[modernsteam]

Couldn’t agree more! Here, here!

[modernsteam]

Agreed!

[modernsteam]

zapkitty wrote:

Rossi, and perhaps Focardi, have been funding their E-Cat project entirely on their own, with no one else’s money.

This falsehood has recently been shot down over at talk-polywell… which fact may go far in explaining you suddenly popping up here.

http://www.infinite-energy.com/images/pdfs/MacyDefkalion.pdf

http://ecatnews.com/?p=126

… apparently Defkalion is not spme sort of an “independent” company but is actually a collection of Rossi investors.

$200 million euros already and selling licenses for a technology even the inventor says won’t be actually validated until next year… if ever…

… funny that you didn’t mention any of that. …..

Well, if “have been funding their E-Cat project entirely on their own, with no one else’s money” is not the case, then Rossi, at least, has been lying to the public, which constitutes a fraud in most countries. On the other hand, the 200 mill. Euros and the sale of licenses may not have involved any actual payment of funds yet. Letters of understanding for licenses, can be done on a promise-to-pay basis. In such a case, if the devices don’t work as claimed, then payment is not made.

[modernsteam]

Tulse wrote:

If it [em]does[/em] work

The mere fact that we don’t even [em]know[/em] if it works at this point, while Rossi et al. are to the point of selling rights and talking factories, seems extremely suspect to me. This is not the historical development path of [em]any[/em] successful technology that I know of.

No, it’s “not the historical development path of [em]any[/em] successful technology that [you] (or I) know of”, but you’re rather comfortably forgetting, or possibly ignoring, something: Rossi, and perhaps Focardi, have been funding their E-Cat project entirely on their own, with no one else’s money. They made a point of stating they would take funds from no one until their device(s), installed in the customers’ premises, demonstrably work as claimed;check their statements on PESN. One couldn’t be more honest than that.

There’s nothing wrong with being skeptical on this matter. I’m skeptical too, until I see the device working as a self-sustaining machine under the conditions that you mentioned earlier. It’s just that I don’t preach my skepticism, or dwell on the “that’s impossible” bent, because there’s enough known in quantum physics to know there’s much we don’t know. We don’t know for sure that the Coulomb Barrier cannot be weakened, or even temporarily cancelled, during a quantum mechanical event.

As I see it, the proper attitude to science is that just as we cannot rightly say that something is a fact, unless there has been conclusive evidence that it is so, neither can we state that something is impossible unless we can prove with Euclidean-type logic that it is impossible. We can prove logically, for example, that the sum of 2 widgets and 3 widgets is 5 widgets, and that the square of the hypotenuse of a right-angled triangle is equal to the sum of the squares of the other two sides, but we cannot prove that there is no such animal as a green crow,simply because no one has reported seeing a green crow. Though it is improbable, it is not impossible. So, my attitude now is to be “on the fence”, and to be encouraging to those who seem to be reporting the truth until such time that they are shown to have been stating falsehoods (Notice I didn’t say, “lying”).

[modernsteam]

This is the latest offering in the Cold Fusion sphere: 10kW devices to go on the market this year:

http://pesn.com/2011/01/17/9501746_Focardi-Rossi_10_kW_cold_fusion_prepping_for_market/

Some kind of fusion of hydrogen and nickel to form copper. Can’t get much of a grip on the science from the report, though.

Rossi and Focardi have made it very clear they are not claiming “Cold Fusion”, but instead, neutron capture possibly via the Widom-Larsen effect. It is well within conventionally-accepted nuclear physics theory, but it’s just that the possibility of engineering such a capture for useful work is generally rejected by the science/engineering “community” as “impossible”. Yes, and the engineering of successful mechanized flight was “impossible” for five years or so after the Wright Brothers demonstrated their airplane. So said the great news media of the time.

HAl Ade
Gatineau, QC.

[Author]

Posts