The problem is that it is easy to come up with fraudulent methods that could have delivered the observed demo results. Add to which Rossi has had no end of opportunities to remove all doubt, at no extra cost in effort or materials, and without danger of loss of IP, but has chosen not to for reasons that I (and others) are unable to guess. This leads to the two hotly contested options:
1/ It's real, but Rossi is not able to see how bad the decisions he is making are, and is incapable of taking sensible advice. 2/ It's a very elaborate scam. I'm in camp 1, but would not be surprised if outputs are much less than initially announced due to steam/water issues. But my belief is based mostly on multiple reports of similar results (though smaller output) by others. If it were just Rossi I would still be in camp 2. Rossi's failure in commercialisation of the biggest thing since the transistor is not totally unprecedented - the Wright brothers were almost as bad. But the fact that he is selling his house to finance a white elephant 1MW demo, when he would have had investors (with the expert help he so obviously needs) beating a path to his door to make him a billionaire if he simply did one good multi-day 10kW scale demo (with proper setup, record keeping and inspection), just leaves me amazed. It is so bad that at this point I am actually starting to feel he doesn't deserve success, I am glad that other groups seem to be closing in on similar results. On 8 November 2011 13:30, Berke Durak <berke.du...@gmail.com> wrote: > The important thing with the e-Cat is that there don't seem to be any good > faith > classical models left around to explain the effect. > > In other words, all the various demonstrations disprove the notion that > this is > just misunderstood classical physics. > > It is either an elaborate hoax, or this is the real stuff. > > Elaborating models with hot bricks in the reactor core etc. is mostly an > intellectual distraction, because a hot brick model is obviously not a good > faith model. > > People can simulate all the hot brick/cement/iron slug/wet vapor models > they > want, but unless someone discovers something that can be there only if this > is a hoax, such models won't speak for the hoax hypothesis. > -- > Berke Durak > >
