10KW LENR demonstrator (new thread)

[Giorgio]

Here is the NyTeknik report of the 1MW E-Cat test:

http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_m ... 303682.ece

Amazingly this report is even more useless than the one of the test of the 6th of OCtober.
I never though that could be possible, but Rossi surprised me once more.....

Am I missing something here or is this really all what they released?

[Giorgio]

Science is about results, not papers.

Almost correct, science is about independently repeatable results, not claimed results.

[Ivy Matt]

Why should Rossi care what the "real" scientists think? They already rejected his attempt to publish by peer review.

Apart from ArXiv.org, to how many journals did Rossi and Focardi submit their paper? How many papers have they submitted to any journal (apart from Rossi's blog) since mid-2010?

Many people think science is a slick looking report published in a peer-reviewed journal, this is not science, it is an abstraction of the real science that gets done in the laboratory or workshop. It is like comparing paper money to real wealth.

I don't think many skeptics of Rossi's claims would disagree with you on that point.

Rossi owes science, the establishment, absolutely nothing and the vitriol you observe against is because he is dangerous for them, he has nothing to lose.

I believe the vitriol is largely because Rossi claims to have some knowledge that, if true, would add greatly to science, yet he has withheld it. Scientists owe Rossi absolutely nothing at this point. Some have offered suggestions as to how he might conduct more convincing demonstrations, but he doesn't seem to take such suggestions very well.

If he has something they will come along in droves and pick over his work and write their reports in beautiful fonts and high-faluting words ... why he should bother to do that now?

No reason, except perhaps to take pity on his followers, who tend to get irritated when criticism of Rossi's methods disturbs their pleasant dreams of a second industrial revolution.

Science is about results, not papers.

I quite agree.

[Ivy Matt]

Regarding Rossi vs. EMC2, I don't recall anyone saying after one of the recent quarterly reports that this was the dawn of a new age, that oil was doomed, or that Dr. Nebel or Dr. Park deserved the Nobel prize. Even if EMC2 came out and said they'd achieved Q>1, I think most people here would say, "Good, now let's see the data, independent replication, etc."

[stefanbanev]

Science is about results, not papers.

Almost correct, science is about independently repeatable results, not claimed results.

Do you really think it's about science? Apparently it's a rhetorical question yet you make again and again this silly comments about science. Once people see that it may bring a fortune there is no place for science even if they continue to speak about science, it's simply a part of business...

[Giorgio]

Science is about results, not papers.

Almost correct, science is about independently repeatable results, not claimed results.

Do you really think it's about science? Apparently it's a rhetorical question yet you make again and again this silly comments about science. Once people see that it may bring a fortune there is no place for science even if they continue to speak about science, it's simply a part of business...

Maybe we are using different meaning for the word "rhetoric".
I have seen no rhetoric questions in icarus post, I have seen a clear statement and a statement I do not agree with.

If you think business will flow just because someone write on a piece of paper COP:2635/0 you have little grasp with reality of the business world.

And if than you think that is silly to ask for repeatable scientific evidences before claiming an amazing discovery than we should as well rise astrology to the status of official science and teach it in public universities.

[Am]

Almost correct, science is about independently repeatable results, not claimed results.

Do you really think it's about science? Apparently it's a rhetorical question yet you make again and again this silly comments about science. Once people see that it may bring a fortune there is no place for science even if they continue to speak about science, it's simply a part of business...

Maybe we are using different meaning for the word "rhetoric".
I have seen no rhetoric questions in icarus post, I have seen a clear statement and a statement I do not agree with.

If you think business will flow just because someone write on a piece of paper COP:2635/0 you have little grasp with reality of the business world.

And if than you think that is silly to ask for repeatable scientific evidences before claiming an amazing discovery than we should as well rise astrology to the status of official science and teach it in public universities.

Surely it depends on who wrote the number on the paper and the circumstances? I assume you're primarily academic and therefore have no knowledge about how business works?

[Giorgio]

Surely it depends on who wrote the number on the paper and the circumstances? I assume you're primarily academic and therefore have no knowledge about how business works?

No, I have never been in academic. I have been employed in several companies and different areas before setting up my own company in 2004.
I am used to deal with medium/large companies, and I can assure you that Rossi is not doing one thing right if he really wants serious businessmen to actually listen to his claims.

[polyill]

Let me indulge in the small details

* No input instrumentation description in the report, though there is a readied section for this.

* No Energy input data. A ridiculous intermediate COP of 2635:0 together with the report of onsite generators working continuously throughout the test

* Less than half of stated output. If the output less by more than 50% is OK, maybe also an input increased by some 60% is considered acceptable by the...

* Shady customer, who's rep. wasn't supposed to be caught on camera, but there he is

* The customer designation on the top of the first page - peculiar: It is typed that it will be confidential, along with the customers rep. title as Colonel-Engineer, then the colonel part is painted over with ball pen as if to represent the stated confidentiality but does not really conceal what it should.
(does anybody know what army has such rank? I am sure the IDF and the Russians do not have a rank like that, neither is there a spoken-language expression like Colonel-Engineer in languages I speak fluently)

[MSimon]

If 470kW output with no input power is verified;

Yep. that big red if again.

[Skipjack]

Yep. still waiting for Polywelll to deliver...

You can not compare Polywell and the Ecat for soo many reasons.

1. Nobody ever claimed that the Polywell worked with 100% likeliness. People said that it had a good chance of working and was worth investigating further.
That is a huge difference to saying "it works" as Rossie does about his device.

2. Polywell does not require new, undiscovered physics to work, or contradicts known physics. Rossi's device does require new physics.

3. There is a valid theory on how Polywell could work. There is no known theory about how Rossis device could work and Rossi does not present one. He also does not let scientists look at his machine so they can present one. This means that he is automatically and understandably subject to a lot more scrutiny.

4. If Rossi presented a theory on how the Ecat works and scientists could take that apart and check it out and if he told everyone how it works, so people can independently reproduce and verify it, then he could maybe compared to the Polywell. None of that has happened.
His device is still a black box and he might just as well claim that it is powered by magic...

Shady customer, who's rep. wasn't supposed to be caught on camera, but there he is

Sorry, but this is not fair. Calling someone who does not want to be named "shady" is a far stretch!
If I was to look into buying Rossis device, I would not want to be named either, especially prior to testing it, to avoid any bad press.

One also has to add that the report was admittedly a preliminary report handwritten within a very short time late that night. They will hopefully make a better one later. That is what Rossi admitted as well and he was asking for people to take that into consideration. So I will give him that, provided there will be a better report later.

[MSimon]

Remember EEstor? They had a factory. They had a customer. They had "proof" from a reputable lab.

We are still waiting for deliveries.

Yep. still waiting for Polywelll to deliver...

But Polywell was never promised as a sure thing. All Doc B wanted was the funds to complete the research. And Polywell posits no new physics. Just new engineering.

Apple, meet orange.

[MSimon]

It gets more difficult to explain away 470kW.

Yes it does. If the number was independently verified.

[MSimon]

I suppose you haven't been around here long enough to know the full polywell story ... it is not as sweet smelling as you might be lead to believe.

Could you be more specific or give a link?

[MSimon]

Just like Polywell ... when did anyone ever ask for independent experiments verifying rick's(what was his name?) data (that is not in the public domain)?

Me. And I had several substantial offers at various times to do that. Unfortunately none of the deals closed. But that (deal closing) was not your question.