10KW LENR Demonstrator?

[raphael]

Rossi says he's waiting for patent approval before he reveals the critical details via which RossiFusion is achieved.

Isn't it a fact, however, that (in cases where a patent is ultimately issued) the inventor(s) are actually protected from the point at which their application is received by the patent office? From that perspective therefore, isn't the day that the patent is approved not the pivotal occasion Rossi's making it out to be?

Also, if (as has been alleged) Rossi, in his application, has insufficiently described said details, isn't he running a major risk? To wit, that a sufficient description of said details will first appear in the public domain and therefore not be patentable by anyone?

[raphael]

The smaller ECats look like they could have come out of a facility that has been tooled and jigged for mass production.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-qPlp3uMljjg/T ... /ECAT_.JPG

Mass production would not be undertaken if RossiFusion were a scam to fleece investor funds (or, government funds, or whatever).

Or, would it?

[chrismb]

Rossi says he's waiting for patent approval before he reveals the critical details via which RossiFusion is achieved.

Isn't it a fact, however, that (in cases where a patent is ultimately issued) the inventor(s) are actually protected from the point at which their application is received by the patent office? From that perspective therefore, isn't the day that the patent is approved not the pivotal occasion Rossi's making it out to be?

Also, if (as has been alleged) Rossi, in his application, has insufficiently described said details, isn't he running a major risk? To wit, that a sufficient description of said details will first appear in the public domain and therefore not be patentable by anyone?

Yes, patents have an effect from the date of original filing, providing they are subsequently granted. They can be 'modified' and re-filed within one year providing that, technically, there are no substantial changes. So, generally, your first filing should be a total brain dump and you delete from that for the application that gets published in one year's time.

And, yes, of course he is running a risk in not having a proper disclosure prior to commercialisation. Very very big risk. In fact, its bigger than that, because his patent is rubbish. It fails on 'enablement'. He's keeping too much a secret, and that's not how patents work. If he had done a proper filing then we'd know exactly how it works, at this point.

See my other thread dedicated to following his patents' misadventures.

[Kahuna]

Rossi says he's waiting for patent approval before he reveals the critical details via which RossiFusion is achieved.

Isn't it a fact, however, that (in cases where a patent is ultimately issued) the inventor(s) are actually protected from the point at which their application is received by the patent office? From that perspective therefore, isn't the day that the patent is approved not the pivotal occasion Rossi's making it out to be?

Also, if (as has been alleged) Rossi, in his application, has insufficiently described said details, isn't he running a major risk? To wit, that a sufficient description of said details will first appear in the public domain and therefore not be patentable by anyone?

Yes, patents have an effect from the date of original filing, providing they are subsequently granted. They can be 'modified' and re-filed within one year providing that, technically, there are no substantial changes. So, generally, your first filing should be a total brain dump and you delete from that for the application that gets published in one year's time.

And, yes, of course he is running a risk in not having a proper disclosure prior to commercialisation. Very very big risk. In fact, its bigger than that, because his patent is rubbish. It fails on 'enablement'. He's keeping too much a secret, and that's not how patents work. If he had done a proper filing then we'd know exactly how it works, at this point.

See my other thread dedicated to following his patents' misadventures.

Thanks for the analysis Chris. Some have spoken about a "secret" component to the patent, presumably for the catalyst, but I had never heard of a provision in patent law that allowed only partial disclosure. I assumed that if it wasn't disclosed fully, it could not be evaluated or protected. I'm sure you know about such things.

If Rossi really has something (and the sociology of it makes me think that maybe he does), he will be depending on trade secrets for protection as soon as he deploys a commercial product. My guess is that he will have some kind of customer agreement that precludes anyone but Rossi's firm opening the reactors. He has already said that they will swap the units every six months and refill them at the factory. Not great protection, but some.

[parallel]

Two more commentaries, including different & higher resolution photos, that some may find of interest. The first by Prof. Aleklett who has a room next to Professor Sven Kullander.

"As a researcher, you want an explanation for what is happening and right now there appears to be no suitable explanation with the knowledge we currently have in chemistry and physics. This means that it may be entirely new physics that must be explained or it may be a scam that must be explained and exposed."

http://aleklett.wordpress.com/2011/04/1 ... w-physics/

http://lenr.qumbu.com/fake_rossi_ecat_frames_v320.php

Has anyone done/seen an analysis of the Ni after it has been used in the reactor? All I have read is about the resultant copper.

[seedload]

Two more commentaries, including different & higher resolution photos, that some may find of interest. The first by Prof. Aleklett who has a room next to Professor Sven Kullander.

"As a researcher, you want an explanation for what is happening and right now there appears to be no suitable explanation with the knowledge we currently have in chemistry and physics. This means that it may be entirely new physics that must be explained or it may be a scam that must be explained and exposed."

http://aleklett.wordpress.com/2011/04/1 ... w-physics/

http://lenr.qumbu.com/fake_rossi_ecat_frames_v320.php

Has anyone done/seen an analysis of the Ni after it has been used in the reactor? All I have read is about the resultant copper.

Not analysis of the Ni after it has been used, but comments from Rossi himself claiming (1) that the Ni is enriched (presumably for Ni62 and Ni64) and (2) he has invented a way to do this cheaply and (3) the enrichment is not a big cost factor for the reactor.

http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.c ... 1#comments

I suppose that if he started with pure Ni62 and Ni64 and somehow jammed in a proton then he would get out stable copper (63 and 65).

Various miracles are left as an exercise for the reader.

[chrismb]

Why is this Prof. Aleklett able to declare "...it may be a scam.." without his throat being figuratively jumped down by several members here?

[parallel]

chrismb

The difference is that he gives both sides of the argument, without jumping in with both feet saying it is a scam and adding gratuitous insults.

Of course it is not yet proven beyond doubt, but I think it is more likely than not.

[Skipjack]

I think one possibility that has not been considered is inductive heating from below the table. If it was a scam, this could be a way to do it discretely. Did anybody care to look under the table? To busy checking all the stuff on the table, eh?
So the scam is not in the device, but in the table.... ahhhhh.
Just saying, one way of doing it.
I am not saying it is a scam. I want to believe it is not. I hope it is not, I really really do. But I am also an old, grumpy cynic, who does not believe much and anything anymore these days.
So I wait to be convinced, which I still am not.

[parallel]

seedload

Various miracles are left as an exercise for the reader.

I seems likely that standard particle physics will not be able to explain it.
It is probably time conventional nuclear physics was shaken up anyway.

See:http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/physics/pdf/0 ... 1253v1.pdf

And http://www.laputanlogic.com/articles/20 ... 36532.html

[chrismb]

chrismb

The difference is that he gives both sides of the argument, without jumping in with both feet saying it is a scam and adding gratuitous insults.

Of course it is not yet proven beyond doubt, but I think it is more likely than not.

I have offered no insults. And as for trying to get both sides of the argument, I asked Rossi directly on his blog how he could explain the generation of energy from Ni-62 [the absolute bottom of the binding energy curve] and he said he did not know and said the results should speak for themselves and theory was unimportant [or something to that effect]. I offered him documents on previous nickel-hydrogen anomalies, but he did not seem to want to know. So... you tell me if I've done what I can to get both sides of this one....

I'm still surprised that no-one hasn't yet drawn the link with BlakcLight power - both claim loads of energy from Ni and H, the only difference lies within the decrepid theorising they've both wheeled out.

[parallel]

Skipjack,

The only way something that obvious could be missed is if ALL the participants were idiots - which they were not.

[chrismb]

Skipjack,

The only way something that obvious could be missed is if ALL the participants were idiots - which they were not.

Never put down to willful intent that which you can put down to carelessness.

[chrismb]

Skipjack,

The only way something that obvious could be missed is if ALL the participants were idiots - which they were not.

It is obvious that the test should begin by a null test heating the apparatus before admitting the hydrogen. So by your argument, you've just said they were all idiots.

[Skipjack]

The only way something that obvious could be missed is if ALL the participants were idiots - which they were not.

You think that this has to be obvious?
I could probably put that into the table in a way that nobody notices. Since it wont heat the table surface that is made out of wood, or plastic and it wont feel hot to the touch, it could easily be missed.
Cables could be hidden in the table legs, or simply among the cables that are going away from the various measurement devices (I am assuming that people would only care about cables going INTO the "reactor" and not about cables going into the measurement devices, or coming out of them. In any case I see a lot of opportunity with this sort of setup.