10KW LENR demonstrator (new thread)

GIThruster · Post by **GIThruster** » Fri Oct 19, 2012 6:12 pm

Ross is not under an NDA. He can disclose whatever he likes. The question remains why he would release the report without the names when presumably he is trying to get some credibility.

KitemanSA · Post by **KitemanSA** » Fri Oct 19, 2012 7:36 pm

Wow! The all knowing Gastro-Intestinal Thruster sets the world strait again. Obviously he has inside knowledge of Rossi's business dealings that no one else on this forum does.

GIThruster · Post by **GIThruster** » Fri Oct 19, 2012 7:44 pm

Oh yeah geesss. . .Kite must be right. Someone quick check and see if Rossi signed an NDA with himself. Maybe he was confused by a mirror or something.

KitemanSA · Post by **KitemanSA** » Fri Oct 19, 2012 8:49 pm

GIT, if there was a NDA, it obviously would have been between Rossi and the person/company who's name was redacted, but obviously since you have proclaimed that there was NOT one between Rossi and Michael A. Nelson, and you are omniscient, then you explanation for why there couldn't be one must be correct.
.
.
.
NOT!

parallel · Post by **parallel** » Fri Oct 19, 2012 9:01 pm

GTThruster

Ross is not under an NDA. He can disclose whatever he likes. The question remains why he would release the report without the names when presumably he is trying to get some credibility.

It really helps to out your brain in gear before spewing ****

The newly released statement is from Defkalion not Rossi (who is Ross?)

Anyway, Rossi does have several non disclosure agreements. Why do you say he hasn't?
Making things up is what trolls do.

Stubby · Post by **Stubby** » Fri Oct 19, 2012 9:46 pm

parallel wrote:GTThruster
Ross is not under an NDA. He can disclose whatever he likes. The question remains why he would release the report without the names when presumably he is trying to get some credibility.
It really helps to out your brain in gear before spewing ****

The newly released statement is from Defkalion not Rossi (who is Ross?)

Anyway, Rossi does have several non disclosure agreements. Why do you say he hasn't?
Making things up is what trolls do.

What does that make Rossi?

Ivy Matt · Post by **Ivy Matt** » Fri Oct 19, 2012 10:12 pm

parallel wrote:Anyway, Rossi does have several non disclosure agreements. Why do you say he hasn't?
Making things up is what trolls do.

Has? Or is under? There's a slight difference between the two.

GIThruster · Post by **GIThruster** » Fri Oct 19, 2012 11:48 pm

I'm just amazed at the kinds of responses here. I don't normally write for 6 year-olds but since it seems that's the level of reading comprehension that needs to be pandered to. . .I'll say it again:

Rossi and Defkalion can speak about whatever they like. NDA's are not mutually binding. Just because an NDA binds someone's hands who signs it in order to get access to technical details, does not mean the party the NDA is for cannot speak on the subject. There's no reason to suppose Rossi has ever signed an NDA. He's the one protecting his work.

Do I really need to use smaller words than this? Looks like Kite will deliberately misinterpret whatever I write but what about the rest of you?

Skipjack · Post by **Skipjack** » Sat Oct 20, 2012 12:06 am

There's no reason to suppose Rossi has ever signed an NDA.

Actually he has, on several occasions said that he was under an NDA with party "X" and was thus unable to reveal details about something.

GIThruster · Post by **GIThruster** » Sat Oct 20, 2012 12:20 am

We're talking about Rossi's claims concerning his property. I'm just saying, the claim that one can't speak about their own work because someone else signed an NDA makes no sense.

parallel · Post by **parallel** » Sat Oct 20, 2012 1:08 am

GTThruster
You are obviously clueless about NDAs. To start with you thought Defkalion's NDA was Rossi's. Then you apparently don't know that Rossi has signed a number of NDAs, or at least says he has. You know better from your crystal ball?

From wiki.

A non-disclosure agreement (NDA), also known as a confidentiality agreement (CA), confidential disclosure agreement (CDA), proprietary information agreement (PIA), or secrecy agreement, is a legal contract between at least two parties that outlines confidential material, knowledge, or information that the parties wish to share with one another for certain purposes, but wish to restrict access to or by third parties. It is a contract through which the parties agree not to disclose information covered by the agreement. An NDA creates a confidential relationship between the parties to protect any type of confidential and proprietary information or trade secrets. As such, an NDA protects nonpublic business information.

NDAs are commonly signed when two companies, individuals, or other entities (such as partnerships, societies, etc.) are considering doing business and need to understand the processes used in each other's business for the purpose of evaluating the potential business relationship. NDAs can be "mutual", meaning both parties are restricted in their use of the materials provided, or they can restrict the use of material by a single party.

parallel · Post by **parallel** » Sat Oct 20, 2012 1:15 am

Can we now get off these red herrings, brought up by trolls, and get back to the significance of NASA apparently confirming anomalous heat.

Presumably if Defkalion's Hyperion works so does Rossi's E-Cat.

GIThruster · Post by **GIThruster** » Sat Oct 20, 2012 1:43 am

::sign::

The above is so asinine I just have no idea how to answer.

ladajo · Post by **ladajo** » Sat Oct 20, 2012 2:58 am

parallel wrote:ladajo
Don't know what happened to the links. They worked on the piece I copied.
So just go to the Defkalion site....

If you copy the redacted bits in the pdf file and paste them in Word, the hidden parts show. The test was done by Michael A. Nelson

Why do you say the COP looks higher than Rossi reports? Not that I have seen.

If Defkalion's device works don't you think Rossi's does? I'm pretty sure both you and skipjack will be proved wrong big time.

I meant magnitudes in context of test procedure not product. In any event, given Rossi's lack of real test procedure, I can say that he has shown squat conclusively to date.

But, all that aside, if DGT is on to something, that is good. Once again, I have always separated Rossi from the device. Rossi is full of it, the device is what it is.

I await further details on DGT's testing. It is worth paying attention I think.

parallel · Post by **parallel** » Sat Oct 20, 2012 10:54 am

The key comments from Defkalion were:

The objective of this test was to get only COP>1.1 with a noise to signal ratio less than 10%. We got COP>3 very easy with noise to signal less than 4%. Note that the tested reactor R5 was not designed for maximum COP but to get maximum lab safety and control /understanding over the phenomena.

Test data and their analysis will be published by the teams that did that tests in peer-reviewed journals they choose.

So now both Rossi and Defkalion say they had third party tests and the results will be published in peer reviewed journals.
Not much we can do but wait. I doubt either party would allow third party testing if they didn't think their devices worked much as claimed.