Someone named Flemming Ravn posted this in the Forbes discussion. This is translated from Swedish by Google. I wish we had the original.
By the way, I hope that copying a message from the discussion is not a copyright violation! Kevin O'Malley should stop making excuses and apologize for that. QUOTE: Flemming Ravn So I asked Bo Höistad some questions, the reply was in Swedish and I have used google translate. Here’s a quick and short answers: 1) All input power was in full control. 2) No hidden energy source in the frame 3) This question is good that you set. In physics, we can not have faith or gut feeling for about a phenomenon occurs or not. We need to find out what actually exists through accurate measurements. As a nuclear physicist, I can directly say that, based on the well-known knowledge of core processes, the probability of nuclear transformations that cause heat production in the E-cat vanishingly small. Furthermore, if for some unknown reason yet to take place, they would leave traces, which has not been observed so far. We wanted to investigate whether Rossi’s alleged heat can be verified in an independent survey. The first result is that we have an indication that the heat actually occurs that can not be explained by any chemical process. How heat production is to remain obscure. The result is obviously very dramatic and absolutely must be further verified before any definitive statements can be made. We intend to do that in a next step. There is still much work left before we can determine if Rossi’s E-cat works. The results so far are interesting enough to continue that work. regards Bo Höistad UNQUOTE My comment: I do not think Dr. Hoistad has read enough of the cold fusion literature. I do not think he is justified in dismissing the nuclear hypothesis. - Jed