It’s more complicated than that. Everyone borrows to a greater or to a less extent.
Mills borrowed at little, Rossi borrowed a lot. Yet in the end – success may require both borrowers - and probably one or two more. From: James Bowery Rossi is known to be misleading in his statements -- and for obvious reasons of commercial advantage -- but he seems to be avoiding outright lies about his theory. So what might be "misleading" about his denial of Windom Larson without being a lie? …I've seen Rossi deny Windom Larson -- which is interesting given that he says he wants to give no information on the underlying theory -- but I haven't seen a denial of Mills's GUToCP from Rossi. Has he let such a denial slip? Jones Beene wrote: As for the patent which most resembles the Hot-Cat, it is probably this one: “Molecular hydrogen laser” US 7773656 to Mills. Of course, Rossi’s device is not a laser, but in operation it is closer than you may realize - unless you have followed the SPP discussions. A picture is worth 1000 words… http://fusionfroide.ch/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/Rossis-HOT-CAT-reactor.jpg … and no, there is no indication that the photons seen here are coherent, or even superradiant. No evidence is possible since there is no lens. The IR light is coming through and/or heating a stainless steel end-cap. If the electrical input power is as low as claimed, then we are probably seeing superradiance, at least.
