Kyle Mcallister <kyle_mcallis...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> What people ought to understand, if (a BIG if) Rossi's machine really does > work, is that the radiation emission from it (whatever it is), is probably > going to be far less dangerous than the radionucleides emitted from burning > coal. > I agree. It is *probably* going to be less dangerous. The key word is "probably." Until we know that for a fact, and it has been confirmed by many experts in many independent test, I think it is foolhardy to scale up so much. Furthermore, you do not need to scale up in order to make rapid technical progress. If a program of intense R&D along with multiple safety checks were undertaken now in dozens of labs, or hundreds of labs, in a year or two we would be closer to solving the energy crisis with this machine than we will be with Rossi's present business strategy. Toyota took about 5 years to design the Prius and begin manufacturing it. When production began, the number of Priuses coming off the line probably exceeded the number of Rossi gadgets they will be able to make in a few years. Five years of R&D at several major industrial companies would be a reasonable length of time before we get the first commercial Rossi device. The time would not be wasted. There would be no overall delay. Projects with smaller devices could begin immediately in universities and National Labs. Furthermore -- here is the important thing from our point of view -- the day after Toyota or GE or some other big companies announce they have begun R&D to introduce a commercial Rossi device, every other industrial company on earth would be on notice that they better follow suit or go out of business. I think they would act. Robert Park and the New York Times might ignore these events, but that would not impede the R&D. It would make no difference at all. It may be that Rossi has contracted with experts to do safety testing. I have no knowledge of this, either way. - Jed
