[Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Defkalion: “We have Rossi’s formula”

[Terry Blanton]

2011/11/29 Daniel Rocha :
> I think the only device that did not somehow impress the people who attended
> demonstrations, according to these, was the one shown to Krivit.

Maybe it was Rossi who set up Krivit knowing that he supported
Piantelli and that Krivit would ultimately look foolish reporting
negatively on the eCat.

  I rub my hands.

T

[Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Defkalion: “We have Rossi’s formula”

[Daniel Rocha]

I think the only device that did not somehow impress the people who
attended demonstrations, according to these, was the one shown to Krivit.

2011/11/29 Mary Yugo 

>
>
> 2011/11/29 Daniel Rocha 
>
>> He didn't say how much that was heated! But it's weird that he mentions
>> that. It's like he is inviting the patent analyzers to test his device, LOL!
>>
>
>
> Nothing we know about this device suggests it was ever shown to the press.
>   Krivit wanted to see it but he wrote that by the time he was ready to ask
> about it, he was already so disappointed and tired that he didn't bother.
>Rossi once said, IIRC, that the output was 35 kW.   Yet he's always
> shown much weaker devices except of course the half megawatt demo which
> really wasn't a demo because nobody saw the data being taken except the
> engineer who supposedly worked for the perhaps mythical client.  It's *all*
> very puzzling.
>



-- 
Daniel Rocha - RJ
danieldi...@gmail.com

[Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Defkalion: “We have Rossi’s formula”

[Mary Yugo]

2011/11/29 Daniel Rocha 

> He didn't say how much that was heated! But it's weird that he mentions
> that. It's like he is inviting the patent analyzers to test his device, LOL!
>


Nothing we know about this device suggests it was ever shown to the press.
  Krivit wanted to see it but he wrote that by the time he was ready to ask
about it, he was already so disappointed and tired that he didn't bother.
   Rossi once said, IIRC, that the output was 35 kW.   Yet he's always
shown much weaker devices except of course the half megawatt demo which
really wasn't a demo because nobody saw the data being taken except the
engineer who supposedly worked for the perhaps mythical client.  It's *all*
very puzzling.

[Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Defkalion: “We have Rossi’s formula”

[Daniel Rocha]

He didn't say how much that was heated! But it's weird that he mentions
that. It's like he is inviting the patent analyzers to test his device, LOL!

2011/11/29 Robert Leguillon 

>  /snip/
> Did he ever say "entire" factory or just heat a factory? :) Or was only
> his room? Seeing his old tests to McKubre, it should be something below
> <400W, if that was the state of the art back then.
> /snip/
>
>
> In his patent application, he states:
>
> [0060] A practical embodiment of the inventive apparatus,
>
> installed on Oct. 16, 2007, is at present perfectly operating 24
>
> hours per day, and provides an amount of heat sufficient to
>
> heat the factory of the Company EON of via Carlo Ragazzi
> 18, at Bondeno (Province of Ferrara).
>
> United States Patent Application Publication
>
> Pub. No.: US 201110005506 Al
> Pub. Date: Jan. 13,2011
>
>



-- 
Daniel Rocha - RJ
danieldi...@gmail.com

RE: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Defkalion: “We have Rossi’s formula”

[Robert Leguillon]

/snip/
Did he ever say "entire" factory or just heat a factory? :) Or was only his 
room? Seeing his old tests to McKubre, it should be something below <400W, if 
that was the state of the art back then.
/snip/
 
In his patent application, he states:

[0060] A practical embodiment of the inventive apparatus,
installed on Oct. 16, 2007, is at present perfectly operating 24
hours per day, and provides an amount of heat sufficient to
heat the factory of the Company EON of via Carlo Ragazzi
18, at Bondeno (Province of Ferrara).



United States Patent Application Publication
Pub. No.: US 201110005506 Al
Pub. Date: Jan. 13,2011
  

Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Defkalion: “We have Rossi’s formula”

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

That people conspired together to steal the IP / trade secrets says it 
is not prior knowledge.


AG


On 11/29/2011 11:33 PM, Daniel Rocha wrote:
Technically, Rossi still has to prove the "I" part of the IP, besides, 
he must show that it is not based on prior art from Piantelli.


2011/11/29 Aussie Guy E-Cat >


More like just another snake who needed the spectrum to work out
Rossi's key IP. If proven, all involved are just common thieves.

AG


On 11/29/2011 11:12 PM, Daniel Rocha wrote:

So, if that is confirmed, we can put Piantelli also as a
scammer, from the point of view of the hardest skeptics.

2011/11/29 Akira Shirakawa mailto:shirakawa.ak...@gmail.com>
>>


   On 2011-11-29 12:14, Akira Shirakawa wrote:

   Hello group,


   For what it's worth, Daniele Passerini on a recent comment
in his
   Blog [1] is saying that when Roy Virgilio denied any
relationship
   between Piantelli and DGT, he answered him privately that
   according to his sources both do have an agreement, but he
   (Daniele) wouldn't comment publicly about it before this matter
   got clearer. Today's NyTeknik article according to him gives
   credit to the information he was given.

   [1]
http://22passi.blogspot.com/2011/11/ma-facciamola-finita.html





--
Daniel Rocha - RJ
danieldi...@gmail.com