10KW LENR demonstrator (new thread)

ScottL · Post by **ScottL** » Fri Sep 07, 2012 9:56 pm

seedload wrote:
ScottL wrote:We're about 2 months away (end of October) from settling this whole thread once and for all. If he's selling to the masses at the end October, we have an oppertunity to see if his claims are true, and if he isn't, we know he was a fraud all along. It's 2 months, I think we can make....
We were 2 months away 12 months ago. In another 12 months we will still be 2 months away.

"Settled"? Never.

Sorry should've specified more clearly, Parallel's claim of Rossi's claim. Parallel was willing to bet money that Rossi would be churning these things out by October, so if he isn't, we can call Parallel on his utter lack of knowledge. I've made it no secret I think Rossi is a fraud and the Pro-Rossi bots around here deserve a good smack on the back of the head so, just counting down the time until I can say "told you so." He can call me childish for this behavior, because I am being childish and the smug feels so good.

parallel · Post by **parallel** » Sat Sep 08, 2012 3:20 am

tomclarke, you and several others have not been attending and seem curiously naive about the time it takes from discovery/idea, to the design of a commercial unit, then get it certified for use and then manufacture it. The certification part of it is completely out of Rossi's hands and without an existing protocol it could take quite some time. Some at Vortex have suggested the test time should be more than one year to be safe.

Rossi originally hoped to have the domestic unit certified and ready for manufacture by the end of this year. Some months ago he stated it would not be until sometime in 2013 As of a couple of weeks ago he said he was still waiting for certification. There is some hope of outsiders being allowed to visit a 1 mW plant before that but nothing definite.

All Rossi has said about the meeting this weekend is that he will provide some evidence of preliminary third party tests but the official report will come from some university conducting a more thorough test in October. I expect there will be some more pretty pictures or a video.

Logically the 1 MW plant design should be replaced by the hot cat but this is only at a very preliminary design stage. I have no more idea about when the domestic e-cats will be available than you do. Sometime in 2013 is the stated date. Make of it what you will.

It looks like the design has evolved more quickly than I, at least, expected. The early units were not stable and the size of the reactor has been changed several times. It seems likely the stability problem has now been overcome, probably by an improved control system. Even Rossi was apparently surprised that he could get a high temperature version to work so soon. It is obvious to any engineer that the high temperature version is much more valuable as an industrial heat source and if he has the money he should drop the old design immediately.

I'm quite certain that some here would have criticized the Wright Bros for not coming up with a modern airliner right from the drawing board, but progress doesn't work like that. It took the press four years to even notice that they had flown.

Skipjack · Post by **Skipjack** » Sat Sep 08, 2012 4:22 am

Parallel, noone is critizising Rossi for not having a finished product to sell. People are critizising him for not having ANYTHING to show, not even a prototype that can be tested by the public. All we get is announcements and more announcements.

parallel · Post by **parallel** » Sat Sep 08, 2012 4:37 am

Skipjack,
You are quite wrong as usual. Rossi has shown at least three different designs. You didn't believe the test results. Too bad. He has no obligation to provide a prototype, test results, or anything else, to the public.

He has been good enough to provide updates of progress for those that are interested. If you don't like him doing that, don't read them and kindly quit repeating your doubts ad nauseam.

Joseph Chikva · Post by **Joseph Chikva** » Sat Sep 08, 2012 6:00 am

parallel wrote:tomclarke, you and several others have not been attending and seem curiously naive about the time it takes from discovery/idea, to the design of a commercial unit, then get it certified for use and then manufacture it. The certification part of it is completely out of Rossi's hands and without an existing protocol it could take quite some time. Some at Vortex have suggested the test time should be more than one year to be safe.

Rossi originally hoped to have the domestic unit certified and ready for manufacture by the end of this year.....

On previous page

parallel wrote:Rossi says he now has certification for industrial use, required to sell 1 MW plants to other customers.He has applied for and is waiting for UL certification for the domestic units.
Proof will only be accepted (by people like you) after verified sales of industrial or domestic items.

Joseph Chikva · Post by **Joseph Chikva** » Sat Sep 08, 2012 6:11 am

parallel wrote:He has no obligation to provide a prototype, test results, or anything else, to the public.

And how he is going obtain investment for development-commercialization and how then he is going to sell?
And how he is going to get a patent on his "discovery" if he does not intend to disclosure the process even for patent office of his country or USA or any other country as well?
And you bothered on back engineering before Rossi would not start production in bulk. How about back engineering of mythical US large military company? Have they any obligation not to do back engineering? Are you even a little aware with intellectual property law?
I see only your primitive attempts to make fool a lot of people. Are member of Rossi's promotional team?

tomclarke · Post by **tomclarke** » Sat Sep 08, 2012 10:45 am

parallel wrote:tomclarke, you and several others have not been attending and seem curiously naive about the time it takes from discovery/idea, to the design of a commercial unit, then get it certified for use and then manufacture it. The certification part of it is completely out of Rossi's hands and without an existing protocol it could take quite some time. Some at Vortex have suggested the test time should be more than one year to be safe.

Since the science claimed is not understood, I don't see how it could ever be certified without much fuller disclousre. we have something that claims to release energy from nuclear reactions: if so one would expect nasty radiation and nasty waste. Suppose Rossi has an item which tests to have none of this - then there is still no understanding WHY this is none, and therefore - if it works - every possibility of danger.

Rossi could only get certification if his device was non-nuclear in operation (and therefore did not work).

Rossi originally hoped to have the domestic unit certified and ready for manufacture by the end of this year. Some months ago he stated it would not be until sometime in 2013 As of a couple of weeks ago he said he was still waiting for certification.

It fits to gether nicely with all previous developments as way to entice people into parting with money before they have working product. Note that Rossi has already got large amounts of money from various idiots (licensees).

You have to admire the guy. He is taking from the rich, stupid and greedy. Not sure about giving to the poor, so far all he's promissed is expensive electric heaters.

There is some hope of outsiders being allowed to visit a 1 mW plant before that but nothing definite.

sounds about the right power level produced.

All Rossi has said about the meeting this weekend is that he will provide some evidence of preliminary third party tests but the official report will come from some university conducting a more thorough test in October. I expect there will be some more pretty pictures or a video.

So, do you expect the university report to be credible 3rd party investigation? Cos it sure does not look that way.

We have a problem, which is you think (I believe) the BLP "validations" are credible 3rd party investigations. When in reality they are a few maverick academics obseving BLP experiments and saying woo-hoo!

Logically the 1 MW plant design should be replaced by the hot cat but this is only at a very preliminary design stage. I have no more idea about when the domestic e-cats will be available than you do. Sometime in 2013 is the stated date. Make of it what you will.

It is not difficult to provide definitive tests of a heater that produced 5X more heat out than electricity goes in. Instead, Rossi keeps announcing new versions of his heater.

It looks like the design has evolved more quickly than I, at least, expected. The early units were not stable

read, not over-unity

and the size of the reactor has been changed several times.

When stuff does not work, you keep ontrying diferent things. Or at least you tell people you are doing that. It excuses the lack of even one thing being properly testable.

It seems likely the stability problem has now been overcome, probably by an improved control system. Even Rossi was apparently surprised that he could get a high temperature version to work so soon. It is obvious to any engineer that the high temperature version is much more valuable as an industrial heat source and if he has the money he should drop the old design immediately.

It is obvious to most engineers that Rossi has given no evience his extraordinary claims are true.

I'm quite certain that some here would have criticized the Wright Bros for not coming up with a modern airliner right from the drawing board, but progress doesn't work like that.

Just, if they had never been able to fly, they would not have been famous.

It took the press four years to even notice that they had flown.

But then they did not have highly publicised internet "demos". They had one test flight which was a failure, one test flight at which they refused to fly. The press remained unconvinced because the Wright Bros for a long time did not want to convince them.

You are at liberty to believe this is Rossi's position. it would explain his apparent incompetence.

parallel · Post by **parallel** » Sat Sep 08, 2012 1:35 pm

tomclarke,
You nearly got part of it right. The Wright Bros knew they could fly and found it annoying that others wouldn't believe them. For a long time they insisted that the Army should pay for a demonstration and the Army refused. I forget how long the stand off lasted. The unconfirmed story is that Rossi refused to do a demo for NASA unless they paid for it.

In the same way it looks like Rossi believes the E-Cat works and that he has demonstrated it well enough to make the point. You and others do not agree. You may be right but you don't have proof you are right and so should avoid your unwarranted certainty and libelous accusations of fraud.

Keep in mind he has no obligation to provide the public with anything. Presumably he is able to persuade the people who are investing in his project, who would be foolish not to run their own tests anyway..

We should know a bit more this w/e.

Joseph Chikva · Post by **Joseph Chikva** » Sat Sep 08, 2012 4:06 pm

parallel wrote:The Wright Bros knew they could fly and found it annoying that others wouldn't believe them.

They really could fly unlike Rossi.
And if army refused for the beginning airplanes the had rational reason for that. New does not always mean better and Wright Bros' first plane could fly only on several hundreds meters. So, absolutely useless for Army. Then only by development of technology planes gain attractive for Army consumer properties. Do not mix "how nice would be if I 'd be healthy and at the same time rich" with harsh reality. As harsh reality is that Rossi has nothing useful to offer.

GIThruster · Post by **GIThruster** » Sat Sep 08, 2012 4:53 pm

parallel wrote:The Wright Bros knew they could fly and found it annoying that others wouldn't believe them. For a long time they insisted that the Army should pay for a demonstration and the Army refused.

That's because they were already funding Langley, which all appraisals would have expected was the better choice. Langley has already had several successful flights with unmanned powered craft. It was when he scaled up and didn't build a stronger frame his designs began to fail.

Given Langley's background and that of the Weight brothers, it is not surprising at all that Langley got the funding. It's also noteworthy that Mann, working with Langley was able to rebuild a common engine of their day that only produced 8 HP into a water cooled radial with 52 HP. The powerplant was at this time one of the most significant limiting factors of early aircraft and again, it seemed that Langley's project was the better choice.

parallel · Post by **parallel** » Sat Sep 08, 2012 6:07 pm

Why do you say "which all appraisals (of the aerodrome) would have have expected was the better choice" (unless you always expect government to get it wrong)?

The wing structure was truly pathetic. Clearly he never carried out the most elementary load tests. There was no provision for lateral control, like wing warping or ailerons. It was designed to land on water and be rebuilt after every flight. The layout was wrong but that was maybe 20/20 hindsight. He never came up with the idea of a wind tunnel necessary to develop a good airfoil.

The only thing it contributed to aviation was a better engine and Langley had nothing to do with that. See http://www.flyingmachines.org/langaer.html

It reminds me of DoE helping build the $25 billion ITER and not being prepared to spend pocket change to check out Rossi's self financed E-Cat.

tomclarke · Post by **tomclarke** » Sat Sep 08, 2012 6:22 pm

parallel wrote:tomclarke,
You nearly got part of it right. The Wright Bros knew they could fly and found it annoying that others wouldn't believe them. For a long time they insisted that the Army should pay for a demonstration and the Army refused. I forget how long the stand off lasted. The unconfirmed story is that Rossi refused to do a demo for NASA unless they paid for it.

In the same way it looks like Rossi believes the E-Cat works and that he has demonstrated it well enough to make the point. You and others do not agree. You may be right but you don't have proof you are right and so should avoid your unwarranted certainty and libelous accusations of fraud.

Keep in mind he has no obligation to provide the public with anything. Presumably he is able to persuade the people who are investing in his project, who would be foolish not to run their own tests anyway..

We should know a bit more this w/e.

Parallel - flight was considered extraordinary because of difficulties with control. Clearly an engineering issue. But it was not in principle impossible, an dindeed birds provided an obvious example.

Rossi's device is extraordinary because it would do something contrary to laws of physics as we know them: nuclear reactions do not happen udner those conditions and if they did, would result in waste, radiation, etc.

Extraordinary claims should be disbelieved without extraordinary evidence. Rossi, as you say, has not even provided ordinary evidence. Hence strong lack of belief is the only rational response.

parallel · Post by **parallel** » Sat Sep 08, 2012 6:52 pm

e-catworld http://www.e-catworld.com/2012/09/zuric ... ce-thread/ write:

I can confirm that I have been sent the validation report that Andrea Rossi has been talking about, and will be discussing at the conference, and I will be free to publish that here on E-Cat World on September 9th.

KitemanSA · Post by **KitemanSA** » Sat Sep 08, 2012 7:28 pm

tomclarke wrote: Extraordinary claims should be disbelieved without extraordinary evidence.

The valid statement is the extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. This does NOT equate to "disbelieving"! merely to withholding credence. Wait and see. Tick, tock.

GIThruster · Post by **GIThruster** » Sat Sep 08, 2012 8:15 pm

Actually, Sagan's stipulation is incorrect no matter how you phrase it.

The point Tom is making is that warrant for belief in a LENR reaction is low, so it requires extraordinary evidence. (Sagan's formulation is lazy and inadequate when it comes to describing "extraordinary claims".) However, there are so many reasons to believe we don't understand what we claim to about the nature of nuclear reactions that I doubt we have so much reason to suspect all LENR. The folks at NASA seem to think there's something there and there is indeed compelling evidence of some sort of energetic reactions we can't explain. I would point again to the evidence from Rowan that seem to me compelling--though I would not say it demonstrates the hydrino process, could be any sort of reaction we don't yet understand.