http://e-catsite.com/2011/11/17/rossi-rival-to-announce-cold-fusionlenr-findings/

First hint of breaking story. Review http://www.citi5.org

The claim that he is converting Nickel in into Copper does raise another problem with his claims though. Iron is #26 in the periodic table. Nickel is #28 and copper is #29. The problem is this, all elements higher than Iron in the table are normally only created by fusion in a nova/supernova. Why? Because it takes more energy being put in than you get out to fuse elements above the production of iron.

In other words it should be consuming, not producing, energy to convert nickle into copper. Lets’ assume for the sake of argument that somehow you can produce fuse nickle and hydrogen to produce copper and create an energy surplus in the process. This still should be easily testable for and raises the question why not make that the centerpiece of the test since it would not only prove cold-fusion, but re-write some of physics in the process. The Noble Prize and lucrative commercial (and government) contracts would be a sure thing.

The international patent application received an unfavorable international preliminary report on patentability because it seemed to “offend against the generally accepted laws of physics and established theories” and to overcome this problem the application should have contained either experimental evidence or a firm theoretical basis in current scientific theories.[1]

Ref.
1 Lisa Zyga (2011-01-20), “Italian Scientists claim to have demonstrated cold fusion”, Physorg.com

And Bob, you’re right about patents. Obtaining international patents is routine, though it may not be very easy. I work at a national laboratory in Japan and collaborate with companies in France. We obtain patents in many countries, including US. No biggie.

Okay, this is my last post. One really shouldn’t waste too much time on shenanigans such as this.

There was no measurement of the pressure/amount of that steam. He just made steam.

It would be pretty easy to test his apparatus. Put a meter on the incoming power line. Recirculate water from a free-standing water tank through the gadget. Measure the temperature change in the known volume of water.

It’s not like he needs to lease the Large Hadron *Collider to get the data.*
Some people really, really want to believe in the unlikely….

Rossi’s gadget will be treated, most likely, as a perpetual motion machine because it portends to produce more energy than would be expected based on other energy producing machines.

Quality journals have standards. If someone wants their extraordinary claim published then they will have to produce that the review community finds credible. Simply making steam while not letting an independent examiner measure input/output does not reach the level of credibility. Unusual claims require higher levels of proof than claims which are small steps from things already proved. If Rossi wants to be taken seriously by serious people he’s got to step up his game.

Rossi is a non-physicist making a claim that the vast majority of physicists find highly suspicious/non-credible. The fact that he is avoiding tendered offers to evaluate his gadget by respectable labs destroys his credibility.

The fact that “qualified neutral parties” have screamed at you, that tells you nothing? You refuse to understand that there is a clear and easy route for Rossi to prove himself credible and he refuses to take it but falls
back on lame excuses.

BTW I noticed you still haven’t answered the basic question of providing evidence of fusion products…why not? It should be easy for Rossi to prove if his device really works.

Also, “quality” journals publish papers all the time without a working device, in fact papers are usually published without the scientific dynamic put into practice through a working device. The hold up is that turning nickel into copper is outside of consensus reality, so scientific experts automatically eliminate the possibility as impossible because it would require the breaching of the Columb barrier at less than super-heated conditions. Do you know how many “qualified neutral parties” have screamed at me that what I was suggesting was preposterous based upon the argument that it was “against the laws of physics?”

Why are you talking trash Bob? You are wrong on both counts, and please don’t make be cite numerous links to support what I am saying, because I will do it.

No quality journal is going to publish a paper based on Rossi claiming that his gadget works. He’s going to have to allow it to be evaluated by a qualified neutral party.

You’re just talking trash. Why is that?

Furthermore, try publishing a peer reviewed article on LENR – it is handled the same way. There has been tons of articles written on how impossible it is to get a peered review article published on unconventional subjects.

Finally, Rossi is doing the only thing he can do: build a manufacturing company from the ground up, and successful commercialize his “discovery” (secret “Italian Sauce”). It galls me that you utter truthiness as if it is truth – do you know how much pain the virtual boycott of patients and peer review publications is?? What a waste that Rossi has to do anything other than show results, as he has multiple times in public demonstrations that people conveniently ignore to avoid cognitive dissidence.

We do not know that the device works. Rossi has not allowed anyone to test his device.

If Rossi’s device works and works due to “the reaction is due to the particle size of the nickel powder” and Rossi has failed to obtain patents he is a fool.

(Please note the “If”.)

If you’ve got something that works then you quickly get patents before other people figure out what you are doing. If you’ve revealed something about how it works without a patent then others are going to eat your lunch.
This guy is operating like a scammer, not like an inventor.

A scammer is going to shop their gadget around, looking for suckers. An inventor is going to lock up his patent and then approach a funding source to get it going big time.

You got something that actually works, you go to a big corporation like GE
and ask them if they want to be the largest company in the world while
making you the richest person in the world.

I have further details from Brian Ahern who discovered this effect in 1995 as the nano-materials expert for the USAF. He will be presenting the full details on December 7th at our Clean Tech / Economic event in NYC, details here on the science and event:

LENR “Cold Fusion” nano-magnetism phenomenon details to be revealed December 7th in NYC » Citi5; Urban Sustainability Mega-Community Fund http://bit.ly/v5nBFw

In the end there is a reason why scientists are bad at detecting frauds like phony “psychics” and why magicians tend to be better at the task. Scientists tend to work from trust in their peers, magicians work from a position of “How can someone be fooled?”.

There is nothing so far described in this “test” that couldn’t be explained by a sufficiently powerful heating element and a hidden power cord. Heating water doesn’t provide evidence of fusion, it only demonstrates heat and/or vacuum. Producing helium without an outside supply being fed into the system…now that would be something to celebrate. It’s been 32 years but we still have no credible evidence of fusion byproducts except from hot fusion reactions, as much as I wish it were otherwise.
We’re still waiting…

It’s not going to happen.

Instead we get one “test” after another were some people are shown a device (that they can’t look too closely at, for one reason or another) that heats water (or lights bulbs, etc). Usually an excuse is offered why it’s not running at full capacity. It’s declared a success, without any real testing. Then years later, after everyone has forgotten about the last one, a “new invention” is trotted out and the process repeats. It’s an old story.

It shouldn’t be too hard if the claims are true, but we’re still waiting on Pons and Fleishman to produce the helium they promised a while ago too. It’s been what, 32 years now for them? We’re still waiting…

Why are people chasing unverified promises (that have always turned out to be false so far) over proven renewable technology that is available today?

The point is that it’s very easy to fake such a “public demonstration” when you control all aspects of the testing and don’t allow anyone to get a real close look. Especially when all you are doing is producing heat in conditions that aren’t independently controlled (or at least monitored) to prevent cheating. All we are asking for is real testing, and actually showing that a fusion byproduct is being produced. Why is that so hard?

Why does your side only offer arguments from authority and excuses for why real tests and peer review have not been done? It’s the same old story that has been going on for at least decades.

Plus, here is a MSNBC link calling the 28 Oct demonstration a success: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/45153076/ns/technology_and_science-science/#.TrNo9rJqwe4

I wonder what you would call a “legitimate test?” Perhaps because all your experience is negative you are unable to take yes for an answer.

“Sorry, but convoluted frauds involving lots of parties is the least likely. So are 3 groups of science observers too stupid to recognize an obvious fraud. Also, there are enough other NiH results which suggest a LENR reaction.”

By the way, here is a Defense Intelligence Agency report (two years old) that details teams from all over the world getting over unity results from LENR experiments: http://coldfusion3.com/blog/intelligence-report-indicates-pentagon-believes-in-cold-fusion