RE: [Vo]:Rossi comments on the "It was sent back" statement

Bob, An error you seem to be making, leading to your conclusion of "way lower than the magnitude of energy reported by Rossi" is an underlying assumption. You assume a symmetrical, chemical, or one-way reaction. What is not being factored into the equation, nor do we know, is the most impor

Re: [Vo]:Rossi comments on the "It was sent back" statement

On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 2:37 PM, Jones Beene wrote: > Craig - Did you catch Rossi's interview Friday? > > He said straight out: "we are in mass production in Miami". I thought he said 'Florida', but it doesn't matter. When I heard this, my initial thought was that he is planning mass production f

RE: [Vo]:Rossi comments on the "It was sent back" statement

Yes AG I am completely OK with DGT's strategy because essentially Thermacore invented the device, Mills explained some of it, Rossi improved it but failed to get a usable patent for what he added. Rossi wrote the contract and could have claimed the benefits but only if he could deliver what the con

Re: [Vo]:Rossi comments on the "It was sent back" statement

On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 3:02 PM, Zell, Chris wrote: > ** > > Testing without cost or risk? Not in any way that I would risk, if I was > him. > What is the risk beyond any risk Rossi already assumed when he did some 8 or 10 public demonstrations already? And he still gives regular interviews an

RE: [Vo]:Rossi comments on the "It was sent back" statement

faking commodity transactions? (Hilliary) Maybe Rossi goes nowhere. but don't be naive about "risk" From: Mary Yugo [mailto:maryyu...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, January 16, 2012 5:24 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Rossi comments on the

Re: [Vo]:Rossi comments on the "It was sent back" statement

Mary, My statement was directed to Beene and not you. It was based on that of Beene, who claimed Rossi's reactor WORKED during the DFG tests but not for the required 48 hours. My statement to you is: So was Beene lying about the "IT WORKED" statement? If so then he may also be lying about th

RE: [Vo]:Rossi comments on the "It was sent back" statement

His name was Thales of Miletus. > Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2012 17:25:53 -0500 > From: sa...@pobox.com > To: vortex-l@eskimo.com > Subject: Re: [Vo]:Rossi comments on the "It was sent back" statement > > > > On 12-01-16 05:11 PM, Zell, Chris wrote: > > Ed

Re: [Vo]:Rossi comments on the "It was sent back" statement

On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 2:23 PM, Aussie Guy E-Cat wrote: > Jones, > > So you are OK with DFG taking Rossi's invention and in effect stealing it > from him? You do admit it worked. > How can we possibly know that anything from Defkalion ever worked? They've never shown any testing in public, they

Re: [Vo]:Rossi comments on the "It was sent back" statement

On 12-01-16 05:11 PM, Zell, Chris wrote: Edison was a greedy liar and cheat who was cruel to animals. Schrodinger was a bigamist. MLK and possibly Einstein were plagiarists. I've read Poincare's papers Einstein supposedly plagiarized. In a word ... he didn't. Poincare had a lot of the pi

Re: [Vo]:Rossi comments on the "It was sent back" statement

On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 2:11 PM, Zell, Chris wrote: > Edison was a greedy liar and cheat who was cruel to animals. Schrodinger > was a bigamist. MLK and possibly Einstein were plagiarists. Werner Von > Braun was a Nazi and may have held rank in the SS. Tesla was a OCD-laden > nutball. > > I'm

Re: [Vo]:Rossi comments on the "It was sent back" statement

Jones, So you are OK with DFG taking Rossi's invention and in effect stealing it from him? You do admit it worked. But not for long enough. So what? IT WORKED. What part of IT WORKED don't you understand? And now your saying DFG will eat the lunch Rossi prepared and you think they are OK in

Re: [Vo]:Rossi comments on the "It was sent back" statement

Zell, Chris wrote: Edison was a greedy liar and cheat who was cruel to animals. Schrodinger > was a bigamist. MLK and possibly Einstein were plagiarists. Werner Von > Braun was a Nazi and may have held rank in the SS. Tesla was a OCD-laden > nutball. > > I'm not sure I'd buy a used car from an

RE: [Vo]:Rossi comments on the "It was sent back" statement

Edison was a greedy liar and cheat who was cruel to animals. Schrodinger was a bigamist. MLK and possibly Einstein were plagiarists. Werner Von Braun was a Nazi and may have held rank in the SS. Tesla was a OCD-laden nutball. I'm not sure I'd buy a used car from any of them. OTOH, I still res

Re: [Vo]:Rossi comments on the "It was sent back" statement

On 12-01-16 04:55 PM, Terry Blanton wrote: On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 4:25 PM, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: Say what? Where's all that atomic hydrogen coming from? Are we back to splitting molecules using ZPE, or is there some other energy source breaking the bond? Geeze, Stephen, don't you pa

Re: [Vo]:Rossi comments on the "It was sent back" statement

On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 4:49 PM, Bob Higgins wrote: > The calculation in the link below appears to be in large error because the > conversion from kWH to MeV is wrong by 1E19 (1 kWH = 2.25E19 MeV).  What I > get is that the association energy of 1g of H to 1g of H2 would be 60 wH > (0.06 kWH), whi

Re: [Vo]:Rossi comments on the "It was sent back" statement

On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 4:25 PM, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: > Say what?  Where's all that atomic hydrogen coming from? > > Are we back to splitting molecules using ZPE, or is there some other energy > source breaking the bond? Geeze, Stephen, don't you pay attention? Molecular hydrogen IS disso

RE: [Vo]:Rossi comments on the "It was sent back" statement

g all this Rossi stuff. From: Mary Yugo [mailto:maryyu...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, January 16, 2012 4:34 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Rossi comments on the "It was sent back" statement On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 1:17 PM, Zell, Chris mailto:

Re: [Vo]:Rossi comments on the "It was sent back" statement

On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 4:30 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > Terry Blanton wrote: > >> >> > As far as I know, Rossi he discovered this method of doing cold fusion. >> >> I would urge everyone to go back and take a look at an earlier thread: >> >> http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg60606

Re: [Vo]:Rossi comments on the "It was sent back" statement

The calculation in the link below appears to be in large error because the conversion from kWH to MeV is wrong by 1E19 (1 kWH = 2.25E19 MeV). What I get is that the association energy of 1g of H to 1g of H2 would be 60 wH (0.06 kWH), which would be way lower than the magnitude of energy reported b

Re: [Vo]:Rossi comments on the "It was sent back" statement

On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 1:28 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > > 1. Tests on his device. Despite the handwaving and nonsense published here > by Yugo and others, these tests are irrefutable. There is not slightest > chance of fraud. > I refuse to rehash that with you. If you believe that those tests we

Re: [Vo]:Rossi comments on the "It was sent back" statement

On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 1:17 PM, Zell, Chris wrote: > ** > Defective analogy. The cars for sale are real and functional, aren't > they? Even if the business is dishonest. > Sorry, I miss your point. I was noting that Jed would likely not buy from someone convicted multiple times of fraud but h

Re: [Vo]:Rossi comments on the "It was sent back" statement

Terry Blanton wrote: > > As far as I know, Rossi he discovered this method of doing cold fusion. > > I would urge everyone to go back and take a look at an earlier thread: > > http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg60606.html > > Which shows that 1 g atomic hydrogen can release 5.35

Re: [Vo]:Rossi comments on the "It was sent back" statement

Zell, Chris wrote: ** > Defective analogy. The cars for sale are real and functional, aren't > they? Even if the business is dishonest. > It is even more defective than that. You would have to compare it to a veterinarian who uses Stroud's reference book. Would you not take his advice for how t

Re: [Vo]:Rossi comments on the "It was sent back" statement

On 12-01-16 04:15 PM, Terry Blanton wrote: On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 3:58 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: As far as I know, Rossi he discovered this method of doing cold fusion. I would urge everyone to go back and take a look at an earlier thread: http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg

Re: [Vo]:Rossi comments on the "It was sent back" statement

Yamali Yamali wrote: > > All the shielding does is to reduce the likelihood for each one. So even 1 > m solid lead won't reduce radiation to unmeasurable levels if there's > enough of it inside. > I meant the most you can get with a 10 kW hot fusion reaction. A few might get through but they wou

RE: [Vo]:Rossi comments on the "It was sent back" statement

Defective analogy. The cars for sale are real and functional, aren't they? Even if the business is dishonest. From: Mary Yugo [mailto:maryyu...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, January 16, 2012 4:09 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Rossi comments on th

Re: [Vo]:Rossi comments on the "It was sent back" statement

On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 3:58 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > As far as I know, Rossi he discovered this method of doing cold fusion. I would urge everyone to go back and take a look at an earlier thread: http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg60606.html Which shows that 1 g atomic hydrog

Re: [Vo]:Rossi comments on the "It was sent back" statement

That depends on how many gamma rays you're dealing with. Its just stochastics. A certain fraction will allways get through. All the shielding does is to reduce the likelihood for each one. So even 1 m solid lead won't reduce radiation to unmeasurable levels if there's enough of it inside. ___

Re: [Vo]:Rossi comments on the "It was sent back" statement

On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 12:58 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > > I cannot understand why Rossi's personality, his problems, > and alleged problems are an issue here in this forum. Why do you -- Jones > -- have such difficulty separating the person from the claim!?? Why do you > have this weird obsession

Re: [Vo]:Rossi comments on the "It was sent back" statement

Jones Beene wrote: > Hey look, you may "want" Rossi the man to be real, instead of just the > technology - but please do not be so gullible as to overlook a mountain of > contrary evidence. What does this mean? How could he be fake, and yet the technology is real? Are you suggesting he stole t

Re: [Vo]:Rossi comments on the "It was sent back" statement

Jones Beene wrote: You simply CANNOT shield this kind of gamma radiation well with lead. Some > always escapes. > That is what experts in radiation say. Actually, you could stop them with enough lead. I believe it takes ~10 cm. If you had 1 m there would be no measurable radiation on the other

RE: [Vo]:Rossi comments on the "It was sent back" statement

Yamali is exactly right. You simply CANNOT shield this kind of gamma radiation well with lead. Some always escapes. There is essentially ZERO chance of selling this kind of reactor in the USA without NRC permit. EEC would be similar. From: Yamali Yamali > He has alway

Re: [Vo]:Rossi comments on the "It was sent back" statement

> He has always said that there are gamma rays. He shields them with lead. There are no gamma rays leaving the device. This is all consistent. Actually no. It is impossible. You can't shield gamma rays completely. You could shield them enough to be so few that they would be undetectable. But if

Re: [Vo]:Rossi comments on the "It was sent back" statement

On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 10:59 AM, Mary Yugo wrote: > > > Also see my questions to Defkalion and the COMPLETELY NONRESPONSIVE EVASIVE REPLY here: > > http://www.defkalion-energy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=865&p=5389#p5389 LOL. I got this response from Defkalion: "You have been permanently

RE: [Vo]:Rossi comments on the "It was sent back" statement

Craig - Did you catch Rossi's interview Friday? He said straight out: "we are in mass production in Miami". Problem is, efforts have been ongoing for some time to locate any factory with the proper permits from OSHA or other agencies, anywhere in Florida - and there are none that come up. You ca

Re: [Vo]:Rossi comments on the "It was sent back" statement

Robert Leguillon wrote: > > But, I agree with her that some of the fanbois need to pull back a little, > too. This is one of the funniest things I've seen posted in a while: > > > Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2012 11:13:54 -0500 > From: jedrothw...@gmail.com > ** > *"Rossi gives the appearance of lying mo

Re: [Vo]:Rossi comments on the "It was sent back" statement

On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 10:47 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > > > > >> And, as to the factory being heated continuously, this is still only >> his word for it, or visitors who saw it running when they were there >> on occasion. > > > I have heard from reliable people who observed it operate over long >

Re: [Vo]:Rossi comments on the "It was sent back" statement

On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 10:22 AM, Jones Beene wrote: > *From:* Mary Yugo > > > It's not so much proven lies as it is constant inconsistencies, > vagueness, tangential answers to obviously relevant and harmless questions, > spouting off about snakes and clowns, and general avoidance of credible

Re: [Vo]:Rossi comments on the "It was sent back" statement

Jones Beene wrote: > LOL ! That is about the lamest defense of AR I have heard. Hilarious > really, > this makes my day. > I am not defending him. I am describing him. > > > He has difficulty telling the truth in a way that does not make it look > like a lie. > > Now why would that be? > It

RE: [Vo]:Rossi comments on the "It was sent back" statement

Having said all that - let me be clear that good evidence still indicates Rossi has invented a robust energy anomaly. That is where myself and Yugo part company. She believes that the dishonesty extends to everything, but that is wrong. At the bottom of it all, there is enough proof from other

Re: [Vo]:Rossi comments on the "It was sent back" statement

Good grief. What is it with the Windom-Larson crowd? I mean while I'm skeptical that anyone has "the theory" to explain any of this yet, I will admit that Windom-Larson may be right. But still, why the religious wars? What's wrong with these people? On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 10:02 AM, Jones Been

Re: [Vo]:Rossi comments on the "It was sent back" statement

On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 1:22 PM, Jones Beene wrote: > Are you saying his denial of culpability in the sordid Petrodragon affair is > not a big lie? Or the money laundering - or the claim that he did not know > that he had a “mail order” degree? Or the many lies about the TEG project? > And, as fo

RE: [Vo]:Rossi comments on the "It was sent back" statement

From: Mary Yugo > It's not so much proven lies as it is constant inconsistencies, vagueness, tangential answers to obviously relevant and harmless questions, spouting off about snakes and clowns, and general avoidance of credible answers. Well, Mary - "inconsistencies" may be what it is abo

Re: [Vo]:Rossi comments on the "It was sent back" statement

On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 12:56 PM, Mary Yugo wrote: > It's not so much proven lies as it is constant inconsistencies, vagueness, > tangential answers to obviously relevant and harmless questions, spouting > off about snakes and clowns, and general avoidance of credible answers.  In > a recent post

Re: [Vo]:Rossi comments on the "It was sent back" statement

On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 8:40 AM, Craig Haynie wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 11:02 AM, Jones Beene wrote: > > >> Rossi sometimes plays word games. Jones did not claim that it was > > "given back". His comment is more like it was "returned for repairs". > > > > That is correct. Not only that,

RE: [Vo]:Rossi comments on the "It was sent back" statement

Ok. Yes it is true that DGT chose their name before Rossi failed the test, as I have been reminded just now. >From previous post: "When Rossi could not pass that test... [DGT] were all smiles. It probably has something to do with why they chose the name Defkalion. For those who are not aware: Deu

Re: [Vo]:Rossi comments on the "It was sent back" statement

On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 11:02 AM, Jones Beene wrote: >> Rossi sometimes plays word games.  Jones did not claim that it was > "given back". His comment is more like it was "returned for repairs". > > That is correct. Not only that, Rossi has all the characteristics of a > pathological liar, and li

RE: [Vo]:Rossi comments on the "It was sent back" statement

I've limited my skeptical Rossi criticisms awaiting a new test or any sort of verifiable information. I commend maryyugo for pulling back (a bit) on her repeated arm waving of "proof" and "independent testing", when no new information has been revealed. But, I agree with her that some of the f

RE: [Vo]:Rossi comments on the "It was sent back" statement

-Original Message- From: Jed Rothwell > Rossi gives the appearance of lying more than he actually lies. LOL ! That is about the lamest defense of AR I have heard. Hilarious really, this makes my day. > He has difficulty telling the truth in a way that does not make it look like a lie.

Re: [Vo]:Rossi comments on the "It was sent back" statement

By the way, this "quiescence" problem does not exist as far as I know. Reliable people have observed Rossi's devices run continuously for days, and the one at the factory did run for months, as claimed. Rossi gives the appearance of lying more than he actually lies. He has difficulty telling t

Re: [Vo]:Rossi comments on the "It was sent back" statement

Jones Beene wrote: But even if he can do this with better controls, and proves himself to be close to the great inventor he imagines himself to be, he is still a liar. Many great inventors were accomplished liars. See Edison's quote about batteries: "When a man gets on to accumulators [batter

RE: [Vo]:Rossi comments on the "It was sent back" statement

-Original Message- From: Terry Blanton >   Another “rumorist” has written somewhere that our Customer has given >   us back the 1 MW E-Cat: this is another stupidity, totally false. >   Warm Regards, >   A.R. > Rossi sometimes plays word games. Jones did not claim that it was "given bac

Re: [Vo]:Rossi comments on the "It was sent back" statement

Isn't that 1st costomer that is helping him build the small e-cats? I remember that by the end of last december, Rossi said he had a great breakthrough due to the collaboration with the customer. 2012/1/16 Terry Blanton > On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 7:44 AM, Aussie Guy E-Cat > wrote: > > http://www

Re: [Vo]:Rossi comments on the "It was sent back" statement

On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 7:44 AM, Aussie Guy E-Cat wrote: > http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=510&cpage=42#comment-170607 > >  * >   Andrea Rossi >   January 16th, 2012 at 7:09 AM >   > > >   Dear Roger: >   Anoth