Horace Heffner <[email protected]> wrote: It is difficult to believe that Harrison, Patterson, or Shockley would put > on about a dozen demonstrations of their technology, repeatedly botch the > scientific aspects of the demonstrations, and refuse to acknowledge or fix > the problems. >
How hard? I suggest you read the history of the Shockley Transistor Corporation. The products were "too unpredictable" as one polite contemporary account put it. This was from a company staffed by 8 people who went on to illustrious careers, including Noyce and Moore. Shockley blamed them for his problems. The entire staff finally jumped ship and formed the Fairchild Semiconductor Corporation. They said he refused to acknowledge or fix problems. Actually, they said it less diplomatically than that. Or read an honest account of Edison's development of incandescent lights, such as "A Streak of Luck." If you spoke Japanese I would refer you to the video of Arata's demonstration in March 2008, at Arata Hall, Osaka National University. These people made Rossi look like smooth, polished professional in comparison. In point of fact, Rossi did not totally botch the scientific aspects of his demonstrations. Many scientists and engineers find these demonstrations convincing despite the fact that they are somewhat sloppy. You do not find them convincing but your reasons do not hold water, in my opinion. Your hypotheses suffer from many more scientific problems than Rossi's demonstrations do. > When Patterson could no longer reproduce his results he freely admitted > it. > No he did not. The last thing he told me is, "I can make more beads anytime I like." That was wishful thinking. > Does that put him in the same camp with Harrison, Patterson, and Shockley, > or in a different class? > As I said, those people make him look reasonable in comparison. And very successful. He has done irrefutable demonstrations of large-scale reactors which no other cold fusion researcher has ever been able to do. - Jed
