10KW LENR demonstrator (new thread)

GIThruster · Post by **GIThruster** » Sat Sep 15, 2012 5:38 am

Okay, so SGS issued a certificate on n on-certification?

I'm sorry but this is just a crazy mess and this time Rossi is not the one to blame. The certificate certifies something. SGS needs to say what this is. I had thought it was a safety certification of some sort--no reference to the thing working or not.

I think SGS is back-peddling because they issued a certificate on a device they don't know works. Pretty negligent IMHO.

tomclarke · Post by **tomclarke** » Sat Sep 15, 2012 10:52 am

GIThruster wrote:Okay, so SGS issued a certificate on n on-certification?

I'm sorry but this is just a crazy mess and this time Rossi is not the one to blame. The certificate certifies something. SGS needs to say what this is. I had thought it was a safety certification of some sort--no reference to the thing working or not.

I think SGS is back-peddling because they issued a certificate on a device they don't know works. Pretty negligent IMHO.

My understanding is that SGS issue certificates based on documentary manufacturer self-certification (what manufacturer says) and some sort of site inspection. The data thus is mostly manufacturer's statements, although there is some element of third party safety inspection. No performance validation.

Convenient for Rossi, he can gloss over this and it looks like they are certifying his device works.

I would say Rossi is 100% to blame.

Stubby · Post by **Stubby** » Sat Sep 15, 2012 12:27 pm

A SPECIAL FIELD INSPECTION is a one-time visit to inspect the machine for safety. I have them done to European laboratory machines as they arrive so they can be installed legally over here.

A SPECIAL FIELD INSPECTION is done when a manufacturer can't or won't bother with the 'complete' testing of a unit. Usually because it is too expensive for the number of machines sold in an area. 300-400 versus several thousand, even tens of thousands since the unit is destroyed in testing. A complete test certifies the manufacturing process.

At the heart of the matter, they check that components used are certified to the local standard like EU or CSA/UL and that electrical circuits are protected by fuses or CB. I have had to replace many circuit breakers and thermal overloads because of this.
A complete testing usually involves 'testing until destruction'. They use the machine until something fails.

Many companies offer this service in various industries. Intertek, SGS, NSF.
They certify that they looked at the components, wiring diagram and performed a HI-POT test (dielectric strength) which tests for leakage current.

NOTE TO SELF: Be sure that the tester is not about to zap you with 1200V as you make the final wired connection. It hurts!

Rossi's certificate is such a document. It does not mean it works but only that, electrically speaking, it should be safe when (i should say if) it operates.

SGS is not to blame. Rossi is. He took a document that says his machine is electrically safe and used it to say his machine is certified to work.

Complete BS from Rossi. His legitimacy is really screwed now.

paperburn1 · Post by **paperburn1** » Sat Sep 15, 2012 4:23 pm

rts! [/i100%
100% correct

Betruger · Post by **Betruger** » Sun Sep 16, 2012 7:00 am

GIThruster wrote: SGS needs to say what this is.

Read what Ladajo (and others?) said. Minus one point for Parallel's credibility too.. He did was he accuses others of - blind faith.

Not Rossi's fault? This is probably Rossi going nuts as usual with his inimitable social networking skills and clutching at straws after USGS blew him off along with the black box he rode in on. That, or... Rossi's too much of a dufus to understand what the SGS documentation says.

So again. Stupid or crazy or both?

parallel · Post by **parallel** » Sun Sep 16, 2012 12:50 pm

Interview with Aldo Proia, CEO of Prometeon srl, Italian Licensee for the E-Cat.

When asked whether he is sure of the E-Cat’s validity, he says that he has never had any doubts. He says that he has researched the technology thoroughly using qualified physicists and engineers who had access to information through confidential channels. Proia states:

We knew that the maximum COP apparatus – taken to extremes not be proposed because commercially unstable – was about 200, a tremendous value. This means that even if Rossi had missed a measure of energy by a factor of 2, there would be no particular problems to ensure the customer the COP 6 guaranteed, because essentially the E-Cat is a Ferrari that is made to walk like a turtle.

http://www.e-catworld.com/2012/09/new-i ... -licensee/

Yet another person who is closer to the E-Cat than his know-nothing critics here, who has presumably invested in it.

Stubby · Post by **Stubby** » Sun Sep 16, 2012 3:25 pm

Please stop, my sides are hurting.

Enginerd · Post by **Enginerd** » Sun Sep 16, 2012 4:27 pm

parallel wrote:Yet another person who is closer to the E-Cat than his know-nothing critics here, who has presumably invested in it.

HEARSAY EVIDENCE is the evidence of those who relate, not what they know themselves, but what they have heard from others. As a general rule, hearsay evidence of a fact is not admissible. If any fact is to be substantiated against a person, it ought to be proved in his presence by the testimony of a witness sworn or affirmed to speak the truth.

parallel · Post by **parallel** » Sun Sep 16, 2012 4:54 pm

Ah. The corollary of Tom's Law.
With any new device, all positive evidence should be ignored. Only negative evidence counts.

Betruger · Post by **Betruger** » Sun Sep 16, 2012 9:59 pm

parallel wrote:Interview with Aldo Proia, CEO of Prometeon srl, Italian Licensee for the E-Cat.

When asked whether he is sure of the E-Cat’s validity, he says that he has never had any doubts. He says that he has researched the technology thoroughly using qualified physicists and engineers who had access to information through confidential channels. Proia states:

We knew that the maximum COP apparatus – taken to extremes not be proposed because commercially unstable – was about 200, a tremendous value. This means that even if Rossi had missed a measure of energy by a factor of 2, there would be no particular problems to ensure the customer the COP 6 guaranteed, because essentially the E-Cat is a Ferrari that is made to walk like a turtle.
http://www.e-catworld.com/2012/09/new-i ... -licensee/

Yet another person who is closer to the E-Cat than his know-nothing critics here, who has presumably invested in it.

Which one of us insisted the SGS doc is something it's not?

parallel · Post by **parallel** » Sun Sep 16, 2012 10:55 pm

Which one of us insisted the SGS doc is something it's not?

Not me. Did you?
You have not seen the two engineering reports that go with the certificate.

Betruger · Post by **Betruger** » Sun Sep 16, 2012 11:10 pm

Lost in the noise is that the low temperature industrial E-Cat has received safety certification by SGS. As far as I can tell SGS is a large competent company and I much doubt they would issue a certificate for something that didn't work.

Skepticism of Rossi and Ecat, respectively, was in neither case about safety. But about whether this famous black box of Rossi works - does something useful.

It is not "lost in the noise". It isn't mentioned because it does not matter. That SGS passed whatever is in this or that BLACK BOX thru their minimum safety inspection is evidence or at least compelling suggestion that the BLACK BOX "works", is a non sequitur.

It is a black box and this punk Rossi has done nothing but use its various "iterations" to play snake-oil show & tell (and hide & seek the secret factories) to this day.

---

The whole pretention that those of us calling Rossi for what he is, a lousy klutz of a salesman, is pathological skepticism, is ridiculous. Period. Otherwise I too have ECats to sell you. You will believe me because I will scam you with my own black boxes and promises, with dubious experimental demos and embarrassingly shit public relations (everything from repeatedly lying about factories, to repeatedly postponed deliveries) as evidence of my honesty.

Anything but identical defending of my claims as you've done for Rossi would show your lack of common sense if not plain lack of integrity, of honesty.

parallel · Post by **parallel** » Mon Sep 17, 2012 1:46 pm

Andrea Rossi
September 17th, 2012 at 7:02 AM

DEAR GIO:
I WANT TO ADD THAT SO FAR THE MEASUREMENTS MADE BY NEW SYSTEMS HAVE CONFIRMED, SUBSTANTIALLY, THE DATA PRESENTED IN THE REPORT OF ZURICH. IN PARTICULAR: WE HAVE ELIMINATED THE INTERNAL CYLINDER, TO MAKE EASIER THE MEASUREMENT OF THE ENERGY, BEING NOW ALL THE ENERGY EMITTED THROUGH THE EXTERNAL CYLINDER SURFACE, AND WE ARE USING A VARIAC INSTEAD OF A TRIAC, TOGETHER WITH CERTIFIED INSTRUMENTATION.
NEVERTHELESS, MORE MEASUREMENTS ARE CARRIED ON BY THE VALIDATORS TEAM.
WARM REGARDS,
A.R.

Betruger, you are a libelous twit, posting accusations without proof..

Joseph Chikva · Post by **Joseph Chikva** » Mon Sep 17, 2012 2:49 pm

parallel wrote:IN PARTICULAR: WE HAVE ELIMINATED THE INTERNAL CYLINDER, TO MAKE EASIER THE MEASUREMENT OF THE ENERGY, BEING NOW ALL THE ENERGY EMITTED THROUGH THE EXTERNAL CYLINDER SURFACE

So, someone more except me said him that very likely that both "hypothesizes" of "validators-experimentators-certificators" were wrong.

ladajo · Post by **ladajo** » Mon Sep 17, 2012 3:15 pm

parallel wrote:
Andrea Rossi
September 17th, 2012 at 7:02 AM

DEAR GIO:
I WANT TO ADD THAT SO FAR THE MEASUREMENTS MADE BY NEW SYSTEMS HAVE CONFIRMED, SUBSTANTIALLY, THE DATA PRESENTED IN THE REPORT OF ZURICH. IN PARTICULAR: WE HAVE ELIMINATED THE INTERNAL CYLINDER, TO MAKE EASIER THE MEASUREMENT OF THE ENERGY, BEING NOW ALL THE ENERGY EMITTED THROUGH THE EXTERNAL CYLINDER SURFACE, AND WE ARE USING A VARIAC INSTEAD OF A TRIAC, TOGETHER WITH CERTIFIED INSTRUMENTATION.
NEVERTHELESS, MORE MEASUREMENTS ARE CARRIED ON BY THE VALIDATORS TEAM.
WARM REGARDS,
A.R.
Betruger, you are a libelous twit, posting accusations without proof..

Parallel,
You are a smart man. You have shown this many times in many other threads not dealing with Rossi. With Rossi you have seemingly drank too much Cool-Aid.
Many posts have been made clearly showing Rossi contradiciting himself or lying. The easiest of these is to following his manufactoring claims.

You post a Rossiquote, and then use it as some sort of gospel, hanging it out like the ultimate truth, 'cause "Rossi said". What Rossi says does not matter.

It is what verifiable independant 3rd party folks say, based on factual reality and not opinion, that matters. Reproducability, Accepted Test Methodology, etc. is what matters.
If the day comes that Ecat does this, and it shows that it works. I will be one of the very first to say, "That is awesome! It works! Finally, real testing instead of crappy marketing ploys!".

However, none of that has anything to do with my opinion of Rossi. And, given that to date, there is a complete lack of real machines in use on the commercial market, and the real fact of no independant testing data, and also that any "demos" (they can't be called tests) to date have been fairly or even extremely questionable, my conclusion, so far, is that the evidence indicates that Ecat does not do what Rossi claims (even when one considers his moving target claims).

And, please note that none of this relates in any logic chain to Rossi being full-o-shyte. That is merely a side indicator to the main circus.

As long as Rossi is looking to collect real money from people, the people get to ask him for real proof of what he is selling. So far, he has avoided answering the people.

No real machines, no real proof, no real factories, just a lot of handwaving and requests for money with a strong avoidance of publically showing real machines, real proof, real factories and for a while, even strong avoidance to admit he has been asking for money.

Looks like shyte, smells like shyte, tastes like shyte, odds are...it is shyte.

I really wonder what you will say (if anything) when Rossi falls flat on his face. I already know what I will say if Ecat works, (see above). However, I am sure that even if (against current evidence) Ecat is eventually shown to work, I will still get to say that Rossi was full of Shyte. Even if he, against all odds, stops being full of Shyte.

Isn't it cool that I got through all that and never called you a name?