10KW LENR demonstrator (new thread)

[Joseph Chikva]

And following this logic "no evidence" means "does not work". At least yet.

Me and Joseph that agree on something?
Either hell has frozen over or the end of the world is near!
Let me go and check my Mayan calendar....

I more like to freeze a hell.

[KitemanSA]

the first says flat out "no" and the second says ... "well, maybe, but not yet".

DoE did NOT say "No". Some folks at the MIT HEP lab would have you believe it did, if only to cover their a$$es. But so far it remains "not yet".

Yes, "not yet" but most probable that never.

I have many "authoritative" statements of "never" from folks who know little to nothing about it, and murky (at best) data from folks who support it. I'm not convinced either way, yet. I will withhold my judgement as there is no need to judge yet.

[KitemanSA]

but there is No data ...

Sure there is data,

Sure there is data, but that's not what I said, read carefully.

Just becasue I didn't think you needed to have me write out the rest of your statement doesn't mean I didn't understand it. My response COULD have been the pedantic "sure there is data to back Rossi's excess energy claims" and continue on with my statement, I just didn't think you would need me to do so.

You said it. I called you on it. You back-pedaled. Simple.

[KitemanSA]

Sure there is data, but there is debate about the quality and validity of said data.

Come on Kite, the data we have now do not have any scientific value, there is no debate about that.

Folks, no ONE SIDED set of data can EVER be scientific. At best it is natural history. Don't blame the non-scientist for not doing science.

But how can anyone CONCLUDE from a LACK of scientific data that this thing is false? Sounds more like faith in the "authorities" to me.

We have been promised better, more scientific data in the future. Why judge now? Till then, I remain unconvinced... EITHER WAY.

[Joseph Chikva]

I have many "authoritative" statements of "never" from folks who know little to nothing about it, and murky (at best) data from folks who support it. I'm not convinced either way, yet. I will withhold my judgement as there is no need to judge yet.

You are right about my little knowledge of theory of producing fusion in crystal lattice or even total absence of thereof: Widom-Larsen or Rydberg matter or something else.
So, I can not judgment but that is only my doubts that such in general is possible to approach two nuclei at a distance of action of strong forces without giving them corresponding kinetic energy.
But at least such processes have not been proved yet.

[tomclarke]

Sure there is data, but there is debate about the quality and validity of said data.

Come on Kite, the data we have now do not have any scientific value, there is no debate about that.

Folks, no ONE SIDED set of data can EVER be scientific. At best it is natural history. Don't blame the non-scientist for not doing science.

But how can anyone CONCLUDE from a LACK of scientific data that this thing is false? Sounds more like faith in the "authorities" to me.

We have been promised better, more scientific data in the future. Why judge now? Till then, I remain unconvinced... EITHER WAY.

Since you ask...

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. In absence of which it is correct to assume them false.

[sparkyy0007]

You said it. I called you on it. You back-pedaled. Simple.

I said it. I clarified it. You dodged it. Simple

Lets wait and see.

Remaining perpetually optimistic....

[ladajo]

Come on Kite, the data we have now do not have any scientific value, there is no debate about that.

Folks, no ONE SIDED set of data can EVER be scientific. At best it is natural history. Don't blame the non-scientist for not doing science.

But how can anyone CONCLUDE from a LACK of scientific data that this thing is false? Sounds more like faith in the "authorities" to me.

We have been promised better, more scientific data in the future. Why judge now? Till then, I remain unconvinced... EITHER WAY.

Since you ask...

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. In absence of which it is correct to assume them false.

Now that sounds familiar.

[KitemanSA]

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. In absence of which it is correct to assume them false.

No, it is correct to acknowledge them unproven. And since you are not required at this time to make a decision, why decide it false?

[KitemanSA]

.. You dodged it. ..:

/specifics? I provide them. Where are yours?

[KitemanSA]

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. In absence of which it is correct to assume them false.

Now that sounds familiar.

The first part is familiar. The second sounds pure TC, and perverts the lesson of the first.

[parallel]

The October 6th demo of Rossi's E-Cat module will take place actually in Bologna U. according to ecatnews.

EUROPEAN PATENT OFFICE

POSTBUS 5818, Patentiaan 2

2280-HV RIJSWIJK

THE NETHERLANDS

27th Sept 2011

Re: European Patent Application No. 08873805.9–1270 Filed on August 4, 2008

In the name of Pascucci Maddalena

Dear Sirs,

With reference to the subject-matter of the Application in re, we wish to inform you that an experiment run by the inventor Mr Rossi Andrea, on a module of a 1MW plant, will take place on October 6, 2011 in Bologna (IT), at a lab made available by the University of Bologna.

This experiment will be attended by Professors from the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, as well as by Professors in Physics from the USA, China, Japan, France, Great Britain, Greece, Russia and Italy. An official report will be published and made available on the Internet at a later date.

In this connection, the Applicant would like to invite the EPO Examiner in charge of the application to attend the above experiment as a guest.

Here below the relevant details.

Date and time: October 6, 2011 10.00 a.m. on (expected duration 24 hours)

Location: Via Dell’Elletricista 6 D, Zona Industriale Roveri, 40100 Bologna (Italy)

In case you accept the above invitation, we will provide you with additional contact information.

Looking forward to hearing from you, we remain

Yours Faithfully….

Received at the EPO on Sep 27, 2011, 12.20.57 Page 1 of 1

[sparkyy0007]

.. You dodged it. ..:

/specifics? I provide them. Where are yours?

Specifics?? I provided 2 energy balances, how much more specific do you need?
Is there an error in the calculations or assumptions, and if there is please explain.

I realize 2 null demos and lies does not mean he has nothing to show, but ...

[nferguso]

The day of decision is October 6. The location of the test is announced, and will be independently observed. I can hardly wait.

There have been a number of criticisms and speculations offered regarding S. Rossi's somewhat peculiar strategy for technology development, product introduction, and public relations. I offer an explanation I don't remember seeing (with apologies if it has). It is this.

Rossi has stumbled on a technology that works like gangbusters. But (1) he seriously doubts it is patentable, at any rate by him; or (2) he hasn't been able to solve stability problems and isn't at all sure they can be solved. So for him, economic reward is very uncertain. He can demonstrate the technology incontrovertibly, but may not be able to commercialize it.

Say that this was the situation months ago. Therefore he decided to build a 1 MW "production" plant out of 50 or so E-Cat subsystems. His supposition was that, if he soon solved the legal and technical problems, he prospers. But if he couldn't solve them, he could nevertheless stage convincing and independent tests in short order. The psychological impact would be massive and global. And he would be sitting there during the first frenzy with over 50 fully functioning E-Cat subsystems to auction off and ship to the highest bidders.

If E-Cats pass testing decisively, how many people and institutions would suddenly be desperate to get their hands on a functioning E-Cat subsystem? And how much would they bid? $100,000? $1,000,000? My guess is that the price would be high enough anyhow that Rossi's financial future is assured.

The correctness of my theory doesn't depend on the E-Cat being real. Based on everything he has said and that I have seen, it could very well be that Rossi is a confabulator. He could have convinced himself of greatly excessive E-Cat heat production simply as a result of momentum, confirmation bias and inadequate test procedures and controls.

Odds are this is not a straight scam. He has put a tremendous amount of money into the 1 MW plant - his own money, he claims. And if the Oct. 6 test is dodged or flops, that surely means it's all over, without a payoff that I can see. That doesn't appear to be a typical move for a scam.

[Crawdaddy]

T
The correctness of my theory doesn't depend on the E-Cat being real. Based on everything he has said and that I have seen, it could very well be that Rossi is a confabulator. He could have convinced himself of greatly excessive E-Cat heat production simply as a result of momentum, confirmation bias and inadequate test procedures and controls.

Since the control is simply repeating the experiment without pressurizing with hydrogen I doubt that honest error is an adequate explanation for the claims.

Fraud or legitimacy are vastly more likely.