Merged Cold Fusion Claims

[ben m]

You guys seem to be over complicating this whole issue. Maybe overblowing your importance in the world. If his invention is legit, I imagine Rossi could care less what you guys think. If he sells the thing, and his customers utility bills go down, thats all the proof needed. If the bills stay the same or go up he's a fraud. If the utility bills go down, manufacturing competition around the world will cause a stampede to his door.

That's right. Nobody disputes that it'd be huge IF it were legit.

Does it look legit to you? A legitimate machine would (as you observe) be very easy to prove legitimate, via simple but careful measurements. Rossi hasn't done simple or careful measurements. I think this is because the machine isn't legit.

 

[CriticalThanking]

You guys seem to be over complicating this whole issue. Maybe overblowing your importance in the world. If his invention is legit, I imagine Rossi could care less what you guys think. If he sells the thing, and his customers utility bills go down, thats all the proof needed. If the bills stay the same or go up he's a fraud. If the utility bills go down, manufacturing competition around the world will cause a stampede to his door.

This is the science and technology subforum. We are here to discuss the invention and its related science. Sadly, Rossi has given insufficient info for people to analyze it completely. I don't think anyone posting here believes they will get their name in lights regardless of whether the device is a fraud, simply does not work, or changes the energy generation playing field. Do you think we should not discuss it at all? Should we only discuss it in positive terms?

Most of us would love to see it work. Maybe this is the one that is real after all the past cold fusion failures. As you have mentioned, the final proof is whether or not it works. And that proof does not yet exist. If you are not a fan of the null hypothesis aspect of science, then real scientists (of which I am not one) won't care what you think.

CT

 

[WhatRoughBeast]

You guys seem to be over complicating this whole issue. Maybe overblowing your importance in the world. If his invention is legit, I imagine Rossi could care less what you guys think. If he sells the thing, and his customers utility bills go down, thats all the proof needed. If the bills stay the same or go up he's a fraud. If the utility bills go down, manufacturing competition around the world will cause a stampede to his door.

Well, perhaps we are.

But have you ever tried to rebut nonsense? First you have to establish what sense is, and only then can you address the _non_sense part.

And what has always stood out about Rossi's claim is what he doesn't say, what information is not presented, and what he seems not to know. Plus, of course, his changing story.

As for "overblowing your importance in the world", are you really insinuating that anyone on this forum thinks we have any?

 

[Dancing David]

You guys seem to be over complicating this whole issue. Maybe overblowing your importance in the world. If his invention is legit, I imagine Rossi could care less what you guys think. If he sells the thing, and his customers utility bills go down, thats all the proof needed. If the bills stay the same or go up he's a fraud. If the utility bills go down, manufacturing competition around the world will cause a stampede to his door.

When and if... and if he really had something it would stand a real test. Come back in six months and gloat then. If his invention is legit...

 

[unclep2k]

Rossi is an inventor not a scientist. Assume he needs to protect his invention. He has made an effort for a patent.There is no accepted theory for low energy nuclear reactions. There is no proof this invention is legit. There is no proof this invention is not legit. Why have so many people on this blog concluded he is a fraud? That doesn't sound like good science either. We will know in a few months when customers have the device. The market place will be the judge.

 

[Jimmy42]

Rossi is an inventor not a scientist.

Is there an echo in the room?

There is no proof this invention is not legit.

I have a bridge near Brooklyn for sale. You could make a mint reselling it! Wanna buy it? Got proof that I don't own it? What! Not going to take the time to even find out? At least, in 'theory', I could own it.

 

[Belz...]

You guys seem to be over complicating this whole issue. Maybe overblowing your importance in the world. If his invention is legit, I imagine Rossi could care less what you guys think. If he sells the thing, and his customers utility bills go down, thats all the proof needed. If the bills stay the same or go up he's a fraud. If the utility bills go down, manufacturing competition around the world will cause a stampede to his door.

People buy homeopathic remedies. It doesn't mean they work.

 

[Dancing David]

Rossi is an inventor not a scientist. Assume he needs to protect his invention. He has made an effort for a patent.There is no accepted theory for low energy nuclear reactions. There is no proof this invention is legit. There is no proof this invention is not legit. Why have so many people on this blog concluded he is a fraud? That doesn't sound like good science either. We will know in a few months when customers have the device. The market place will be the judge.

The burden of proof is on the claimant, not those questioning the claim.

 

[Horatius]

If the bills stay the same or go up he's a fraud.

So, instead of asking him for some actual evidence that what he says is true, you're okay with him just taking money from people, and then going, "Oh well, suckered again!"?

What other areas of your life do you apply that philosophy to? Do you correspond with lots of Nigerian government officials, on the theory that this time it might not be a scam?


And while we're on the subject of our "importance in the world", you do realize that people like Rossi are applying for real, actual patents, and that real actual people (like me) have to determine if said patents should issue? I've used resources found here at JREF more than once in my professional capacity, so in fact, we are having real influence in at least some of these cases.

 

[attaboy]

Hi folks,
I'm new here and do have extensive scientific training. I have a BS in Chemical Engineering and a PhD in Chemistry. While I never went to top universities nor was I ever much more than an average student, I've had considerable interest in Cold Fusion (maybe better called lenr) all the way back to the Pons/Fleischmann fiasco. So while I don't have expertise in the lenr area, I do feel that the P/F development was real and feel it is almost certain that the Rossi/E-Cat work will soon prove to be real.
Having had my own work discredited and having knowledge of others in similar situations, I realize how vicious the world of scientific discovery can be.
In the P/F case, the almost ruthless competition off times compels scientists to publish before they get scooped. And sometimes that means they are not as thorough of as they could or maybe should be. I believe this is what happened to P/F. A competitor was hot on their heels and they published without thoroughly having a feel for their discovery and its pitfalls. For one, they didn't realize how difficult it was going to be to repeat their work. Denying physicists were furious. Not only could the P/F work undermine the principles of physics they held so dear, but they feared this could mean the end of billions of dollars of grant money going into hot fusion. In trying to repeat the P/F work their mood was not to affirm this work, but rather to discredit it. For them it was easy, because no one realized at the time how difficult it was to observe the P/F effect. The situation was far more complex than that, I'm sure. And the usual corporate blood suckers were certainly somewhere in the picture fueling the P/F discreditation. But since then there have been too many experiments that have proven P/F to be correct. Just do a google centered around names like McKubre and Case and you will see this for yourself. Then there is also the work reported from Naval Research affirming P/F, although this latter has been quiet of late probably traceable to the corporate blood suckers.
But the possibilities from the P/F work pale compared to those of the Rossi E-Cat. Based on what I've just said, its hardly surprising that Rossi has been elusive and secretive. I'm sure the blood suckers are watching carefully for a way to bring him down and/or steal his E-Cat. Patents often don't mean much when you're up against rich corporations with teams of patent lawyers who can find ways to patent around you. So many people object because we don't know why it works or the underlying theory behind it. This should be of little concern right now. In my own work I came up with many developments where we never knew how or why they worked. My corporate employer could care less. As long as it was safe (and Rossi has demonstrated a safe operation) all they cared about was getting it into a product so that the big bucks could begin rolling in. There are just too many reasons to believe in the E-Cat. It has the reputable U. of Bologna backing with other top scientists involved there and continuing demonstrations, some by skeptics, keep proving the E-Cat to be all Rossi claims. Just the fact that the corporate controlled media is almost completely silent on this speaks volumes.

 

[Cuddles]

If he sells the thing, and his customers utility bills go down, thats all the proof needed.

Exactly. And as I already noted, it would be trivially easy for him to have demonstrated this already. The fact that he has constantly refused to do so is very strong evidence that he is a fraud.

You guys seem to be over complicating this whole issue. Maybe overblowing your importance in the world. If his invention is legit, I imagine Rossi could care less what you guys think.

You appear to be rather confused about what this site is. It's a discussion forum. A place where people come to, you know, discuss things. I doubt anywhere here is labouring under the delusion that Rossi will read our posts and suddenly admit that it was all a fraud and he would have got away with it if it wasn't for us meddling kids. We're just a bunch of people who happen to be interested in discussing various claims and trying to work out if they're true or not. In this case, as in so many others, it just happens that the claims are almost certainly false. If you have additional evidence to add to the mix, that would be just great. But if all you can do is whine about the subject of the discussion not caring, you'd be better off not wasting your time.

Rossi is an inventor not a scientist.

And? What exactly is this supposed to mean? An inventor still needs to be able to see whether their invention works or not. Not being a scientist is not an excuse for the farcical "tests" Rossi has presented.

Assume he needs to protect his invention. He has made an effort for a patent.

In which case his invention is already protected.

There is no proof this invention is legit. There is no proof this invention is not legit. Why have so many people on this blog concluded he is a fraud? That doesn't sound like good science either.

Firstly, you still appear rather confused about this site. It's not a blog. Secondly, we've concluded it's a fraud in large part precisely because there is no evidence that this invention is legit. Absence of evidence is evidence of absence when in a situation where you would expect to see evidence. Rossi could easily demonstrate his device producing energy, but instead chooses ridiculous tests with many obvious ways of cheating, both deliberately and accidentally.

When someone claims to have done something, the burden of proof lies on them to provide evidence to support it. When the claim in question is something that well established science says is physically impossible, that burden gets a lot heavier. When no evidence is provided, the conclusion is that the claim is false. If further evidence is provided later, that conclusion may of course change, but so far Rossi has nothing. If that doesn't sound like good science to you, that just means you don't understand science.

We will know in a few months when customers have the device.

Is this the same few months in which Steorn will be providing us with free energy as well? Because they've been making exactly the same claim for 5 years now.

 

[Aepervius]

Hi folks,
I'm new here and do have extensive scientific training. I have a BS in Chemical Engineering and a PhD in Chemistry. While I never went to top universities nor was I ever much more than an average student, I've had considerable interest in Cold Fusion (maybe better called lenr) all the way back to the Pons/Fleischmann fiasco. So while I don't have expertise in the lenr area, I do feel that the P/F development was real and feel it is almost certain that the Rossi/E-Cat work will soon prove to be real.

Your PHD does not give you enough expertise to discuss that area, sorry. So youa re acting on feelings. Which can be deceptive.

Having had my own work discredited and having knowledge of others in similar situations, I realize how vicious the world of scientific discovery can be.
In the P/F case, the almost ruthless competition off times compels scientists to publish before they get scooped. And sometimes that means they are not as thorough of as they could or maybe should be. I believe this is what happened to P/F. A competitor was hot on their heels and they published without thoroughly having a feel for their discovery and its pitfalls.

You are incorrect. What did P&F in was not that they published too quick (that was only part of it) what did them in is that they went for mass media before going trhu a full peer review & verification process !

For one, they didn't realize how difficult it was going to be to repeat their work. Denying physicists were furious. Not only could the P/F work undermine the principles of physics they held so dear, but they feared this could mean the end of billions of dollars of grant money going into hot fusion.

Again incorrect. At the time in the department I was speaking a lot of people were "furiously" calculating and trying if they could do some check, NOT because they were angry, but because it was *THE* occasion to go into a process which could be tested in a *labor* (which is why it was named tabletop fusion).

In trying to repeat the P/F work their mood was not to affirm this work, but rather to discredit it. For them it was easy, because no one realized at the time how difficult it was to observe the P/F effect.

Not the feeling I had at the time.

The situation was far more complex than that, I'm sure. And the usual corporate blood suckers were certainly somewhere in the picture fueling the P/F discreditation. But since then there have been too many experiments that have proven P/F to be correct. Just do a google centered around names like McKubre and Case and you will see this for yourself.

Augh. Fancy that, because cold fusion still remain unproven. But I bet you will tell us it is a conspiracy or cabal to bury the results ?

Then there is also the work reported from Naval Research affirming P/F, although this latter has been quiet of late probably traceable to the corporate blood suckers.

The result are actually "disputable".

But the possibilities from the P/F work pale compared to those of the Rossi E-Cat. Based on what I've just said, its hardly surprising that Rossi has been elusive and secretive.

So secretive than instead of having all well prepared to manifacture , it is now plastered all over teh web.

THAT sort of secretive.

Yeah.

I'm sure the blood suckers are watching carefully for a way to bring him down and/or steal his E-Cat. Patents often don't mean much when you're up against rich corporations with teams of patent lawyers who can find ways to patent around you. So many people object because we don't know why it works or the underlying theory behind it. This should be of little concern right now. In my own work I came up with many developments where we never knew how or why they worked. My corporate employer could care less. As long as it was safe (and Rossi has demonstrated a safe operation) all they cared about was getting it into a product so that the big bucks could begin rolling in. There are just too many reasons to believe in the E-Cat. It has the reputable U. of Bologna backing with other top scientists involved there and continuing demonstrations, some by skeptics, keep proving the E-Cat to be all Rossi claims. Just the fact that the corporate controlled media is almost completely silent on this speaks volumes.

TL;DR white space are your friends.

By the way you are aware of Rossi's apparent shaddy past, are you ?

 

[attaboy]

Your PHD does not give you enough expertise to discuss that area, sorry. So youa re acting on feelings. Which can be deceptive.



You are incorrect. What did P&F in was not that they published too quick (that was only part of it) what did them in is that they went for mass media before going trhu a full peer review & verification process !



Again incorrect. At the time in the department I was speaking a lot of people were "furiously" calculating and trying if they could do some check, NOT because they were angry, but because it was *THE* occasion to go into a process which could be tested in a *labor* (which is why it was named tabletop fusion).



Not the feeling I had at the time.



Augh. Fancy that, because cold fusion still remain unproven. But I bet you will tell us it is a conspiracy or cabal to bury the results ?



The result are actually "disputable".



So secretive than instead of having all well prepared to manifacture , it is now plastered all over teh web.

THAT sort of secretive.

Yeah.



TL;DR white space are your friends.

By the way you are aware of Rossi's apparent shaddy past, are you ?

Sorry but I believe it is you who are wrong and incorrect. We should all know in October. BTW, what are your credentials?

 

[Horatius]

Again incorrect. At the time in the department I was speaking a lot of people were "furiously" calculating and trying if they could do some check, NOT because they were angry, but because it was *THE* occasion to go into a process which could be tested in a *labor* (which is why it was named tabletop fusion).



Not the feeling I had at the time.

This bears repeating now that we have yet another person trying to re-write the history of how real, actual physicists reacted to the original P&F announcement. I was an undergrad at the time, and everyone was interested in finding out as much as they could about what their claims actually were.

The notion that we'd turn our backs on this just because it "undermine[d] the principles of physics [we] held so dear" is simply ridiculous. Every physics student knows that the names we remember are the guys who kicked over the established understanding of physics, and replaced it with a new understanding that more accurately models the real world. Had P&F's work panned out, we would have all had a shot at being in on the ground floor of the biggest change in physics in almost a century, which would have been the defining characteristic of our careers.

We wanted it to be true, because we knew better than anyone what it meant both for us personally, and for the rest of the world. To say anything else is to re-write history that I actually lived through.

 

[Horatius]

Sorry but I believe it is you who are wrong and incorrect. We should all know in October. BTW, what are your credentials?

And come October, when nothing happens, will you come back and admit you were wrong? Because we'll still be here.

 

[Cuddles]

You are incorrect. What did P&F in was not that they published too quick (that was only part of it) what did them in is that they went for mass media before going trhu a full peer review & verification process !

To be fair, what actually did them in is the fact that cold fusion doesn't work. They would easily have got away with going for the mass media approach if they'd actually had something that worked. It might have been frowned upon, but a bit of frowning isn't going to hold back one of the most important discoveries in human history. It's the fact that it simply didn't work that made them look like idiots for doing media announcements rather than letting other scientists check their results first.

 

[Jrrarglblarg]

You guys seem to be over complicating this whole issue.

Or, conversely, Rossi and his cheerleaders could be over-simplifying the whole issue. I'm not a scientist, I'm just an over-educated cranky old carpenter who occasionally kludges things together in a vaguely scientific way. I've looked at all the papers and reports out there and haven't been impressed with the amount and quality of data collection on this device. Seriously, I've done better data collection on a crockpot full of stew than he's done.

The device supposedly creates heat, and the heat is supposedly more than the amount of electrical input. But the chemicals in the reaction chamber are pretty darn close to the contents of various batteries, and he's never proven that the reaction isn't an electrochemical reaction. He's apparently injecting hydrogen into the powdered nickel and getting "transmutation" of copper out -- but it's common for some amount of copper to contaminate nickel in the first place. He's never proven the copper wasn't there to begin with, he's never proven that a transmutation event is taking place (ie, with radiation events), and he's never ruled out the possibility that he's made a crappy battery that is getting hot as it simultaneously charges and discharges.

 

[Dancing David]

In the P/F case, the almost ruthless competition off times compels scientists to publish before they get scooped. And sometimes that means they are not as thorough of as they could or maybe should be. I believe this is what happened to P/F.

from my perspective the results were not replicated, so they could not be verified.

If they produce or one of them or anyone produces verifiable results, that can be replicated then YAY!

For one, they didn't realize how difficult it was going to be to repeat their work.

Oh whoops, that is why it is called repliaction, if they could not give directions to reproduce the system, then oh whoops.

One off result.

For them it was easy, because no one realized at the time how difficult it was to observe the P/F effect.

Then maybe the nature of the effect was not understood, how many times have P&F replicated their own results?

 

[Dancing David]

Hi Attaboy, which results by McKubre and Case do you like? That way we can discuss teh actual data and the study that produced it.

 

[Belz...]

Hi folks,
I'm new here and do have extensive scientific training. I have a BS in Chemical Engineering and a PhD in Chemistry. While I never went to top universities nor was I ever much more than an average student, I've had considerable interest in Cold Fusion (maybe better called lenr) all the way back to the Pons/Fleischmann fiasco. So while I don't have expertise in the lenr area, I do feel that the P/F development was real and feel it is almost certain that the Rossi/E-Cat work will soon prove to be real.
Having had my own work discredited and having knowledge of others in similar situations, I realize how vicious the world of scientific discovery can be.

Yeah, those evil people asking for cranks to prove their own claims. How rude !