10KW LENR demonstrator (new thread)

[Stubby]

Yes people are getting more desperate.

[parallel]

The piece linked by Kahuna http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/201 ... old-fusion is a good summary.

For the record (nth time) I don't consider the E-Cat has been proven to work beyond all doubt, but think it is highly likely that it does. This as opposed to the pathological skeptics here, who believe Tom's Law, who have decided with 100% certainty that it doesn't.

[Stubby]

The piece linked by Kahuna http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/201 ... old-fusion is a good summary.

For the record (nth time) I don't consider the E-Cat has been proven to work beyond all doubt, but think it is highly likely that it does. This as opposed to the pathological skeptics here, who believe Tom's Law, who have decided with 100% certainty that it doesn't.

See! there is the difference.

We do not consider the Polywell proven to work but really hope it does. It has shown promise. It continues to get funding from a very picky, tightwad agency through demonstrable progress. We acknowledge the possibility that might not work.

You on the other hand are convinced that it is highly likely it does work. WHY? Where is the scientific basis for your belief? Pointing to that certificate makes you look very foolish.

[Betruger]

The piece linked by Kahuna http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/201 ... old-fusion is a good summary.

For the record (nth time) I don't consider the E-Cat has been proven to work beyond all doubt, but think it is highly likely that it does. This as opposed to the pathological skeptics here, who believe Tom's Law, who have decided with 100% certainty that it doesn't.

Nothing pathological in a negligible doubt that Rossi's word is dubious at this point.

[GIThruster]

Anyone who has studied mob psychology understands why the trolls here act the way they do and why parallel gets kicked around the way he does. It's got nothing to do with "being scientific". It's got to do with the need to find someone to blame, beat and abuse for any seemingly legit reason.

[ScottL]

Anyone who has studied mob psychology understands why the trolls here act the way they do and why parallel gets kicked around the way he does. It's got nothing to do with "being scientific". It's got to do with the need to find someone to blame, beat and abuse for any seemingly legit reason.

Instead of arguing any further, its best to summarize. Rossi says the only way to prove his reactor is to make it a commercial success. Parallel claims Rossi owes us nothing, but neither do we owe him our belief or faith. Until he provides, we'll continue arguing the science of the articles linked and the claims made, but we won't believe until he gives us something to believe in. There is no pathology there, we simply demand proof and/or an open view of the process (like Woodward provides with ME). Some people do good science, Rossi doesn't.

1MW Deadline has come and gone.
Home eCat's deadline coming up real soon
Hot Cat's - who cares, all has been delayed to 2013

I see a pattern forming here...

[GIThruster]

I don't think you're going to make an impartial, "scientific" judgement about Rossi while you're posting about what you've been promised. I've seen this emotional disappointment masquerading as critical thinking here at T-P on more than one occasion. You're acting like Rossi broke a personal, solemn vow to each of us and that's not true.

I'm not defending Rossi. The guy seems a snake to me. However, it is easy to see how he would have gotten the power input wrong without noting he can't use a standard measurement technique when the V and I are out of phase. Any real EE would have known, but he apparently did not.

And this is the thing: with groups like Rossi, EEStor and BLP. . .people pretend they're somehow entitled to the truth of these private technologies purely because they have an interest when this is not true. The owner of the technology, whether it is patented or still functioning as a trade secret, has reasons to keep what he can close to the vest. The owner dispenses knowledge sparingly and only to specific ends. Those ends naturally revolve around funding, so faulting them for this is stupid in the extreme.

In short, we are not entitled to the answers we want and our curiosity is not a license to bash people, be they the IP owners or their advocates. Stuff like this is as far from "scientific" as one can get. The worst of the whining is the "we've been waiting all these years" argument. Sounds like a small child having a tantrum over not being allowed to open his Christmas presents the night before.

[Carl White]

In my opinion, there's sufficient evidence that something unknown and unexpected is happening.

There's just not sufficient evidence that Rossi has anything. Yet. In fact, doubts keep being raised. Who knows, all we can do is wait to see.

There's no doubt that personal dislike for Rossi and the unconventional means by which he has been proceeding color peoples' opinions about the technology itself and push them more firmly into full-skeptic mode.

[tomclarke]

I don't think you're going to make an impartial, "scientific" judgement about Rossi while you're posting about what you've been promised. I've seen this emotional disappointment masquerading as critical thinking here at T-P on more than one occasion. You're acting like Rossi broke a personal, solemn vow to each of us and that's not true.

I'm not defending Rossi. The guy seems a snake to me. However, it is easy to see how he would have gotten the power input wrong without noting he can't use a standard measurement technique when the V and I are out of phase. Any real EE would have known, but he apparently did not.

And this is the thing: with groups like Rossi, EEStor and BLP. . .people pretend they're somehow entitled to the truth of these private technologies purely because they have an interest when this is not true. The owner of the technology, whether it is patented or still functioning as a trade secret, has reasons to keep what he can close to the vest. The owner dispenses knowledge sparingly and only to specific ends. Those ends naturally revolve around funding, so faulting them for this is stupid in the extreme.

In short, we are not entitled to the answers we want and our curiosity is not a license to bash people, be they the IP owners or their advocates. Stuff like this is as far from "scientific" as one can get. The worst of the whining is the "we've been waiting all these years" argument. Sounds like a small child having a tantrum over not being allowed to open his Christmas presents the night before.

You are right: one duff measurement is not conclusive.

The point about Rossi is that he has never had any non-duff measurements, or other validation. No reason ever for anyone to believe his claims. It somewhat revolting that so many people do so.

[ScottL]

And this is the thing: with groups like Rossi, EEStor and BLP. . .people pretend they're somehow entitled to the truth of these private technologies purely because they have an interest when this is not true. The owner of the technology, whether it is patented or still functioning as a trade secret, has reasons to keep what he can close to the vest. The owner dispenses knowledge sparingly and only to specific ends. Those ends naturally revolve around funding, so faulting them for this is stupid in the extreme.

I agree 100% with your statement, however; it works both ways. We do not owe Rossi or any of these groups our faith. Parallel seems to take extreme exception to our lack of faith in Rossi. He posts claims, we post rebuttals and he gets all in a tizzy about how we don't understand anything. Go ahead and go back to the beginning original thread, that's exactly what happened. The minute you criticize anything Rossi, he lumps you into the "pathological skeptics" category, but it sounds more like a pathological believers issue to me.

If being critical and providing alternative interpretations of an unscientific endeavor is being pathologically skeptical, then I am. Provide me with meaningful evidence or transparancy in your process so that myself and others can make adequate decisions on the likelihood, and I'll very likely change my position. Until that time, however; I remain woefully critical of this whole scenario.

[ladajo]

For those who may not follow every nuance of LENR activity, here is a pretty balanced summary of what has been happening over the last several months in WIRED:

http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/201 ... old-fusion

I think the article is fair in stating that there has been an acceleration of interest in LENR of late.

Nothing wrong with that. If Rossi (and others) have done anything, it is stir the pot. Which IMO is good.

[ladajo]

And this is the thing: with groups like Rossi, EEStor and BLP. . .people pretend they're somehow entitled to the truth of these private technologies purely because they have an interest when this is not true. The owner of the technology, whether it is patented or still functioning as a trade secret, has reasons to keep what he can close to the vest. The owner dispenses knowledge sparingly and only to specific ends. Those ends naturally revolve around funding, so faulting them for this is stupid in the extreme.

I agree 100% with your statement, however; it works both ways. We do not owe Rossi or any of these groups our faith. Parallel seems to take extreme exception to our lack of faith in Rossi. He posts claims, we post rebuttals and he gets all in a tizzy about how we don't understand anything. Go ahead and go back to the beginning original thread, that's exactly what happened. The minute you criticize anything Rossi, he lumps you into the "pathological skeptics" category, but it sounds more like a pathological believers issue to me.

If being critical and providing alternative interpretations of an unscientific endeavor is being pathologically skeptical, then I am. Provide me with meaningful evidence or transparancy in your process so that myself and others can make adequate decisions on the likelihood, and I'll very likely change my position. Until that time, however; I remain woefully critical of this whole scenario.

I also agree with you GIT. I am not attacking Ecat. I am attacking Rossi. I have said several times that Rossi is the issue, not the machine. The machine is what it is. It may be something or not. Although, based on evidence, not claims, it would seem so far not. All that said, Rossi is a liar. There is ample evidence for this. Personally, I do not dislike Rossi, he has done me no harm. He may think I have done him harm by calling out his inconsistencies and conflations, but I would assess that to be based in his probable refusal to accept responsibility for his actions. I would not trust Rossi with anything of value belonging to me, and folks that do so, should really either not, or very carefully think about the risk and subsequent consequences. If they determine the worst outcome is acceptable, then, as far as I am concerned, have at it.
Don't gamble unless you can survive losing or cannot survive without trying. Rossi is a huge risk, that currently ranks in my opinion as a most likely fail. In short, he pegs the full-o-shyte meter routinely.
Sometimes you got to ask yourself, "should I leave my child with a known child molester that continues to demonstrate questionable behaviour with children?"
Or the nicer version, "should I invest money with a convicted scammer, that continues to behave like a scammer?"

I do not know if Ecat works or not.

However, I do know that I have seen NOTHING to indicate that it really does work. As long as Rossi keeps shopping it around in public, and saying, "check out and buy my cool toy that works", I get to say in public, "Show me that it works, and then I will think about buying it". And, to date, Rossi has not really shown in public that it works. If it did work, it would be VERY simple to show that it does, in a public setting, with no great reveal about how it does it. And if Rossi did that, he would be the instantist richest writus ownus ticketus dude on the face of the planet. Instead, he continues with magic mirrors, half-assed "demos" under questionable circumstances, while some fairly shaky folks lead his license marketing efforts, and he continues to sell no real machines that anyone has seen or heard of. Oh, except the one that no one ever saw that went to the US Military (in Italy), after being "Certified" by a retired NATO Engineer Colonel, that just happened to be an old college buddy of Rossi. Of course we should not remind ourselves that the said "mythical" sold unit was constructed in the US at one of several factories, but magically appeared in Italy for the sale (to the US Military), and then after the successful sale sat in the same spot for months, and...that NATO does not make it own Colonels, and nor does NATO or Italy have any Nuclear Rockets for said NATO Engineer Colonel to do engineering on, and that the folks who have Nuclear Rockets do not have foreign miltary "Colonel Engineers" come and work on them, especially those from non-nuclear armed countries. (I wonder if that Ecat is still sitting in the corner of the empty garage behind the Rossi Brother's Bicycle shop in Bologna...been a while since we have seen any shop floor photos...)

Of course, the cheapest way to buy a ticket into Rossiworld, is to buy a license. Interestingly enough, the licenses to date are reportedly cheaper than a machine. That causes me concern to some degree, and does not really make sense. I am also fairly sure that the purchase of a machine or license would still leave me wanting as to whether it works or not for some time. That also causes me concern.

I can muster enough disposable cash to buy a license (at reported prices). But, I will not. E tu Parallel?

[Skipjack]

Instead of arguing any further, its best to summarize. Rossi says the only way to prove his reactor is to make it a commercial success. Parallel claims Rossi owes us nothing, but neither do we owe him our belief or faith. Until he provides, we'll continue arguing the science of the articles linked and the claims made, but we won't believe until he gives us something to believe in. There is no pathology there, we simply demand proof and/or an open view of the process (like Woodward provides with ME). Some people do good science, Rossi doesn't.

1MW Deadline has come and gone.
Home eCat's deadline coming up real soon
Hot Cat's - who cares, all has been delayed to 2013

Well said!

[GIThruster]

Given Rossi's funding just dried up, I think you should consider all "deadlines" null and void.

[ladajo]

In case anyone was still wondering to the intent of the SGS document:

http://www.ecatworldnews.com/?p=180

Please note that while unverified who the SGS Executive was that commented is at this time, it is still a strong indicator. And at a minimum means that ADMIN at ecatworldnews is risking his site over it if he is making shyte up.

My guess is that there will be some sort of press release by SGS and possibly even a revokation of the "voluntary" document as they (if true) are thinking along the lines that Rossi violated the agreement/terms.

<munches more popcorn...>