And HP & Dell ended up selling the most PC's... I predict this quantum rabbit is just beginning to multiply
Stewart On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 1:48 PM, Axil Axil <[email protected]> wrote: > You can bet your eye teeth that Rossi et al are trying to duplicate the > spark control mechanism that DGT is currently demonstrating. In this LENR > activation area, DGT is ahead in the LENR technology race and Rossi wants > it badly. > > > > It reminds me of what the competition was like between Jobs and Gates in > the PC race, when Gates saw windows on a MAC. Gates said, “I WANT IT!!!” > > > > Rossi must now be saying... I want that spark. > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 1:36 PM, Axil Axil <[email protected]> wrote: > >> There might well be a LENR reaction strength component to this even >> isotope issue. >> >> >> >> The DGT reactor might well produce a stronger reaction intensity that can >> crack upon open the Ni58 and Ni60 isotopes that the weaker Rossi reaction >> cannot do. >> >> >> >> If a reactor with a stronger reaction is invented, the isotope question >> may not be relevant because a strong LENR reaction may affect all matter >> equally. >> >> >> >> If the LENR reaction is variable based on strength level, basing a patent >> on isotope activity may not be smart. >> >> >> >> >> On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 12:39 PM, Jones Beene <[email protected]>wrote: >> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: [email protected] >>> >>> >Brad Lowe: It was reported that the nickel isotopes all react, except >>> that >>> >Ni 61 does not react. (Ideas why this would be?) >>> >>> 61Ni is the only naturally occurring NI isotope with odd spin (and hence >>> a >>> nuclear magnetic moment). >>> >>> >>> The more logical explanation is that that DGT is trying to distance >>> themselves from the Claims of Rossi patent application, in the event it >>> will >>> be granted. >>> >>> If you accept the validity of the DGT demo, and it looks damn good to me >>> despite a few problems, then Rossi's demo should be accepted also, and >>> the >>> Patent Law under section 713.98 permits the demonstration of a working >>> device. So we pretty much have to assume that the Rossi IP will be >>> granted >>> eventually - since he can actually demonstrate the effect. We know that >>> he >>> has claimed that Ni-62 is the active isotope and if true, it would keep >>> DGT >>> out of the game. >>> >>> Anyway - it is extremely doubtful, given the expense of pure isotopes and >>> Defkalion's lack of capital, that they have done the correct testing to >>> back >>> such a self-serving statement. Rossi has been much better funded. >>> >>> Therefore DGT has every incentive, in seeking investors - to insert that >>> kind of comment about not having the same technology as Rossi, even if >>> untrue. They cannot afford to be seen as having copied Rossi's >>> technology - >>> when his patent is eventually granted; but everyone on this forum knows >>> the >>> history going back a few years; and that DGT actually admitted to copying >>> the formula at the University of Sienna. >>> >>> IOW - If they - DGT are to attract sufficient outside funding, and they >>> badly need it - then they essentially "have to" invent something like >>> this >>> story to overcome due diligence objections. >>> >>> In spite of the successful demo, the statement about isotope activity >>> from >>> DGT is almost certainly self-serving and bogus. >>> >>> Jones >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >
