parallel wrote:The real problem is that the experiment should have been carried out by a reliable group, like the MIT group who fudged the results to hide the anomalous heat when they tried to replicate Fleischmann and Pons. I believe Dr. Mallove resigned in protest at the time.
See http://www.infinite-energy.com/images/p ... report.pdf
We must have a reliable group to protect the science that academics have taught for the last 22 years and most importantly, the huge amount of grant money flowing to hot fusion research. There are whole government departments like DOE that simply can't be shown to be wrong. Heads might roll...Nah that would never happen.
Likely you haven't understood because of my bad English.
Before worrying how another's people would spend another's money, may you would worry on that when Mr. Rossi at last will learn to measure the heat correctly.
And only then why he has not his piece of fusion financing cake.
It is not a question of misunderstaning you. DOE simply would not provide any money until after the work was done. It they then got involved, they would want a slice of the pie. Rossi is doing it his way.
DOE's letter quoted on Vortex.
This is in response to your e-mail message to Secretary Chu dated September
13, 2011 in which you asked to know where the Department of Energy stands on
“cold fusion.”
In 1989, a review panel that had been charged by the Department concluded
that reports of the experimental results of excess heat from calorimetric
cells did not present convincing evidence that useful sources of energy will
result from the phenomena attributed to “cold fusion.” To quote the panel,
“Hence, we recommend against the establishment of special programs or
research centers to develop cold fusion.”
In 2004, the Department organized a second review of the field and that
review reached essentially the same conclusion as the 1989 review. The
Department’s Office of Sciences does not provide any funding support for
“cold fusion” research.
Are you kidding? It is a profound example of DOE "openmindness" ;o) Only one argument is objective - it is money; it's a way more objective then any "scientific" opinions; the academia opinions do may have value for investing in R&D with uncertain outcome once only "opinions" are available to make a bet. In Rossi case the "scientific" opinions are totally useless once the investor has the device to run a colorimetry test. No surprise such "uselessness" irritates these guys so badly...
Ok, maybe he should have said "competent calorimetry would also be a good indicator"!
There was nothing known to be wrong with the calorimetry. The argument seems to have been either the thermometer was touching the casing (foreigners are all idiots) or "just because Levi claimed it doesn't prove a thing."
Did they zero their insturment? Did they check temperatures with the unit OFF to give a baseline? If not, you have no idea where the energy is coming from.
parallel wrote:did not present convincing evidence that useful sources of energy will result from the phenomena attributed to “cold fusion.
Clear enough?
As you know DOE wrote that quote. It shows they are closed minded about the whole area of LENR. DOE was instrumental in stopping others getting money for research and persuading the US Patent Office not to allow patents in the area. They have a lot to answer for. Several of the people were involved in fudging the MIT replication results in order to falsely make their case.
If you don't believe me follow the link I provided earlier. http://www.infinite-energy.com/images/p ... report.pdf
I would advise you not to worry on LERN-Cold Fusion. Certainly, if you are not involved yourself in that fraud.
AS phenomenon does not exist and people attempting to develop that as a rule are not trained enough.
Joseph Chikva wrote:
AS phenomenon does not exist and people attempting to develop that as a rule are not trained enough.
"The CF phenomenon does exist and people denying it are note well trained."
We have two mutually exclusive statements, frankly, no need to argue which one is correct; CF device is claimed to exist as an operational device with performance way beyond of breakeven so, it is very simple to test, only total idiot may invest $ in "existing machinery" without testing it therefore, it is a win-win scenario - if it works everybody wins, if it's a scam then stupids loose money - wealth moves along IQ gradient to be managed more effectively.
Joseph Chikva wrote:
AS phenomenon does not exist and people attempting to develop that as a rule are not trained enough.
"The CF phenomenon does exist and people denying it are note well trained."
We have two mutually exclusive statements, frankly, no need to argue which one is correct; CF device is claimed to exist as an operational device with performance way beyond of breakeven so, it is very simple to test, only total idiot may invest $ in "existing machinery" without testing it therefore, it is a win-win scenario - if it works everybody wins, if it's a scam then stupids loose money - wealth moves along IQ gradient to be managed more effectively.
In Rossi's case we can see only the device, input of which can be easily be measured by voltmeter and amperemeter but output is unknown till now. That should be enough.
Where is evidence of phenomenon?
Conjurer also may use some device. But in conjurer’s case all except only very little children know that this is a fraud.
Idiots or not idiot are the people who believe to Rossi, that is from another song. And less interesting for me.
Chikva,
I don't know why you suggest Rossi is a scam artist. After Rossi had stated on his blog he had financial problems (presumably from Defkalian) this from pesn.com:
A previous version of this story was composed, and emailed to Andrea Rossi for his review. In particular, we asked if we might post a link where people could donate if they wanted. He responded by saying, "No, I absolutely do not want people to spend money. Do not worry, I have the money to finish the work. We do not have serious financial problems and I have all the finance necessary to do what I have to do."
Puzzled, we sent an email back, citing his September 16 blog post (above). He wrote back: "I have sold my house, now I have the money to finish the plant."
This does not sound like someone trying to con people out of their money to me.
Edit added. You may not be convinced by the evidence so far, but the fact is Rossi's customer in the US will not pay him unless the 1 MW plant performs to specification. It is reported that this company is large and extremely competent. They have already checked out individual E-Cats in Bologna and you can be certain they will measure the output of the 1 MW plant very carefully, over a month, before paying him.
AR> "I have sold my house, now I have the money to finish the plant."
Wow! I really wish this guy to succeed; the bunch of complaining looking for excuses losers from academia must hate this type of people. Even if he is delusional he deserves the respect.
parallel wrote:Chikva,
I don't know why you suggest Rossi is a scam artist. After Rossi had stated on his blog he had financial problems (presumably from Defkalian) this from pesn.com:
A previous version of this story was composed, and emailed to Andrea Rossi for his review. In particular, we asked if we might post a link where people could donate if they wanted. He responded by saying, "No, I absolutely do not want people to spend money. Do not worry, I have the money to finish the work. We do not have serious financial problems and I have all the finance necessary to do what I have to do."
Puzzled, we sent an email back, citing his September 16 blog post (above). He wrote back: "I have sold my house, now I have the money to finish the plant."
This does not sound like someone trying to con people out of their money to me.
Edit added. You may not be convinced by the evidence so far, but the fact is Rossi's customer in the US will not pay him unless the 1 MW plant performs to specification. It is reported that this company is large and extremely competent. They have already checked out individual E-Cats in Bologna and you can be certain they will measure the output of the 1 MW plant very carefully, over a month, before paying him.
I can not and also have not any interest to make audit of his property.
But his demo for gentleman, whose name I forgot, did not prove his claim on producing 5kW.
If you ask me "why?" that was discussed 1000 times. Do you want 1001st?
Parallel, you continue to preach about Rossi and his trustworthyness.
However, his track record to date is demonstrated (and convicted) shaky. He is making extraordinary claims that by definition require extraordinary proof. So far he has failed to provide even basic proof. His demos are frought with concerns, well discussed across the globe. Just because folks approach something with scepticism and critical thinking does not mean that they are out to sink it. And, again, as many others have asked, why can't and doesn't Rossi do a credible high school (goodness, middleschool even) level calorimetric single phase experiment with adequate controls that my twelve year old could do in the kitchen?
Why does he insist on complicating and obfuscating the tests? Why all the theatrics? Then when questioned, he reverts to exacerbated hand waving perceived persecution based behaviors? Rossi may well be onto marketing something useful, but he certainly does not understand what he is doing with the science aspect, as demonstrated many times.
I remain unconvinced, but not unconvincable. My bet-o-meter tells me currently not to take the bet. We shall see.
I still do not understand your point in all this. I resist to believe you are seeking religous converts to Rossi'ism, although that does seem to be the root theme in your argument methodology. What are you seeking?