The main differences are between the modes of thinking and acting. Have you read hat Piantelli says about the Scientific Method? This makes you reliable and accountable because if you make a hypothesis or a statement then it is your obligation to demonstrate it by experiment(s) A scientist does not use the prelogical method of thinking (see my http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com/2011/03/modes-of-thinking-my-taxonomy.html) he needs to know the cause effect relationships. And also dislikes the postlogical mode of thinking- authority based- see the Galantini story. Using a lixometer to measure the quality of farinha, instead of measuring what is relevant. Take for example Piantelli's 2008 hypothesis (described in Roy's report) he has made series of experiments with many if not all transition metals for all he steps- hydrogen negative ions formation., orbital capture etc.
It is a class difference between Piantelli and Rossi, their styles are opposed. Re Focardi (see him in good friendship with Piantelli here: http://www.infinite-energy.com/images/pdfs/astiworkshop.pdf) Focardi was in a sense the second violin in an orchestra led by Piantelli- all the successful experiments were done in Siena not Bologna. No problem that Focardi has joined Rossi but it is a problem that he has interrupted abruptly any communication with his former friend. And an even greater problem is that he says that has NO idea what the wonderful catalyst is (in any variant) Re the publication- the University tradition to put the authors in alphabetical order solves some rivalities but makes much more harm. Research is not a democratic activity it is pure Extremistan and not Mediocristan (if you have read the Black Swan of Taleb More at my blog, these days Your questions are a justification of the necessity to understand well what says Galileo. Peter On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 3:07 AM, Daniel Rocha <[email protected]> wrote: > But Focardi assited Rossi, just like he assited Piantelli. If people think > Focardi could be fooled by a demonstration of huge power excess he could > well be get wrong the measurment of a demonstration of low power excess. -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
