I knew a pathological liar when I was younger, she was one of the smartest people I have ever met, but would lie to no benefit other than to make herself look better or garner sympathy from the bad things she said had happened to her. I didn't realise it at first, thinking she had had a lot of bad luck, but after knowing her for a year I realised that while the individual anecdotes and stories were believable, when examined closely there were a lot of inconsistencies, and taken together as having all happened to the same person it was unbelievable - just an intricate web of exaggerations and lies. She also had a history of moving towns ditching old friends and making new ones every few years in order to (I now surmise) cover her tracks. Before I had had enough on those times I did call her out on it she would never admit to anything, but always go on attack or come up with some new story to cover herself.
Sound familiar? I think that Rossi is getting to the point where he has embellished statements and claims so much over the last 12 months that he can no longer keep them all straight in his head. The internet has a long memory, and he is having to backtrack to get out of the worst of the contradictions and exaggerations that he has created (I think blaming translation issues is disingenuous at best). The stories, promises and claims are getting bigger to distract from the earlier mis-steps, even while he fails to deliver any tangible progress. This is unfortunate because he is having to devote so much time to covering up the holes in his stories (and quite possibly his investor's concerns) that I think it is now costing him any chance of progressing the technology. I think it likely that Rossi has made an important breakthrough, though my feeling is that he has exaggerated some measure of performance greatly (be it gain, power output, duration of run, no radiation or some combination of these). He may have even fooled himself with his steam based calorimetry and found that he wasn't producing the power he thought he was. His failure to demonstrate successfully to the several hard-nosed scientific observer teams that he has tried to establish commercial links with (Defkalion, US group) in August-September is pretty telling and I think he is now trapped by the story he has told to the point that he feels that he cannot reveal the true situation without totally destroying his credibility, he instead trying to buy time to fix whatever problem he has. I hoped for better from Defkalion, though I have growing doubts about them too now. They claim a 5kW reactor Ø40mmx100mm, and at a temperature of 400°C if exposed to the air it would only radiate and convect a few hundred watts. But their press release states that they intend to "isolate" it for the coming tests (I think they mean insulate) and are not using liquid cooling but may blow air though it to cool it, so power output is likely to be limited to 10's-100's of Watts. It would be very easy to implement crude air flow calorimetry (<$100 and perhaps 1 hour of work to cover the reactor with a plastic sheet, blow air through and measure the temperature rise and flow rate with a cheap thermometer and anemometer). So what is going on? Why are they "isolating" the reactor? Are they trying to hide a performance short-fall too? It is getting very frustrating. We have reports from Brillouin, Arata, Miley, Ahern, Celani, Piantelli, Focardi et al of pretty substantial outputs and gains. And we hope for much better from Rossi and Defkalion, but even if there are flaws or performance short-falls, knowing exactly what the performance is would give the world more chance to assess, experiment, understand and improve upon what has been achieved. On 20 February 2012 12:42, Wolf Fischer <wolffisc...@gmx.de> wrote: > Some weeks ago, Rossi said that NI, he and the customer were working > together on the 1MW plant. And now the customer wants something different? > Why change a running system (if it ever was running)? And why is it > important to the customer, which company supplies the controlling mechanism > for a heating plant? > > Wolf > > > From Rossi: >> >> "Also our Customer has chosen other >> suppliers for the first generation of the domestic E-Cats and of the 1 >> MW plants. " >> >> It is possible that a simple PLC/PAC could have been chosen. I don't >> think stabilization would be that big a challenge. All Rossi needed >> was some feedback. >> >> T >> >> >
