As Akira already stated the wording is not very clear even for Italian speakers. I share same feelings as Akira on the success of further testing.
I think the most important question, as always in this field, is about reproducibility, but Eng. Abundo, seems quite clear about this and says that if an experiment does not work they will help finding what is wrong with that setup. So they seem very confident. "Abbiamo poi sfidato i detrattori ad eseguire loro le misurazioni, e noi controlliamo dove fanno gli errori, rendendoci disponibili persino a prestare immediatamente il nostro apparecchio ma conducendo le prove in nostra presenza (smaschereremmo persino un detrattore prestigiatore!)". "We then challenged detractors [skeptic] to make the measurements, we check where they make the mistakes, we are even available to lend the apparatus, but the tests must be made in front of us (we would even expose a magician detractor)" The patent idea to protect further open source development with this setup is just wonderful. mic Il 23 aprile 2012 21:13, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> ha scritto: > Akira Shirakawa <shirakawa.ak...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> I hope it is as you say. However, subtle wording details in the original >> letter sent to 22passi by eng. Ugo Abundo make it look like they don't have >> clear-cut experimental data . . . > > > It wouldn't surprise me if they don't. > > >> >> I'm being ultra-cautious because given the exposure it's currently >> receiving (and will further receive), this story can potentially end up >> really bad for many people. > > > Hey, no big deal if they are wrong. They are just high school kids. > > Still, I am going to hold off putting this in a News Item at LENR-CANR.org. > I will wait for more details. > > The News Items at LENR-CANR.org are way behind events and they only cover a > small fraction of total events. Because I am lazy. > > I wonder if Krivit has covered this? > > - Jed >
