Jed: "If you are forced to close down a lab and fire everyone after spending 7 million Euros, that does not impress your investors or your inner circle."
I can understand the reason for this. When a company knows little in a specified field, they spend money to hire employees and consultants to fill the specialized knowledge gap. As time goes on, the major players in the company learn all that the outsiders have to teach and if these outsiders now become incompatible with the new expertise required as dictated by the new technical directions required to move the project forward, then why waste any more money on this old outdated static technical expertise. DGT brought Dr. Kim on board of late, and he has made a major contribution, even if I now believe his theory is derivative and emergent from more basic LENR principles; the same limitation as Ed Storms by the way. When the project has gone far into the unknown, almost near the end of the trail technically, few can help anymore, so the employment pool that DGT can hire from is near zero. By now for example, I guess that the real time nuclear reaction product analyzer is completed and is yielding results. That would have had to cost big money to develop. I am interested to see its results. Those results will say a lot about the character of the reaction. But the people needed to develop that machine are no longer needed. DGT must be working on a new version of their reactor just as Rossi is. If there are any new skills that they need to complete that new version of their reactor, they will contract that out to get new expertise but based on Jed's public opinion of them, I don't think that they will confide in Jed about that or anything else at this juncture...if I am any judge of human nature. On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 11:15 PM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 10:26 PM, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com>wrote: > >> >> There are no facts! THERE ARE NO DETAILS! That is my whole point. That's >> what I have been saying, again and again. Defkalion has published NOTHING. >> No one paper. Not so much as a calibration curve. >> > > In preamble, remember that even some tests that Rossi did were not > successful. > > > > > > There is a ton of information in those two papers issued from ICCF-17 and > ICCF-18 and the presentations produced by Kim or did you forget or were you > even interested in it. There is more that goes into theory than the > ability to boil water. What is your opinion on the data that was contained > in these sources? > > > > > > There is far more info in those releases than Rossi ever produced, and > Rossi's credibility at boing water is equal to or less than that of > Defkalion. > > > > > > This is just an exercise in the pear review process. Defkalion has made > some amazing scientific claims. If Defkalion is not credible, then their > scientifically derived claims are not credible. That lack of credibility > extends to all the theories that embrace the validity of those scientific > claims and data. > > > > > > It is best to stop or invalidate any false claims sooner rather than > later. We must be ruthless in this regard. On the other hand, if the claims > are true we must remove the taint around those claims as some as possible. > > > > Being so prominent in the field of LENR, Jed, holds a special position as > a practitioner of valid an unquestioned peer review. > > > > > > If he can't reveal his hidden sources because of confidentiality, that > restriction on information must somehow be overcome in support of immediate > scientific truth to advance LENR as a field of science. > > >> >> They did a video demonstration at ICCF17. Some months later they came out >> and said the flow rate measurement was not right so the results were >> questionable. >> >> They said that many experts visited them and confirmed the results. They >> said they would publish these evaluations. That was 2 years ago. >> > > Why release data on a version of a reactor design that is two versions old. > > >> Not one evaluation has been published. All of the experts I know who went >> there are under NDA but they told me a little. They said "it did not work." >> Period. >> >> So, the ball is in your court. If you know of *any* evidence that they >> have something, tell us about it. Anything at all! If you do not know of >> anything, then why do you believe them? >> > > >> >> It is up to Defkalion to make a scientific case. If you believe them, it >> is up to you to point to some published scientific information. >> >> > I have been. I have references over a hundred papers in support of a > theory that is compatible with the data and the operation behavior of their > reactor that Deflation has released. > > Since these papers do not deal with boiling water, the measuring of said > energy production, they obviously hold little interest for you. >
