Brad Lowe <[email protected]> wrote:
Thanks for the clarifications, Jed...
>
> I understand you're in a position to hear from insiders who have recently
> worked with Rossi's technology...
>
Well, insiders and Focardi, who said all of that on video, and Essen and
Kullander. I do not know anyone who has found a fault with their report.
They stand by it. I realize many people think they have found a fault with
E&K but I disagree.
Well, what are people saying??
>
You know what they are saying.
> Surely you agree that if a breakthrough as important as "energy
> independence" was found, more people would be talking specifics. ("I saw
> Rossi's ABC and it clearly did XYZ!")
>
They have been pretty specific. But what you say applies to any other cold
fusion experiment. At the NRL, the heat releases are tiny and it only works
~5% of the time, but from a scientific point of view it is just as
convincing and important as Rossi's results. The first fission reactor at
U. Chicago produced only a few watts as I recall, but it proved that a
gigantic release of energy was possible. It proved that just as much as it
would have if it had been 1 MW. The scale is irrelevant.
That is why Rossi's 1 MW reactor was such a waste of time. It would have
impressed investors and potential customers just as much at 10 kW or even
100 W. Scaling up to that improbable configuration was pointless.
My confidence level in Rossi has gone from 90% down to less than 5%.
>
I can't imagine what basis you have for such a calculation. Perhaps you
know something about him I do not.
It seems to me Rossi is in about the same place he was in 2011. The
probabilities cover a huge range, almost like a quantum effect. He may
never decohere. People like him often take their secrets to the grave.
(Assuming they actually have secrets.) He promised me he would not do that,
but you never know.
His business prospects are impossible to fathom. Perhaps a a third party
verification will be released in a few weeks, as he claims. I would not
rule that out! Nothing he say about his business can be trusted, and
nothing can be dismissed.
What is your confidence level that LENR can produce more than a few watts
> of energy today?
>
That question depends entirely on politics. We could have cold fusion
powered automobiles in five or 10 years if we *really* wanted them. Just
put lots of money and people on the job. F&P sustained a 101 W reaction for
158 days back in 1996, so obviously there must be a way to make this into a
practical source of energy. It was all but done!
We could do this, but given the irrational opposition, I think it is more
likely the research will be suppressed and forgotten.
It is impossible to predict a political outcome, or any other primate
behavior. It is the most complicated phenomenon in the known universe.
> What kinds of different decisions are you making with your insider
> knowledge of LENR?
>
I have no inside knowledge. Everything of importance that I learn, I
publish at LENR-CANR.org. I avoid groups such as CMNS because I do not wish
to hear any inside information. If I can't publish it, I don't want to hear
it. The only exception in this case was the presentation of the independent
testing of Rossi's gadget. I *thought* they would give me permission to
upload that, but no dice.
I have no influence and I can make no decisions that would influence the
course of events. Really, the only people who can make this happen are
multimillionaires and billionaires. I think there is no likelihood the DoE
or any other government agency will fund the research.
There are few researchers such as Dennis Cravens who might be able to break
the logjam and convince the world that cold fusion is real. Unfortunately,
Cravens insists on doing strange tests with things like his Model A Ford.
In my opinion, he will not convince anyone by that method. He needs to use
standard, top quality calorimeters and he needs to publish a conventional
paper in a journal or proceedings. He complains that he gets no support. I
tell him he reminds me of a rebellious 18-year-old kid who goes in for a
job interview with no tie and an attitude problem. The kid does not get the
job and he blames society instead of looking in the mirror.
As Martin Fleischmann said, "we are painfully conventional people." If you
want support from engineers, scientists and investors -- the audience at
LENR-CANR.org -- you have to do things their way, and meet their
expectations. I expect the Model A will torpedo any prospect of funding. I
hope I am wrong about that.
That's what I tell Dennis. He doesn't want to hear it. Like Rossi, he
insists on doing things his way, even if it means he will probably fail.
Mizuno is the same way sometimes. These people have enormous egos that get
in their way. They would rather lose everything and deprive the world of
their discovery than meet anyone halfway, or take anyone's advice.
- Jed
