Thanks for the response.

I think the chance the technology is a fraud is very, very low. I would say 
less 
than 1%. I'm at the point where I think anyone who thinks this is a fraud must 
have an agenda, be a paid troll, or have a severe case of pathological 
skepticism.

I'm not too concerned about the devices that blew up. I think that happened 
when 
they were running in self sustain mode or in a very high power condition. I 
think there are obvious safety mechanisms that can prevent such explosions. 
Such 
as placing plugs in the device that melt at a certain temperature that would 
release nitrogen or other inert gases into the reactor. Or such a plug could 
allow hydrogen to vent into the atmosphere reducing the pressure and reducing 
the reaction.

I'm also impressed by the fact that so far not a single test of the system has 
failed. Actually, not a single test has been less than a success. Even the test 
in which one of the resistors broke produced a large amount of gain! 


Rossi also claims that Greece has granted all safety certifications and will be 
allowing the sale of the units. This tells me that they must be satisfied the 
systems are not producing significant amounts of radiation.

We may disagree on how Rossi should go about developing the technology, but I 
appreciate you providing some sanity to this forum.






________________________________
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com>
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Mon, May 2, 2011 7:57:47 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:FAKE or REAL -- April test -- NO Chemical Fakes eliminated


noone noone <thesteornpa...@yahoo.com> wrote:
 
I do not know why some people keep bringing up the notion that this technology 
is a fake. It is not rational in my opinion. 

>

It seems odd to me, as well. I am much more worried about other aspects of the 
technology, such as:

37 devices blew up; the device may not be as reproducible as Rossi hopes; 
performance may not be as stable as he thinks; and some radioactive product 
might show up.

There is a still a remote possibility that it is fraud, but that is far down on 
the list of things that worry me. I do not understand why people are so 
obsessed 
with this possibility. Do you know of any other fake cold fusion claims? I 
don't. Why would anyone suppose that this particular one, out of all those 
hundreds, happens to be fake? I guess because it is so dramatic, but it was 
reasonable to think -- or at least hope -- that a dramatic breakthrough would 
come sooner or later. Ni-H has long been stuck at that back of the pack, with 
low power density and poor reproducibility, but everyone I know has been taking 
it seriously since Mills, Piantelli and Patterson. Rossi just happens to be the 
first to try the Arata technique with Ni-H. He did a splendid job of it. It is 
not a bit surprising it works; it is only surprising that it works this well.

(I have no idea whether he was directly inspired by Arata, or even knew of his 
work before the patent was drafted. I would love to find out.)

I also do not understand why people are so concerned about Rossi's personality 
and his quirks. That worried me a lot last year, when there was no proof of his 
claims, but now that we have independent verifications who cares what kind of 
person he is? He could be a pathological liar, but thermocouples and weight 
scales "are not built to comprehend a lie." Personality should only be 
considered when we have nothing else to go on. Any number of scientists and 
genius programmers are ever stranger than Rossi. Some of the other people in 
cold fusion are mad scientists from Central Casting. I won't mention any names.

Actually, the fraction of strange people may not be much higher in cold fusion 
than in other walks of life. Look at automobile salesmen, grocery cashiers, 
data 
entry clerks, Japanese farmers, or airplane pilots and you will find many 
strange people. There's naught so queer as folk.

Let me add that if Alan Fletcher were to turn his considerable powers of 
analysis toward Pd-D cold fusion, I am pretty sure he can prove it might well 
be 
fake. If he will examine the plasma fusion program or the Top Quark claim, he 
can prove these things must be fake. There is practically no evidence for them! 
Plasma fusion "excess power" is a tiny fraction of input. There has not been a 
single independent verification for these claims, never mind an independent 
replication. Plus, as Stephen A. Lawrence pointed out, the Brown's Ferry 
nuclear 
plant was recently revealed to be a gigantic hoax:

"They're using DIESEL POWER to run them?

Jeez, all these years and they STILL haven't closed the loop on a
so-called 'nuclear reactor'?

That's SUCH a red flag..."

- Jed

Reply via email to