Hillhater
100 TW
http://www.leonardo-ecat.com/fp/
-
Howdy! we're looking for donations to finish custom knowledgebase software for this forum. Please see our Funding drive thread
This man may change the world Andrea Rossi & eCat
- Thread starter bigmoose
- Start date
http://www.leonardo-ecat.com/fp/
Nothing is ever straightforward with this guy.
Courtesy of EcatNews:
Andrea Rossi
November 12th, 2011 at 8:57 AM
WARNING: THE WEBSITE http://WWW.LEONARDO-ECAT.COM IS NOT OUR WEBSITE. IT HAS NOT BEEN APPROVED, IT IS A DRAFT OF A PROPOSAL WHOSE TEXT HAS TO BE CONTROLLED, APPROVED. WE ASKED TO THE INFORMATIC WHO PROPOSED IT TO PUT IT IMMEDIATELY OUT OF THE NET, BECAUSE IT CONTAINS SUBSTANTIAL ERRORS, WRONG NAMES IN WRONG PLACES :SPECIFICALLY, ALL THE NAMES PUT IN THE PAGE “BONA FIDE” ARE TOTALLY WRONG AND SUCH NAMES HAVE NOT TO BE PUT IN THAT POST.
WARM REGARDS,
ANDREA ROSSI
Courtesy of EcatNews:
Andrea Rossi
November 12th, 2011 at 8:57 AM
WARNING: THE WEBSITE http://WWW.LEONARDO-ECAT.COM IS NOT OUR WEBSITE. IT HAS NOT BEEN APPROVED, IT IS A DRAFT OF A PROPOSAL WHOSE TEXT HAS TO BE CONTROLLED, APPROVED. WE ASKED TO THE INFORMATIC WHO PROPOSED IT TO PUT IT IMMEDIATELY OUT OF THE NET, BECAUSE IT CONTAINS SUBSTANTIAL ERRORS, WRONG NAMES IN WRONG PLACES :SPECIFICALLY, ALL THE NAMES PUT IN THE PAGE “BONA FIDE” ARE TOTALLY WRONG AND SUCH NAMES HAVE NOT TO BE PUT IN THAT POST.
WARM REGARDS,
ANDREA ROSSI
Dee Jay
100 kW
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2007
- Messages
- 1,211
http://www.e-catworld.com/2011/11/leonardo-corporation-web-site-now-live-rossi-says-not-yet-official-due-to-errors/Joseph C. said:
ah crap, detractors trying to muck things up, there's just something seriously WRONG with these people's brains...
Hillhater
100 TW
Yes, there is some serious resource being put in by various parties to screw with this project !
I wonder why they feel it necessary to put this much effort into discrediting this particular development, since if its a fraud it will die on its own eventually.
..and who is funding the sabotage ?
Other info on the EcatNews site suggests more commercial interests, in the form of National Instruments, have now affiliated with the Ecat.
I wonder why they feel it necessary to put this much effort into discrediting this particular development, since if its a fraud it will die on its own eventually.
..and who is funding the sabotage ?
Other info on the EcatNews site suggests more commercial interests, in the form of National Instruments, have now affiliated with the Ecat.
bigmoose
1 MW
Defkalion issues press release with their version of eCat called Hyperion. They allege that the Rossi Fat Cat was their version 3 of Hyperion that was "leaked" to Rossi... The press release is showing version 7 of Hyperion. Just FYI. You could make a movie out of all of this ...
http://www.defkalion-energy.com/files/DGT_PRESS RELEASE_2011-11-14.pdf
http://www.defkalion-energy.com/files/DGT_PRESS RELEASE_2011-11-14.pdf
There is an interesting article on ecatnews who has nicely upgraded his site laying out NASA's support of LENR. They are leaning heavily towards the phenomenon being real.
http://ecatnews.com/?p=1570
Here are the PDFs of presentation slides at a NASA LENR workshop. Steven Krivit obtained them using a freedom of information request.
http://newenergytimes.com/v2/government/NASA/20110922NASA-Zawodny-GRC-LENR-Workshop.pdf
The one below is particularly relevant as it deals with Rossi and his Ecat.
http://newenergytimes.com/v2/government/NASA/20110922NASA-Nelson-GRC-LENR-Workshop.pdf
http://newenergytimes.com/v2/government/NASA/20110922NASA-Bushnell-GRC-LENR-Workshop.pdf
http://ecatnews.com/?p=1570
Here are the PDFs of presentation slides at a NASA LENR workshop. Steven Krivit obtained them using a freedom of information request.
http://newenergytimes.com/v2/government/NASA/20110922NASA-Zawodny-GRC-LENR-Workshop.pdf
The one below is particularly relevant as it deals with Rossi and his Ecat.
http://newenergytimes.com/v2/government/NASA/20110922NASA-Nelson-GRC-LENR-Workshop.pdf
http://newenergytimes.com/v2/government/NASA/20110922NASA-Bushnell-GRC-LENR-Workshop.pdf
Gordo
100 kW
Joseph C. said:
Hosay,
That is a compound miter saw commonly used to cut aluminum. Depending on the blade and blade speed, it can be used to cut 1"+ of SS.
Doctorbass
100 GW
I wonder WHEN someone will DIY his own replica of that reactor and put that on youtube 8)
Doc
Doc
nechaus
100 kW
Something to think about,
To date, if this was true fusion, you would have neutrino detectors going mental when the fusion process is happening, its been tested heaps, and no neutrinos..
I believe Cerns neutrino detectors are the best in the world, not sure if they have been involved, but they should be, to put a end to this.
Now being that some neutrinos are actually faster than photons,
+ Its hard to detect with huge amounts of solar Neutrino's however they generally go in the one direction from the sun,
but what about all the other stars,
I remember reading somewhere The US goverment has now actually said, it is a low level nuclear reaction.
At least if this was real, i could have a decent steam engine on my bike if i wanted to
i could steam clean my house to
who knows really..
To date, if this was true fusion, you would have neutrino detectors going mental when the fusion process is happening, its been tested heaps, and no neutrinos..
I believe Cerns neutrino detectors are the best in the world, not sure if they have been involved, but they should be, to put a end to this.
Now being that some neutrinos are actually faster than photons,
+ Its hard to detect with huge amounts of solar Neutrino's however they generally go in the one direction from the sun,
but what about all the other stars,
I remember reading somewhere The US goverment has now actually said, it is a low level nuclear reaction.
At least if this was real, i could have a decent steam engine on my bike if i wanted to
i could steam clean my house to
who knows really..
nechaus said:
It probably is real. The NASA officials who have been watching this area have concluded this. But they don't think Rossi's device is anywhere near ready for public consumption and they also believe that it will not be able to run for long periods without thermal runaway.
Basically, the phenomenon of LENR is real but it is a long way off being probably developed or understood. What's more confusing, it seems to work with a lot of different materials with varying degrees of efficiency.
nechaus
100 kW
deleted
Sunder
10 MW
The proof of the pudding is in the eating, so they say, and everyone went hungry...
More fizzer than fusion, so Dick's not energised
Tim Barlass
January 15, 2012
Will he invest? ... Dick Smith.
IT WAS billed as a scientific breakthrough providing a clean-energy future for the planet. The poster that lured the good folk of Mullumbimby said: ''Hello clean, green, renewable, inexpensive cold fusion. You are invited to a public meeting.''
There was to be a Skype link-up to Italy with the physicist Andrea Rossi, who would explain how his E-cat machine could take a small amount of energy and turn it into lots of energy. Something for nothing.
It involved a reaction between atoms of hydrogen and nickel.
Advertisement: Story continues below
So about 100 Mullumbimby residents filed into the ex-services club on Friday night. The entrepreneur Dick Smith had offered to invest $200,000 if the physics was proven. He sent along a consulting aerospace engineer and sceptic, Ian Bryce, to assess the machine. In the hall were two screens, ready for the link-up.
Sol Millin, a local retiree and founder of The Byron New Energy Charitable Trust, spoke first, hoping to convince investors. But when it was time for the link-up, the phone didn't ring. And it didn't ring.
Mr Millin told The Sun-Herald: ''I thought it was better if Dr Rossi rang us. He is a very important man and a very busy man and I didn't want to keep him waiting.''
But they had their wires crossed, their timing out of sync. Each was expecting the other to call.
''I didn't bother to blame him and he didn't bother to blame me,'' Mr Millin said. ''I was very disappointed - I was going to stand on the stage and talk directly to the inventor.''
Asked if he though Mr Smith would invest in the project, Mr Millin replied: ''Absolutely.''
Mr Bryce has advised Mr Smith otherwise. ''My view was that it was much too early to talk about investing. I have serious concerns about the invention's credibility and lack of sound scientific theory behind it.''
Mr Smith said: ''I said, get me some evidence and I will put some funding up, but they couldn't even organise the timing for a Skype link-up. I am very suspicious of the whole thing. I am not holding my breath. I will keep my $200,000 in the bank.''
Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/environment/energy-smart/more-fizzer-than-fusion-so-dicks-not-energised-20120114-1q0fv.html#ixzz1jT9zVPz1
nechaus
100 kW
You would think if he was a scammer, this would be his chance to cash up ???
but still who knows... ill wait see if he actually releases anything
but still who knows... ill wait see if he actually releases anything
oldpiper
1 kW
Joseph C. said:nechaus said:
He certainly isn't a conventional one anyway.
This video will allay any fears that this field (not Rossi now) is not genuine.
http://technologygateway.nasa.gov/media/CC/lenr/lenr.html
Well, they (from Pons/Fleischmann through Rossi/eCat/whoever) have not convinced me that "this field is genuine." First, we still don't have access to the data and the complete experimental setup like we would if it had been written up in a reputable journal. The scientists at NASA are just like all of the rest of us - if something seems to be going your way (in this case, low-cost energy production which would help NASA - and everyone else - go further cheaper) you are just a bit less critical of the explanations involved. It's just human nature, that's why papers go out for independent peer-review. If a reviewer writes a scathing criticism of your work, you have the right to answer him point-by-point and, if you want, incorporate the outcome of your debate in the paper, making it stronger. Let's see that. He's already got patents filed, which gives him protection from copycats, I assume (and just because you get a patent approved, that doesn't prove your idea, just that you can navigate the bureaucracy).
Second, it''s not real until someone else independently gets the same answer and all other feasible explanations are eliminated. There are too many "discoveries" popping up all the time which don't hold up in another laboratory.
After we see #1 and #2 above, I'll consider it further.
Cameron
bigmoose
1 MW
As I have pondered this area over the years, I believe "something is happening" in these D-Pd and perhaps also in the H-Ni system, but I don't believe we yet know "what" that is. Sometimes it works, oftentimes it doesn't. We do not understand the guiding parameters to optimize the yield or get to the core phenomena. Worthy of some basic research, you bet (IMHO), ready for prime time, not by a mile...
That said, one test of the eCat or Hyperion in a "credentialed lab" with gamma ray spectrometry, neutron spectrometry and the ability to do isotopic analysis of the pre and post test "fuel" would tell the story. I would not be surprised if both corporate and government labs of the caliber necessary to do these tests have made the offer... Until such tests are done, peer reviewed and published, I for one am a skeptic.
In discussing this latest release of the NASA video, we should be aware of some material that Zawodny posted in his personal blog about the released NASA video that featured him http://joe.zawodny.com/ :
"There have been many attempts to twist the release of this video into NASA’s support for LENR or as proof that Rossi’s e-cat really works. Many extraordinary claims have been made in 2010. In my scientific opinion, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. I find a distinct absence of the latter. So let me be very clear here. While I personally find sufficient demonstration that LENR effects warrant further investigation, I remain skeptical. Furthermore, I am unaware of any clear and convincing demonstrations of any viable commercial device producing useful amounts of net energy."
He makes it clear that with fusion research in general - NOT specific to eCat...
"When considered in aggregate I believe excess power has been demonstrated. I did not say, reliable, useful, commercially viable, or controllable. If any of those other terms were applicable I would have used them instead."
Then, referring to eCat/LENR:
"If anything, it is the lack of a single clear demonstration of reliable, useful, and controllable production of excess power that has held LENR research back."
...
"There have been many attempts to twist the release of this video into NASA’s support for LENR or as proof that Rossi’s e-cat really works. Many extraordinary claims have been made in 2010. In my scientific opinion, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. I find a distinct absence of the latter. So let me be very clear here. While I personally find sufficient demonstration that LENR effects warrant further investigation, I remain skeptical. Furthermore, I am unaware of any clear and convincing demonstrations of any viable commercial device producing useful amounts of net energy."
That said, one test of the eCat or Hyperion in a "credentialed lab" with gamma ray spectrometry, neutron spectrometry and the ability to do isotopic analysis of the pre and post test "fuel" would tell the story. I would not be surprised if both corporate and government labs of the caliber necessary to do these tests have made the offer... Until such tests are done, peer reviewed and published, I for one am a skeptic.
In discussing this latest release of the NASA video, we should be aware of some material that Zawodny posted in his personal blog about the released NASA video that featured him http://joe.zawodny.com/ :
"There have been many attempts to twist the release of this video into NASA’s support for LENR or as proof that Rossi’s e-cat really works. Many extraordinary claims have been made in 2010. In my scientific opinion, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. I find a distinct absence of the latter. So let me be very clear here. While I personally find sufficient demonstration that LENR effects warrant further investigation, I remain skeptical. Furthermore, I am unaware of any clear and convincing demonstrations of any viable commercial device producing useful amounts of net energy."
He makes it clear that with fusion research in general - NOT specific to eCat...
"When considered in aggregate I believe excess power has been demonstrated. I did not say, reliable, useful, commercially viable, or controllable. If any of those other terms were applicable I would have used them instead."
Then, referring to eCat/LENR:
"If anything, it is the lack of a single clear demonstration of reliable, useful, and controllable production of excess power that has held LENR research back."
...
"There have been many attempts to twist the release of this video into NASA’s support for LENR or as proof that Rossi’s e-cat really works. Many extraordinary claims have been made in 2010. In my scientific opinion, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. I find a distinct absence of the latter. So let me be very clear here. While I personally find sufficient demonstration that LENR effects warrant further investigation, I remain skeptical. Furthermore, I am unaware of any clear and convincing demonstrations of any viable commercial device producing useful amounts of net energy."
Joseph C. said:
"It has the demonstrated ability to produce excess amounts of energy, cleanly, without hazardous ionizing radiation, without producing nasty waste"
What does "demonstrated ability" mean? that Rossi has demonstrated the ability?
To me, it looks like a promotion video with the intent of getting funds for research, or similar.
I think 'it', and emphasise the word think, refers to LENR. As I already stated the video has nothing to do with whether or not Rossi's stuff is genuine or not.
The belief from NASA (those looking into this field) is that Rossi's device does work but is no where near ready for public consumption. They believe that his device cannot be used for sustained periods without thermal runaway.
The belief from NASA (those looking into this field) is that Rossi's device does work but is no where near ready for public consumption. They believe that his device cannot be used for sustained periods without thermal runaway.
Do you have some insight into what NASA is doing, other than this video?
I have seen the video, and understand it's content. I posted a link to it earlier in this thread. I'm questioning what ground they have for the claims in the video. They are mostly talking about how this new energy source could change the world, and presenting it like a TV-shop advertisement. They are talking very little about science. So, I'm asking; what "demonstration" is Dr. Zawodny talking about?
One thing that makes me skeptic is that Zawodny says that the easiest implementation would be to put it in your home. Hasn't that been Rossis idea from the start? to have a unit of a few kW in your home? why is Zawodny using the same idea? did they both come to that conclusion independently? or is everything Zawodny says based on Rossis ideas, and the "demonstration" he is talking about is Rossi's demonstration?
One other thing; Zawodny says that the unit would replace your water heater, and that something would derive electrical energy from that. Thats fine. But then he says that you would use the waste heat from the electrical conversion to heat water. Why would he say that? didn't he just say that the base of the whole unit would be a water heater? either he is nervous in front of the camera, or he doesn't know what he is talking about.
I have seen the video, and understand it's content. I posted a link to it earlier in this thread. I'm questioning what ground they have for the claims in the video. They are mostly talking about how this new energy source could change the world, and presenting it like a TV-shop advertisement. They are talking very little about science. So, I'm asking; what "demonstration" is Dr. Zawodny talking about?
One thing that makes me skeptic is that Zawodny says that the easiest implementation would be to put it in your home. Hasn't that been Rossis idea from the start? to have a unit of a few kW in your home? why is Zawodny using the same idea? did they both come to that conclusion independently? or is everything Zawodny says based on Rossis ideas, and the "demonstration" he is talking about is Rossi's demonstration?
One other thing; Zawodny says that the unit would replace your water heater, and that something would derive electrical energy from that. Thats fine. But then he says that you would use the waste heat from the electrical conversion to heat water. Why would he say that? didn't he just say that the base of the whole unit would be a water heater? either he is nervous in front of the camera, or he doesn't know what he is talking about.
bearing said:
I'd imagine he is speculating (he is a research scientist). I have no insight into what NASA is doing just what they have stated. I am writing a piece on this area so I will go into more detail if it is required, later.
