10KW LENR demonstrator (new thread)

[parallel]

Skipjack

Wait, Smith should have tried harder? I mean hello? He is offering 1 million USD of his OWN money and he should be trying harder?

You have a comprehension problem. No he is not. The whole point of my post was that Smith is no longer offering his money.

Further, his excuse about the NDA is bogus because he has never officially contacted DGT and therefore has never seen any NDA document from them.

You appear to be one of those who wouldn't believe the Hyperion worked even if you had one operating in your house.

[tomclarke]

How do we know what the NDA stops people from publishing?
Tom

Well we know it does not stop them from publishing their take on the test results. That is in the test guidelines and if the NDA contradicted that, someone would have screamed about it by now.

No - we do not know this. We have no information from a truly independent 3rd party who has seen the NDA (except maybe DS, if he does).

DS is starting to appear to be a bit disingenuous about now. In fact he appears to be doing what he predicted DGT would do. From what I understand, he has been a fair and upstanding guy in the past. Perhaps he will do a turnaround.

It is obvious that both he and DGT are in this mostly for the PR. They may both have assumed from the outset that they other would never pull the trigger.

Not obvious. It is on record that DS is a philanthropist. And he genuinely would want to invest in LENR if it was what is claimed. The fact he thinks this unlikley, given his info at the moment is only what one would expect, and indeed what everyone else thinks.

[tomclarke]

this quote is pretty ironic as Smith is a big AGW supporter and often cites the Majority of Climatologists’ support for it as proof of it being “settled science”(Not making a statement on AGW here, just Smith's inconsistency).

There is a consensus in climate science for AGW. There is no equivalent consensus amongst scientists that either Rossi's or Defkalion's devices will work (there isn't even a consensus for any kind of cold fusion or LENR - if anything it's rather the reverse).

No inconsistency on Smith's part.

Not my point at all. This was not about AGW (as I said), its about Smith appealing to majority opion in one case but not the other. Smith was only referring to the opinion of posters on the blog on which he was writting, not the broader acceptance of LENR in the scientific communitiy.

I see no irony in differentiating between consensus of internet site fans, and consensus of scientists?

[ScottL]

Preface: I have not been keeping up with the details across all the different sites:

It seems to me that DS used the resonable request by Defkalion to provide some legally binding documentation and sign an NDA prior to Defkalion jumping thru any hoops.

That DS back out with such a snide posting suggests that he was never honest about the offer in the first place.

What I have read by Defkalion requested an NDA which would allow final results to be posted on whatever site DS wanted. Seems reasonable to me. But DS then harped about "secrecy...". Well, If I had a process that was not yet patented, I might want a bit of secrecy too. But the results would have been publishable. Why does DS want more, other than as an excuse to back out?

Tick, tock, tick...

Noone has seen the NDA, so it's ridiculous in my opinion to speculate what it says. While I think DS' comments are rude, perhaps there are damning restrictions in the NDA that control what is published. DGT's claims and what the NDA say may or may not match, we'll have to wait and see the NDA. Until then, I think its safe to reserve judgement.

[parallel]

tomclarke,

No - we do not know this. We have no information from a truly independent 3rd party who has seen the NDA (except maybe DS, if he does).

You seem to have the same problem as Skipjack. Smith has never seen the NDA as he has never officially contacted DGT. So how can he have a problem with it? He has no idea what might be in it.

DGT have already stated the test protocol and results may/will be published.

[CKay]

You appear to be one of those who wouldn't believe the Hyperion worked even if you had one operating in your house.

And in ten years time, when Rossi is serving out the rest of his days behind bars, or has disappeared leaving a string of creditors on his wake, no doubt you'll still be making excuses for him?

[parallel]

CKay
Of course not. I base my view on facts not idle speculation like you & Skipjack.

[ladajo]

You seem to have the same problem as Skipjack. Smith has never seen the NDA as he has never officially contacted DGT. So how can he have a problem with it? He has no idea what might be in it.

Facts/Evidence?

Here is a fact for you to chew on, Rossi's latest claim is that his technicians were trained by National Instruments (for a week or more...), and implies a much deeper relationship, as part of his dealings with them.

National Instruments states that they were only in discussions with him about using their engineering tools, and that there is nothing more.

So who is telling the truth? My money is on NI.
I also do not hink we have heard the last of Dick Smith on Ecat.

I any event, DGT now has two days to publish testing protocols they repeatedly state they will post, and identify the testers (oh yeah, now they are saying they will not id anyone until after the "testing".).

Are they counting the test decription as protocols? Who knows?

Meanwhile, Rossi still babbles about factory construction, and has seemed to forgotten about the previsouly mentioned hundreds of Ecats he has already produced. Plus, still no photos of any production facilities of any kind. Hmmm. How many 1MW's did he sell? 14? 12? 2? 1? Moving target I guess. Of course, we have only seen photos of one. Oh yeah, it is the one that never shipped.

Remember folks, it is what one does, not what one says that really matters.

As The Rossiworld Turns. Snicker.

[Carl White]

I guess you guys enjoy squabbling and mudslinging? Why bother when we'll have results of some sort in a couple of months?

Please increase the signal to noise ratio in here.

[Skipjack]

Why bother when we'll have results of some sort in a couple of months?

Because some of us believe that these results will never show. We were supposed to have results months ago, as some seem to have forgotten. We were supposed to see universities do independent testing, we were supposed to see tests at the MIT, etc, etc.
Nothing ever materialized. Levi to this day has not released his results.
I am slowly loosing my patience with the protagonists of this sad play.

[KitemanSA]

Noone has seen the NDA, so it's ridiculous in my opinion to speculate what it says. While I think DS' comments are rude, perhaps there are damning restrictions in the NDA that control what is published. DGT's claims and what the NDA say may or may not match, we'll have to wait and see the NDA. Until then, I think its safe to reserve judgement.

However, Defkalion has stated that their NDA would not prevent publication of protocal or results. Seems fairly innocuous to me. Of course, I haven't seen it. But apparently neither has DS. So why the hysteria?

[Giorgio]

CKay
Of course not. I base my view on facts not idle speculation like you & Skipjack.

I am still waiting for you to come forward with facts on Rossi that are not coming from Rossi himself or from one of his followers.
Blind and unquestionable trust in one's word is generally never the best road to choose, and this is even more true with a person like Rossi that changes the story every couple of weeks.

Too bad real word work is keeping me out of the forum in this period, there is lot that could be said on recent (un)developments.

[Giorgio]

I guess you guys enjoy squabbling and mudslinging? Why bother when we'll have results of some sort in a couple of months?

These LENR results are like Fusion Reactors, release date is moving in time faster than time itself!

[stefanbanev]

likelihood that COP>1 is indeed regularly and routinely observed seems really high.

Evidence?

The EVIDENCES for "likelihood" is quite subjective so the publicly available information you may find on internet is the only source I have as well. There are plenty articles from LENR research plus multiple circumstantial-indirect evidences etc... From my point of view all these information does suggest that "likelihood that COP>1 is indeed regularly and routinely observed seems really high". I have no problem if someone considers this statement to be wrong but from my perspective such person demonstrates quite a leap of faith... (please note that it is just my subjective opinion)

[ladajo]

Rossi's explains (non)relationship with National Instruments:

http://newenergytimes.com/v2/sr/RossiEC ... p-Over.jpg

Of course, he does not really address what National Instruments said. In fact, he completely misrepresents the situation to his percieved advantage.
I am curious how "discussions" translates to "Weeks of training". I speak Italian. It is beyond weak. Like his, "ooops, did I say gone? I meant sold, not gone..." line of crap.

Rossi challenges honest skepticism. I want to retain a belief that he deserves a chance to actually demonstrate. But man-o-man, he just keeps trying to talk his way out of benefit of the doubt.