a 6 years old"- however on what is based your idea that IH is more expert in calorinmetry than Rossi? Or the ERV? Peter On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 5:48 PM, Bob Higgins <rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com> wrote: > Nothing I have seen reported, has *proven* Rossi has no technology now > and never had any. Maybe it is not as good as Rossi claims. Maybe even > Rossi is deceiving himself. Maybe Rossi has "guilded the lilly" - has > deceptively over reported his results. I don't believe Focardi was > deceived - I think Focardi saw real energy creation - and that is what > leaves me with hope for this Rossi episode. So, I am NOT willing to say at > this point that I think Rossi has no LENR technology. Though the case of > "always net 0" is still possible. > > I do believe IH is honest and has NOT been able to produce any working > LENR technology using what Rossi has *disclosed* to them. This is a > completely different situation than Rossi having no technology. We know > Rossi is a difficult character from which to get technology transfer. Look > at his previous failed relationships. I suspect that he sold the license > agreement to IH for the large initial investment of $11.5M and then he just > threw them a few bones of information - this is not technology transfer. > > How should this be resolved? Rossi should now be joined at the hip > permanently with IH until he delivers what he promised them. Rossi is > claiming high COP, high power LENR technology. Let Rossi start from > scratch and teach every single detail to IH, and get IH to reproduce this > reactor in their lab. Their creation should be measured in IH's lab > together and agree on the performance. If it doesn't work reliably, then > Rossi needs to stay until the team of IH + Rossi invents a way to make it > reliable. > > It is only with this kind of enabling technology transfer that IH will be > able to move toward making a profit from the license Rossi sold them. > Rossi should not be allowed to escape his agreement until he cooperates and > delivers this kind of technology transfer. If he truly has no technology, > then he is stuck there until he develops it and transfers it, or until he > admits that he really has nothing (at which time IH is entitled to > damages). He will have to prove himself without the smoke and mirrors. > Once he has done this successfully, he should be entitled to the full terms > of the contract. > > The courts should not allow Rossi to behave as a scoundrel and escape his > contract. I don't see how anyone could believe Rossi is the victim in this > situation. Rossi should "man-up" and do the right thing. > > On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 8:11 AM, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> a.ashfield <a.ashfi...@verizon.net> wrote: >> >>> >> >>> "I refer to first-hand statements by I.H., especially in their press >>> release:" >>> >>> I thought you were more interested in facts than what people said. >> >> >> Obviously, I assume these people are reporting a fact. They are saying >> they evaluated the calorimetry, and they do not think it shows excess heat. >> I do not think they are lying, or mistaken. I think Rossi is wrong. I do >> not know whether he is lying or mistaken, but I think he is wrong, just as >> he has been wrong so often in the past. >> >> >> Seems that facts are thin on the ground right now. >>> >> >> Not a bit. They are certain of their conclusion. >> >> >> Either of us could be right. >> >> >> But, based on the track records of Rossi and I.H., it is much more likely >> I.H. is right. That's my point. >> >> >> The point is we don't know yet. >>> >> >> We know what both sides said, and I know which side usually does a better >> job. When an incompetent person with a track record of making idiotic >> mistakes argues with experts, usually the incompetent person is wrong. >> >> - Jed >> >> > -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
