It is not so important, it seems that even far from Vancouver, Stanford or Miami, there are businessmen that cannot take the risk to be patho-skeptical. They know the first will be the king...
Question today is how to manage the boom, the competition between startups, to keep the Battle fair and arrange partnership. I feel concerned about the DC question, but it seems that like for my own personal opinion, it is no more a problem for some decisions makers. I urge anxious people to look for public and visible data, that are already interesting. The data is (in) the network. Time to arrange for step#2. This is no more free energy, it is valuable business opportunities. 2013/5/28 Peter Gluck <[email protected]> > This is not the first letter of Prof. Guglielmi to LENR researchers > I remember he wrote to Celani and Carpinteri too (can find the letters > but I think it is not worth. > Now he transforms a technical problem (have they checked really > everything, the most fantastic possible tricks of the malefic Rossi?) in > ethical problem -are they accomplices of Rossi in his criminal activity. > The Professors had to solve a well defined problem: does the HotCat give > EXCESS HEAT? Not more or less, just excess heat. And the answer is > clear Yes, all the still continuing orgies of nit-picking can change the > quantitative aspect a bit but not the answer. > Do not forget there exists a favorable context for he positive answer. > It seems Prof Guglielmi is the porta-voce or better said porta-lettere > of the desperate hyper-skeptics whose reputations are at play. > Peter > > > On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 12:02 PM, Akira Shirakawa < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Hello group, >> >> It appears that this email by prof. Guglielmi of the University of Bath >> is being circulated in several blogs. In short, the author wonders whether >> Levi et al. did with their E-Cat investigation a good job from an ethical >> point of view. I don't necessarily agree with the message, but I think it's >> brave of him to put his real name (and those of a few supporters) on this. >> History will tell whether he was right or not. >> >> http://cassandralegacy.**blogspot.com/2013/05/ethics-**of-e-cat.html<http://cassandralegacy.blogspot.com/2013/05/ethics-of-e-cat.html> >> http://news.newenergytimes.**net/2013/05/27/scientific-** >> ethics-of-e-cat-promoters-**questioned/<http://news.newenergytimes.net/2013/05/27/scientific-ethics-of-e-cat-promoters-questioned/> >> http://ecatnews.com/?p=2545#**comment-50191<http://ecatnews.com/?p=2545#comment-50191> >> http://wavewatching.net/**fringe/the-hot-cat-report/#**comment-5641<http://wavewatching.net/fringe/the-hot-cat-report/#comment-5641> >> http://fusionefredda.**wordpress.com/2013/05/24/**vettore/#comment-21110<http://fusionefredda.wordpress.com/2013/05/24/vettore/#comment-21110>(original) >> >> Date: Mon, 27 May 2013 11:58:24 +0100 >>> To: Giuseppe Levi, Torbjörn Hartman, Bo Höistad, Roland Pettersson, Lars >>> Tegnér, Hanno Essén >>> From: Alessio Guglielmi >>> Subject: Ethics of your recent work with Mr Rossi >>> Cc: Ugo Bardi, Dario Braga, Sylvie Coyaud, Camillo Franchini, Giancarlo >>> Ruocco >>> >>> Dear Doctors Levi, Foschi, Hartman, Höistad, Pettersson, Tegnér and >>> Essén, >>> >>> I have read your recent manuscript `Indication of anomalous heat energy >>> production in a reactor device containing hydrogen loaded nickel powder´ on >>> arXiv and I am very perplexed. >>> >>> You are aware that several alleged technical mistakes have been pointed >>> out, such as omitting control on DC current input (which has been >>> acknowledged by Prof. Essén in a recent interview) and assuming that the >>> output heat is released by a perfect black body (this assumption is >>> contested by Prof. Gianni Comoretto, for example). The picture that >>> emerges, and I am sorry if this sounds offensive, is that some crucial >>> measures have not been taken seriously enough on a discovery that, if >>> genuine, would alter the history of mankind. >>> >>> However, I have an issue that appears to me even more important, because >>> it concerns the very essence of your continued activities on Rossi’s >>> device. Our job as researchers is to advance knowledge, and to do so >>> whatever we investigate must be reproducible by other researchers, so that >>> the knowledge we generate becomes established and we can move forward. This >>> seems at odds with your behaviour. You went to the workshop of a private >>> individual who claims to be solving half of mankind’s problems, and >>> performed measures on a device that you could not fully control and that is >>> not available to other researchers. Therefore, your manuscript does not >>> contain any reproducible experience. So, how does it advance knowledge? >>> What do we learn? >>> >>> This brings me to asking another natural question: who will profit from >>> the release of your manuscript? You do realise that Mr Rossi sells >>> distribution licences and that he needs to convince customers to order some >>> of his plants. There is no doubt that your manuscript will help that >>> market, but is this something that academics should do? Is our job to help >>> a private sell his stuff in the absence of solid, reproducible evidence? >>> >>> In other words, I wonder whether you are adhering to the scientific >>> method and I wonder whether what you are doing is legitimate for academics. >>> Others questioned your technical ability, but I think that the ethical >>> questions that I am posing here come before, also because they are more >>> understandable by the layman. I trust that you appreciate my frankness, and >>> I hope that you can prove my concerns unjustified. >>> >>> I am forwarding this letter in copy to several persons who are following >>> this matter: Ugo Bardi (Professor of Chemistry, Univ. Florence, blogger), >>> Dario Braga (Pro-Vice-Chancellor for Research, University of Bologna), >>> Sylvie Coyaud (Scientific Journalist, Il Sole 24 Ore), Camillo Franchini >>> (blogger, former Supervisor of the CAMEN nuclear plant) and Giancarlo >>> Ruocco (Pro-Vice-Chancellor for Research, La Sapienza, Rome). Whoever >>> wishes to publish this letter is welcome to do so, of course, and I hope >>> that also the answer could be given public form. >>> >>> Could you please forward this letter to Dr Foschi, whose address I could >>> not find? >>> >>> Best regards, >>> >>> Alessio Guglielmi >>> University of Bath >>> http://alessio.guglielmi.name >>> >> >> Cheers, >> S.A. >> >> > > > -- > Dr. Peter Gluck > Cluj, Romania > http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com >
