You didn't look good enough. I have a PhD in Physics. My original field of expertise was astrophysics and in particular gravitational waves. Half of my dissertation was on astrophysics of neutron stars (so I know 1 or 2 things about nuclear reactions) and the other was on improving signal detection of gravitational waves detectors. I come up with a new way of using resonant bars to increase signal to noise ratio. This second part of my dissertation was mostly engineering.
I have taught physics at the college level (a lot of my students were engineers) , won NASA grants to send stratospheric payload (again mostly engineering problems) and continued to work on data analysis for the last 25 years. I eventually switched field and went to neuroscience. I'm a researcher at Northwestern but I work in the modelling and data analysis of EEG that is an imminently physics and engineering problem. I have a patent pending invention that is based on Phase Locked Loop that again is an engineering problem. I'm writing papers on applying thermodynamics principles to neuroscience. I'm also launching my own startup in the field of neurostimulation. So I may not have experience with industrial engineering but as you see I have plenty of qualification to evaluate some basic physics and engineering issues. In fact, many of the problems with Rossi statements can be evaluated from an introductory physics point of view, no extensive experience in any particular field is necessary. I resisted to use my qualification to respond to your question simply because I really resent when people use their so called experience to win an argument on the internet without addressing the substance of the argument raised. It is really bad form. Giovanni On Sun, Aug 14, 2016 at 5:57 PM, a.ashfield <a.ashfi...@verizon.net> wrote: > The only Giovanni Santostasi I saw on Google was an associate > neuroscientist at Northwestern University working on sleep disorders. If > that's you, you appear to have no relevant experience regarding the 1 MW > plant. > > Knowing you disbelieve anything I write, here is a published footnote at > the end of my paper on Cleaning up the Nuclear Waste at Hanford. I will > send you a photocopy of the last page that shows it if you send me your > email address. > > "Footnote > Adrian Ashfield is collaborating with Larry Penberthy in this project. He > previously headed engineering for Canning Town Glass in the U.K. Domglas > in Canada. Anchor Hocking and Wheaton Industries in the U.S. before > starting Ashfield Associates in 1981." > > > > On 8/14/2016 4:31 PM, Giovanni Santostasi wrote: > > A link to a CV or linkedin takes a second. Not acceptable answer that you > did this on the past. > You are using your claim of experience right now. > What is your real name? > It is you that is using arguments from authority. Mine stand on their own. > And as I said, you can google my name and see what is my experience in > science and technology. I'm 100 times more transparent than you are. > > Giovanni > > > > On Sun, Aug 14, 2016 at 4:28 PM, a.ashfield <a.ashfi...@verizon.net> > wrote: > >> I have already done so on this blog in the past. Please answer the >> question. >> >> >> >> On 8/14/2016 4:20 PM, Giovanni Santostasi wrote: >> >> Besides what I have said about using "argument from authority" as a way >> to win a debate, can you please give us a link to your CV a.ashfield? >> Can you back up your claims to have such expertise? >> Thanks, >> Giovanni >> >> >> >> >> On Sun, Aug 14, 2016 at 4:10 PM, Giovanni Santostasi < >> gsantost...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> A.ashfield: >>> >>> "Ad hominem" attacks. To quote a famous immortal scene from the >>> "Princess Bride": "You keep using that word. I don't think it means what >>> you think it means". >>> >>> I didn't attack anybody at hominem. I didn't put down Penon not to have >>> a PhD. >>> I simply stated that Rossi saying he has a Doctorate is not true and >>> that is at least sloppy and probably misleading. >>> >>> It doesn't reflect negatively on me at all. >>> >>> So let me reflect this back at you given you don't understand what ad >>> hominem attack is and instead you are using your supposed experience to >>> make an argument (and trying to disqualify my arguments too as a >>> consequence) and therefore committing another known fallacy , i. e. >>> "argument from authority". >>> >>> Giovanni >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Sun, Aug 14, 2016 at 3:52 PM, a.ashfield <a.ashfi...@verizon.net> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Giovanni, >>>> Your string of ad hominem attacks do nothing to clarify the issues and >>>> reflect badly on you. >>>> >>>> I find Dr. Levi's 18 hour test of an E-Cat in 2011, without steam, >>>> finding a COP 15 -20kW peaking at 130 kW is good proof that the E-Cat >>>> produces considerable excess heat. As I've said, the performance of the 1 >>>> MW plant has yet to be proven. >>>> >>>> Having headed engineering for large corporations and later consulting >>>> around the world, doing due diligence for organizations like GRI, EPRI, >>>> OECD and the World Bank, I have considerable experience in judging people >>>> and new technologies. >>>> What experience do you have? >>>> >>>> >>> >> >> > >
