On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 9:22 PM, Jed Rothwell <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Ahern told me he is sure that Rossi is getting some heat. He doubts the > extent of it, not the reality of it. > Right. But the extent of it is the point with respect to the feasibility of retail reactors. Here's what he wrote to Krivit: “Rossi has been clever enough to change the trick on each successive demo. Using a secret customer is a great way to allow him to fulfill his promise to demo the 1 MW unit in October. He then evaded conducting the demo transparently by saying that the customer demanded the demo conditions. The “customer’ signed off when Rossi gave him the wink and he shut things down without any measurements by anyone except the shill. “Occam’s Razor, on the other hand, says that 12 inconclusive demos in succession are not random. It is well planned and orchestrated. He has used the journalists like a team of puppets.” That doesn't sound like he considers a retail reactor very likely. > > Krivit is not a researcher. As far as I know he has no valid technical > reasons to doubt Rossi. He only points to "suspicious behavior" and to some > imaginary problems. > He published 200 pages of analysis from experts he consulted. They are full of technical reasons. "Imaginary" is only your characterization of the problems he points to. They are very real to him, and to many of his audience. Krivit started out as a cautious supporter, but changed his mind when he saw the pitiful steam Rossi tried to claim represented several kW of energy, and after extensive consultation. I don't agree with Krivit on other things, especially the Widom Larsen theory, but he does represent an example of a cold fusion advocate who is skeptical of Rossi. My guess is that if Rossi's ecat fizzles, as I expect it will, some time in the distant future, Krivit will take his place as the king of cold fusion. He will become the go-to guy whenever new claims appear, as one of the few cold fusion advocates not so gullible as to be taken in by Rossi. And your credibility on the subject will likely suffer for the absolute certainty you have voiced.
