E-Cat cold fusion demonstration a success

[Almeisan]

At 2 million dollars a pop, I would hope the government or the Navy would have a little more stringent requirements before purchasing one than what the video purports to show. 2 million isn't a "little" waste of tax payer money in my book--And in the economy we are in, I'd pity the politician who signed on to buy one of these with tax payer money if this turns out to be a hoax.

.. Well compared to the Trillions wasted on bailing out banks , it doesn't even register. Politicians pilfer than much on expenses, at least they do in the uk.

Besides which the buyer can specify any tests and have their engineers present to oversee them.

If it doesn't work , they know who he is and how to get a hold of him. Also, surely it would have at least a limited guarantee of some sort.

but even if it was money lost , it was for a good purpose - compared to the money spent on bombs and assorted weapons..

I would say most people would want to know .

Edited November 16, 2011 by almeisan

[Copasetic]

.. Well compared to the Trillions wasted on bailing out banks , it doesn't even register. Politicians pilfer than much on expenses, at least they do in the uk.

Non sequitur.

Besides which the buyer can specify any tests and have their engineers present to oversee them.

If it doesn't work , they know who he is and how to get a hold of him. Also, surely it would have at least a limited guarantee of some sort.

Yet at this point it doesn't appear that they can. Tests are conducted on Rossi's terms with Rossi's people "independent third parties" over seeing them.

Con men have been, for thousands of years, making sales to their clients at face. Many laws and loopholes through laws allow con men to continue their business. For instance, hasn't Rossi claimed he "doesn't know how energy is being produced" and made no explicit claims to cold fusion on patent applications. It would follow then, any civil case brought against Rossi could be dismissed on the grounds that Rossi never claimed an intent that the machine is incapable of doing.

but even if it was money lost , it was for a good purpose - compared to the money spent on bombs and assorted weapons..

I would say most people would want to know .

I disagree. Spending millions of dollars to investigate the claims of anyone and everyone (even those with so colorful a background as Rossi) isn't a good investment. And it especially isn't a good investment of my tax money, of which I could think of many things I'd rather see it going too. Now if the situation were to change and Rossi made his claims and machine transparent to the scientific community--and if it was found that there exists some new and novel mechanism by which energy is generated, then I'd be all for spending that kind of money on serious scientific investigation. In deed, I donate my own money regularly and freely to new and novel scientific investigation, because such things do have the potential to be good investments (from a societal standpoint). However, when all you see is smoke and mirrors its prudent to hold off on those donations.

[Emma_Acid]

No serious scientific discovery, especially one of this magnitude, would ever be announced through the mainstream media. There's a reason why this hasn't been peer reviewed.

[Almeisan]

some latest news:

Rossi Refuses New Test Offer, Confirms First Customer as Military Agency Which has Ordered 13 More Units

November 18, 2011

...link here

&

Swedish physicists run the site Ecat.com link

Edited November 19, 2011 by almeisan

[badeskov]

No serious scientific discovery, especially one of this magnitude, would ever be announced through the mainstream media. There's a reason why this hasn't been peer reviewed.

Indeed Emma, indeed so. And if he actually did have it working he would be selling big time, no need for undisclosed military customers. It is pretty much the telltale signs of a something either being a scam or the brainchild of a dreamer with no basis in reality;. It is certainly not the telltale signs of someone with a working product.

Cheers,

Badeskov

[+DieChecker]

I'll sign that. The worst that can happen is a few of the publics dollars being spent on a worthless device and unmasking a fraud. The best that can happen is another source of energy production.

EDIT: Apparently you do have to sign up for a WhiteHouse.gov account before you can sign the petition.

Well the petition is up to 450, out of the 25,000 needed. Maybe if they change the title to, "Investigate E-Cat as way to legalize Marijuana" it would get more signatures?

[+DieChecker]

some latest news:

Rossi Refuses New Test Offer, Confirms First Customer as Military Agency Which has Ordered 13 More Units

November 18, 2011

...link here

&

Swedish physicists run the site Ecat.com link

Interesting. I thought he said previously the people for the Bologna test were Americans (USA). That would mean the US Military is the first customer. Yet he also said it would be tried in a industrial setting. I might be ignorant somewhat, but I don't beleive the US military actually builds anything, it just buys contractor stuff. So, that would mean they plan on a contractor using these e-cat generators.

13 units like the Bologna unit? So 13 more storage units with shelves of little e-cats. Sounds cheesy.

[bmk1245]

Man I was going to repond to this days ago and forgot.

The tests and explainations given in the video are completely at Rossi's say so. How can anyone know that he has a 220 outlet set up? It takes like 5 minutes to rewire an outlet and about the same time to string a wire over to a transformer in another room.

And why does the steam go into a hole in the wall? So we can't see any of the experiment happening, that Rossi does not want us to, and only some numbers popping up on a computer screen to verify what he says. Some one in the next room could be typing or dumping those numbers onto the screen. I will not believe Rossi's numbers till I see a certified University publish corroberating results. Sure Bologna University is supposedly working with him, but what have they published? Nothing conclusive that I know of, just graphs that show what they want to show.

It is like a commercial where they put a colored chemical into a tank of clear liquid to show the dispersive power of their detergent. It prooves nothing. The chemical and the liquid could be anything.

Yeap, I agree.

Simple glass pipe on the "reactor's" exit would give an idea how much water/steam goes down the drain, at least qualitatively. Scam written all over this Rossi stuff. And the last news from Rossi just reinforces that. If he would claim some civil entities requested 13 items of E-Cats, investors soon would be asking "Where are those requesters, why we do not hear anything from them". With military card (smart move, I'd say), Rossi can play 'Ponzi game' with investors much longer. Not to mention he refused offer for real test.

Too many red flags

[badeskov]

Interesting. I thought he said previously the people for the Bologna test were Americans (USA). That would mean the US Military is the first customer. Yet he also said it would be tried in a industrial setting. I might be ignorant somewhat, but I don't beleive the US military actually builds anything, it just buys contractor stuff. So, that would mean they plan on a contractor using these e-cat generators.

y.

The US military builds things, alright. But for stuff like this they buy and test. Period. I have been through a number of these projects and what they like, they grab, what they don't, well, goodbye.

13 units like the Bologna unit? So 13 more storage units with shelves of little e-cats. Sounds cheesy.

Sounds very cheesy indeed.

Cheers,

Badeskov

[Almeisan]

more news

Brian Josephson, Nobel prize winner for physics in 1973, highlights the UK energy departement (DECC) interest in Andrea Rossi's E-Cat and invites the inventor to reconsider the idea of a scientific test.

A new piece in the puzzle of Rossi's E-Cat, which is said to be able to produce power with a cold fusion reaction: UK energy departement (DECC) has taken an interest in this tecnology, and might even plan "further action", under some conditions. In the exclusive open letter we publish here, Brian Josephson, physicist, who stands by Rossi since the beginning, invites him to reconsider the importance of a new, fast scientific test, after Rossi's negative reply to Francesco Celani's offer.

Brian Josephson adds that he doesn't necessarily looks up to Celani's offer (which, for secrecy reasons, doesn't match the refutability standards DECC have indicated), but highlights the matter of the benefit that could follow a scientific test.

Dear Andrea,

It appears that the UK Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC), unlike its US counterpart, has an open mind regarding your reactor, and acting upon Francesco Celani's suggestion from the Focus magazine's pages is likely to have a beneficial outcome by dispelling any doubts they may have. Is not the likelihood of endorsement from an institution such as the DECC of interest to you?

Regards, Brian Josephson

Brian Josephson refers to a report published on Free Energy Truth (2011, Nov 18th) stating that the DECC (UK's Department of Energy and Climate Change ) is taking an interest in Andrea Rossi's E-Cat. This is the posting from Free Energy Brian Josephson refers to:

"DECC is aware of this alleged power source: the DECC CSA, David MacKay FRS, has read some of the literature and has met Sven Kullander, who has reviewed an experiment and whose report is on the Defkalion website. The CSA's judgment is that it is appropriate for DECC to maintain a watch on this sector, with the key trigger for further action being the publication of the work in a reputable peer-refereed journal, including full details so that academic scientists can replicate the results."

David MacKay is a member of the Royal Society, professor in the department of Physics at the University of Cambridge and chief scientific adviser to the UK Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC).

Sven Kullander, professor at the University of Uppsala, reviewed the tests of February 2011.

from -> http://www.focus.it/scienza/e-cat-and-cold-fusion-open-letter-to-andrea-rossi_C12.aspx

,

[Taita]

I don't know what the fellow has and I am sceptical on it being "cold fusion". This doesn't mean a heat producing reaction is not occuring however.

Being that his intent is to control this idea and make money on it, it would be business suicide to make the knowledge of the process public domain, which is what is being asked.

If I were a potential customer, I would require a very convencing test and some sort of bond. If it produces more energy than it consumes and the cost is not prohibitive, then it could be a good source of energy regardless of what it is called.

Mark

[sepulchrave]

Being that his intent is to control this idea and make money on it, it would be business suicide to make the knowledge of the process public domain, which is what is being asked.

There is a difference between making knowledge ``public'' and making it ``public domain''.

As far as I know, all of Rossi's critics want him to reveal how E-Cat works, i.e. make the knowledge ``public''. If he patents his process, he is making the knowledge ``public'' without allowing others to profit freely from it, is he not?

As it stands, all Rossi has is a trade secret... which I think is unenforceable. If someone sneaks into his trailer and steals his secrets and then publishes these secrets without giving Rossi credit, I don't think he would be able to sue for financial compensation.

I admittedly don't know much about legal matters like this, so I apologize if I am way off-base.

[Taita]

There is a difference between making knowledge ``public'' and making it ``public domain''.

As far as I know, all of Rossi's critics want him to reveal how E-Cat works, i.e. make the knowledge ``public''. If he patents his process, he is making the knowledge ``public'' without allowing others to profit freely from it, is he not?

As it stands, all Rossi has is a trade secret... which I think is unenforceable. If someone sneaks into his trailer and steals his secrets and then publishes these secrets without giving Rossi credit, I don't think he would be able to sue for financial compensation.

I admittedly don't know much about legal matters like this, so I apologize if I am way off-base.

You are spot on actually.

If the process works and is a finished product, I doubt he is concerned with peer review in any sense. That is for abstract ideas and an attempt to promote new theories and break thoughs absent of direct and great monitary value. A good many discoveries are protected and patented first or sold out right before any peer review is allowed.

I wouldn't suggest it works as cold fusion, but understand how it can protect his interests to not give over all information for people around the world to make their own versions of his work. Is it likely any of these business and institutions recreating his work will pay for any of it if, after their own reconstruction, it works?

Due to the methods he is employing, I am thinking he has something that does work in some manner but not something as yet marketable for whatever reason; cost, practicality, danger, sustainabilty, so on. If he gets it to work in a sustainable manner producing an appreciably greater energy than required to operate, I would bet one of the major powers will buy him and his work and no more will be heard of anything like this again. Otherwise he will slowly fad away as another footnote in cold fusion history.

Mark

[badeskov]

more news

Brian Josephson, Nobel prize winner for physics in 1973, highlights the UK energy departement (DECC) interest in Andrea Rossi's E-Cat and invites the inventor to reconsider the idea of a scientific test.

A new piece in the puzzle of Rossi's E-Cat, which is said to be able to produce power with a cold fusion reaction: UK energy departement (DECC) has taken an interest in this tecnology, and might even plan "further action", under some conditions. In the exclusive open letter we publish here, Brian Josephson, physicist, who stands by Rossi since the beginning, invites him to reconsider the importance of a new, fast scientific test, after Rossi's negative reply to Francesco Celani's offer.

Brian Josephson adds that he doesn't necessarily looks up to Celani's offer (which, for secrecy reasons, doesn't match the refutability standards DECC have indicated), but highlights the matter of the benefit that could follow a scientific test.

Dear Andrea,

It appears that the UK Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC), unlike its US counterpart, has an open mind regarding your reactor, and acting upon Francesco Celani's suggestion from the Focus magazine's pages is likely to have a beneficial outcome by dispelling any doubts they may have. Is not the likelihood of endorsement from an institution such as the DECC of interest to you?

Regards, Brian Josephson

Brian Josephson refers to a report published on Free Energy Truth (2011, Nov 18th) stating that the DECC (UK's Department of Energy and Climate Change ) is taking an interest in Andrea Rossi's E-Cat. This is the posting from Free Energy Brian Josephson refers to:

"DECC is aware of this alleged power source: the DECC CSA, David MacKay FRS, has read some of the literature and has met Sven Kullander, who has reviewed an experiment and whose report is on the Defkalion website. The CSA's judgment is that it is appropriate for DECC to maintain a watch on this sector, with the key trigger for further action being the publication of the work in a reputable peer-refereed journal, including full details so that academic scientists can replicate the results."

David MacKay is a member of the Royal Society, professor in the department of Physics at the University of Cambridge and chief scientific adviser to the UK Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC).

Sven Kullander, professor at the University of Uppsala, reviewed the tests of February 2011.

from -> http://www.focus.it/...-rossi_C12.aspx

,

In other words, the DECC know of the field, know of Mr. Rossi's device and essentially have no interest in it. I can only guess, but I know where I would hinge my bet on why that is.

Cheers,

Badeskov

[Taita]

In other words, the DECC know of the field, know of Mr. Rossi's device and essentially have no interest in it. I can only guess, but I know where I would hinge my bet on why that is.

Cheers,

Badeskov

I didn't get that from the letters quoted at all. It appears they are interested or wouldn't bother writting a letter at all or requesting more information. What I see is normal prudence in forcing the seller to produce proof of value first, over handing over some millions of dollars with no guarantees. All this on some very hedgy language on Rossi's part concerning what is happening and what the process can and does do, then having to discover this information for themselves.

If the machine were fully capable of what is being professed we wouldn't even be disscussing this at all. A straight forward demonstration to legitimate backers would have produced any number of sources for funding or outright purchase of his machine and process. People aren't stupid and as presented this would be a huge money maker and everyone in the power industry wants the upper hand. Safe reliable power at the highest profit margin.

Whatever he has, I am betting it is not yet market ready and the market is not going to accept it without a convincing vetting.

Mark

[Almeisan]

E-Cat and cold fusion: Andrea Rossi replies to Nobel prize winner Brian Josephson

Brian Josephson joins Francesco Celani's call for further scientific tests of Andera Rossi's E-Cat, but Rossi has different plans.

A few days ago, an eminent italian physicist asked Focus to host an open letter to Andrea Rossi to call for a scientific test of his device. Then it was Nobel prize winner Brian Josephson turn to stress the importance of such a test: it wouldn't just satisfy some scientist's curiosity, it would benefit Rossi himself. But in the inventor's ideas, the market itself will test the E-Cat.

To emphasize his position, Rossi is today in the USA where he plans to meet Sen. Bruce Tarr and the representatives of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, the University of Massachusetts and Northeastern University, to «explore the prospects of developing the device and producing it in Massachusetts», Tarr states: «Mr. Rossi's reactor, if successfully proven and developed, has the potential to change the way the world deals with energy».

Andrea Rossi's reply to Brian Josephson

Dear Professor Josephson,

I do understand your concerns, but as I already explained, I am not going to give any other demonstration of the E-Cat because at this point it wouldn't make any sense: we already got industrial manufacturing underway and the E-Cat is a ready product for the market. Our customers will buy a working device; if it didn't work, they wouldn't buy it. Besides, I'm in such a busy and demanding stage that, even if I wanted, I wouldn't have the time to arrange any test.

Please allow me to underline that professor Celani is not just a scientist, but a competitor too. This is one of the reasons I cannot accept his offer. The market plays by different rules than the academic world, and even if I realize that a scientist needs to know and understand the theory, I need to protect my invention, if not I could lose my job. Please try to understand my point, I don't mean to disregard the scientific needs. I would like to remind everyone that we are working on that too: in my letter to professor Celani, I explained that the university of Bologna is about to start a complete work of research on the E-Cat; not to mention that the positive feedback from a 30 years experienced customer should drive all doubts away.

A question seems to be legitimate here.

Why are you suggesting me to take Francesco Celani's offer? Don't you think that a complete study from a university is precisely what is needed, with regard to the theoretical and engineering develop? Don't you think that, with regard to the scientific praxis and credits, it would be more appropriate to rely on the university than on an individual researcher?

In summary, I don't intend to give any other demonstrative test: the last one has been the one of Oct, 6th. We are selling plants to customers who run their own tests and decide whether to buy the E-Cat or not relying on their results: they don't mind what's inside the reactor. Meanwhile, the university of Bologna will take scrupulous care of the scientific work. If the DECC, or any other public or private organization, has taken an interest in this technology, I suggest them to get in touch and discuss any possible business agreement with me.

Thank you for your support and your balance in pointing out to me such important and sensitive questions.

Best regards

Andrea Rossi

source link

[badeskov]

I didn't get that from the letters quoted at all. It appears they are interested or wouldn't bother writting a letter at all or requesting more information. What I see is normal prudence in forcing the seller to produce proof of value first, over handing over some millions of dollars with no guarantees. All this on some very hedgy language on Rossi's part concerning what is happening and what the process can and does do, then having to discover this information for themselves.

If the machine were fully capable of what is being professed we wouldn't even be disscussing this at all. A straight forward demonstration to legitimate backers would have produced any number of sources for funding or outright purchase of his machine and process. People aren't stupid and as presented this would be a huge money maker and everyone in the power industry wants the upper hand. Safe reliable power at the highest profit margin.

Whatever he has, I am betting it is not yet market ready and the market is not going to accept it without a convincing vetting.

Mark

I think we are in complete agreement here. In my honest opinion they write a letter to get information to ascertain a level of confidence. It is their job to keep themselves appraised of what is going on in the field of energy generation and if they really thought that it was a breakthrough, I am sure they would be hammering them. Not just sending a letter asking for more information.

Cheers,

Badeskov

[+DieChecker]

Rossi is still going with his E-Cat.

http://coldfusion3.com/blog/rossi-reveals-schedule-for-ecat-rollout-and-discusses-warranties-etc

Posts at Rossi’s blog reveal the schedule he wants to follow if everything goes well. The schedule is as follows:

1.February construction of robotized ecat factory probably located in the USA begins. Note the location for this has not been revealed.

2.March and April Rossi will unveil or begin work on a 1MW industrial ecat water heater.

3.November testing of the production line for 10 KW home ecat heating systems begins.

4.December sales of 10 KW ecat systems to the public begins presumably in the USA.

http://energycatalyzer3.com/news/ecat-lenr-home-heating-and-cooling-system-could-be-shipped-in-august

Rossi also revealed that the home heating units will use a completely different technology from the 1MW plant which utilizes a large number of small e-cat units hooked together. He also stated that the smaller plants will not be able to provide the economy of scale of the larger units. The coefficient of performance of the e-cat heater will always be 6 Rossi stated.