Physics is natural science.
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Jed Rothwell 
  To: vortex-l@eskimo.com 
  Sent: Sunday, October 23, 2011 2:40 PM
  Subject: Re: [Vo]:1 MW plant testing is underway.


  That's excellent news. Very open of Rossi. Entirely reasonable.


  We complain about Rossi's habits, but you have give him credit for allowing a 
lot of access to this tests, and for giving out a great deal of information. 
The problem is not that he is unwilling to share data. It is that his tests do 
not produce good data, and he does not write scientific papers.


  People have said that Rossi is a liar, or he exaggerates, or he cannot be 
trusted. As I see it, he has a split personality. When he talks about business 
or personal matters, I think he gets excited and he blurts out nonsense. I 
don't take this nonsense seriously. He scapegoats people -- including me. He 
can be devious, sometimes planting misinformation to cause dissension. I know 
he does that, because he did it to me several times.


  However, when it comes to engineering-based technical claims, as far as I 
know, Rossi is the soul of honestly. He has often made astounding claims that 
seem utterly impossible. As far as I know, all the ones that have been put to 
the test turned out to be true. I do not know about that factory heater that 
ran for a year. Cousin Peter says he cannot believe it. I can't be sure it is 
real, but I am sure it is unwise to bet against Rossi.


  I do not think there is a shred of evidence that Rossi has ever tried to use 
a hidden source of energy, fake instruments, or any other kind of fraud. It 
would be much harder to do this with his cells and reactors than with any 
previous cold fusion devices, because the scale of the reaction is so much 
larger. He is careless with instruments, and sloppy, and this sometimes 
obscures the results. That is not a deliberate effort to hide results or escape 
from scrutiny. It is what it appears to be: sloppy. Lots of people are like 
that. Some geniuses such are Arata are like that. Many programmers write 
unstructured spaghetti code too. It is not because they are devious or they 
want to sabotage the project or infuriate their co-workers. It is because they 
are sloppy. They should be promoted to management where they will cause less 
harm.


  Many engineers and inventors have this kind of split personality. Edison is a 
famous example. He was a "sharp dealer" as they said in the 19th century. Sharp 
dealing -- cheating, breaking contracts, and taking unfair advantage -- was 
widespread and considered normal back then. He put on Dog and Pony show 
exhibits of his inventions. When investors asked him how much progress he was 
making, he lied so extravagantly, it would have embarrassed a data processing 
project manager circa 1972, when computer programming was at the lowest ebb of 
reliability and projects routinely went off the rails. Edison did all of that, 
but he would never lie to himself, to his coworkers, or in a serious technical 
discussion. He did not have it in him to lie. Most engineers and programmers do 
not. It would be analogous to a farmer who neglects to plant seeds and then 
expects a crop to grow. Every technician in history has known that you cannot 
fool Mother Nature.


  I cannot judge Rossi's assertions about theory or transmutations. 
Theoreticians tell me they are bunk. I suppose they are, but Rossi is unaware 
of that. They are not lies.


  I have also learned to believe everything Rossi says about his operational 
plans. When he said he was building a 1 MW reactor, I believed him. He says he 
will try to turn it on. I have no doubt he means it. I just hope he does not 
blow himself up, or get arrested for operating it without a license. I hope 
that someone dissuades him but I doubt anyone will. If he changes his mind at 
the last minute, I would never accuse him of lying. A person who does cutting 
edge research who does not frequently change his mind, his plans, and his 
entire approach will fail catastrophically. Flexibility is essential to that 
job, as it is to a general fighting a battle. As Eisenhower said, "no battle 
plan survives contact with the enemy." You have to respond to things as they 
are, not as you hoped they would be. I wish Rossi would change course more 
often, not less often.


  I think Rossi is careless with instruments because he is old fashioned and he 
agrees with Fleischmann and me that direct observation is the best science. It 
is better than proof by instruments and calculation. He does not bother to 
write down the thermocouple readings, or insert an SD card, because he thinks 
that the heat continuing for 4 hours is all the proof anyone can ask for. 
Worrying about the thermocouples when you have a reactor too hot to touch is 
ridiculous. It is useless nitpicking in the face of definitive, first-principle 
proof that you can literally feel with your hand. The instruments are the icing 
on the cake; the real proof in Rossi's best work is visual and tactile 
observation. That is what Rossi told Lewan and me.


  Peter Heckert calls this "junk science." We think this is still the best way 
to do science, as it has been for all of human history. Natural science is the 
queen of sciences -- physics is not! In natural science and much of biology 
even today visual observations still rule. People look at animals, plants, 
rocks and weather. They smell and touch. Newton may have been greatest 
scientist, but Darwin was a close second, and he never used an instrument or a 
mathematical formula. All of his work was based on field observation and 
dissection, followed by analysis. As Francis Bacon said, "we are not to deny 
the authority of the human senses and understanding, although weak; but rather 
to furnish them with assistance."


  - Jed

Reply via email to