Also Peter,
I resent that you attack Jed and dismiss him as a defender of IH. You call
him in a satirical way IHoptimist.
I don't think at all that people like Jed and others like me that despise
the way Rossi behaves as shrills of IH. IH is not a saint but it is clear
who is the worst scammer here. And there is nothing to be optimistic about
this. It is incredibly sad and depressing. But one has to accept reality
even when it is depressing. Rossi is an enemy of LENR not a friend.
I have a PhD in physics and I'm aware both of the promises but also the
possible pitfalls of this field. I was in my first year of college Physics
studies (in Bologna) when the discovery of Pons and Fleischman was
announced. I remember exactly the moment and place when it was announced in
radio and television. There was so much enthusiasm and excitement both at
the public level and among professors and students. I remember having long
discussions with a professor that thought he understood how it all worked.
And I remember even more clearly the disappointment and broken heart for
what followed within a year.
I stared to follow Rossi and ecats news several years ago because I thought
it was an amazing story of redemption both for LENR and himself as a
person.
I wished the best and for the field and Rossi because if LENR proves true
it would indeed the world for the better.
But then more I understood what was beyond Rossi's claims and actions more
I realized that he has absolutely nothing and it is obvious he is pulling
another fraud.
"Il lupo perde il pelo ma non il vizio" is a famous Italian saying ("The
wolf can lose his fur but never his vice"), meaning "old habits die hard".
Giovanni
On Sun, Aug 14, 2016 at 3:10 PM, Giovanni Santostasi <[email protected]>
wrote:
> A part of the energy. And that needs to be demonstrated by Rossi. It is
> not trivial. And Rossi didn't say that is the case, he said it was used in
> chemical reactions. That makes no sense.
>
> Giovanni
>
> On Sun, Aug 14, 2016 at 3:07 PM, Peter Gluck <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> But I have explained about the heat exchangers. Energy consumed and sent
>> underground. Do you exclude this simple possibility for apart of energy?
>> peter
>>
>> On Sun, Aug 14, 2016 at 9:59 PM, Giovanni Santostasi <
>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Also Peter can you explain the difference between use and consumed? What
>>> that means?
>>> Unless there was a black hole inside the building of the "customer"
>>> doesn't matter what you do with the energy eventually the energy needs to
>>> be somehow radiated or removed from the building to the outside environment
>>> in a way or another. It cannot be "consumed".
>>> It can maybe stored if this is what you mean but what kind of process
>>> can store all that energy in this efficient manner? If the "customer"
>>> invented such a storing process it would be even more valuable than a
>>> working ecat.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sun, Aug 14, 2016 at 2:50 PM, Giovanni Santostasi <
>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Peter,
>>>> It is not a straight answer at all.
>>>> Where is Rossi evidence that there was a real chemical plant having any
>>>> use of the energy at all?
>>>> Yours are just incredible speculations.
>>>>
>>>> Giovanni
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, Aug 14, 2016 at 2:37 PM, Peter Gluck <[email protected]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> when things go too far, they must be stopped, situation calmed down
>>>>>
>>>>> http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2016/08/aug-14-2016-lenr.html
>>>>> --
>>>>> Dr. Peter Gluck
>>>>> Cluj, Romania
>>>>> http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Dr. Peter Gluck
>> Cluj, Romania
>> http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
>>
>
>
