Yes, Eric. I think he is a man on a mission. I do not say your two conclusions are wrong. I think there are many more conclusions and to select is hard or impossible. Yes, if we limit the field to engineering than they are fewer. Both yours are possibly thoughts created by an entrepreneur and all psychological.
The assumption that Rossi's behavior is rational is not an axiom I accept. I hope he has the COP > 3. That would be good for us all. Unfortunately I see very little light in the tunnel otherwise. Maybe my fellow country man Holmlid has a better solution. Problem is that he is in the academical world - good from many reasons other than speed. I think there is no reason to throw Rossi under the bus. There are details (that is amazing to me) that indicates he has something. They are not worth speculating about but I am sure you have seen a few yourself. Let us wait and see if Rossi is such a darn good scam artist than he can sell his story to Hollywood (entrepreneurial thinking and still come out ahead. The LENR community is in no hurry (waited over 25 years) so they can throw him under the next bus when he is in Hollywood Best Regards , Lennart Thornros lenn...@thornros.com +1 916 436 1899 Whatever you vividly imagine, ardently desire, sincerely believe and enthusiastically act upon, must inevitably come to pass. (PJM) On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 7:49 AM, Eric Walker <eric.wal...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 9:20 AM, Lennart Thornros <lenn...@thornros.com> > wrote: > > As it comes to if Rossi's claims are real or not. I do not know but much >> of his behavior tells me he is a real guy and as most inventors / >> entrepreneurs hard to deal with. They are by nature hardnosed and outside >> ghe box. > > > Consider this detail: from what is now publicly available about how the > 1MW test has proceeded since early on, Rossi has not made an effort to > persuade IH of the truth of anything. He has proceeded above their > objections like a man on a mission, checking off the checkboxes in the > license agreement and perhaps trying to hew to the letter of it (although > not exactly, as we see with the switch to the four "tiger" modules). If we > are to assume rational behavior on some level, which is not guaranteed, one > of the following conclusions is hard to escape: > > 1. Rossi assumed that IH would pay up, whether or not IH believed the > 1MW test was persuasive; or > 2. Rossi assumed that IH would not pay, in which case Rossi would sue > and then either obtain the full amount through the judgment of the court, > or IH would settle for some lesser amount out of court. > > What is not listed in these possibilities is that Rossi would try to make > a convincing, rigorous case to IH or to the court that there was a LENR > reaction producing 1MW, with a COP of 6 (or 50). > > Eric > >
