Part of the problem is that the authors have not made themselves available to discuss the report and the questions that have come up. What are they doing? Are they answering questions? If not, why not? All authors (except one?) are on linkedin.com and I could email them--but I don't feel I should be the one. Surely someone on this list can get further clarification. Maybe they still have access to the lab and a empty reactor and can do a high temperature dummy run.
With the reactor over 1000C, it would be difficult for Rossi to swap out fuel or ash. At the end of the demo, he says he was with "the committee" when they opened the reactor and put the contents in a test tube for analysis. Rossi slipping a quantity of Ni62 into the ash after the demo seems hard to imagine--all eyes would be on the sample as it came out of the reactor. We all understand "chain of custody" from CSI shows. I find it hard to believe that the authors are just going back to their day-to-day lives, after signing off on a report suggesting a new energy source. Maybe they're shorting their energy stocks.. maybe they're writing a rebuttal.. but answers to a few questions from the peanut gallery would be nice. On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 1:33 PM, Jones Beene <[email protected]> wrote: > From: Jed Rothwell > > > > There is no potential financial motive here as far as I know. > > > > That is the major problem here, stated simply: you do not know.
