MOTTO
DAILY NOTES
Jed Rothwell's answer to my editorial of yesterday.
You wrote: "One of our colleagues here who seems to have excellent connection with IH now reveals now says that he knew from them - from months ago- that the !MW plant has never, ever produced a single Watt of excess heat!"
Again you have distorted the facts. I did not say anything like that. I said that during the test, experts from I.H. and elsewhere told me they were not happy with the calorimetry. I said -- repeatedly, very clearly -- that I was hoping the problems would be fixed and that I.H. and Rossi would agree on the results. I was hoping for a positive final report. That is why I agreed to take part in Mats Lewan's symposium, which was predicated on a positive report.Unfortunately, as you see in the I.H. March 10 press release, they did not reach agreement:
http://lenr-canr.org/
Then, in the I.H. response to the lawsuit, I.H. said:
"Industrial Heat has worked for over three years to substantiate the results claimed by Mr. Rossi from the E-Cat technology – all without success."
They told that means the 1 MW reactor does not produce excess heat. They disagree with Rossi's conclusions. They think his calorimetry is invalid. I was not aware of this conclusion until this press release was published. I had only heard there were disagreements.
I know a great deal about both Rossi's work and I.H.'s work. Based on what I know, in my opinion it likely that I.H. is correct and Rossi is wrong. That is all there is to it.
This is a technical dispute. It has nothing to do with politics or money. If the reactor worked as claimed, I am sure I.H. would be happy to pay for it. As things now stand, if they do not pay, they will not get any intellectual property. Why would they throw away an $11 million investment if they thought the reactor works? That makes no sense.
You need to wait and read I.H.'s response to the lawsuit before you take sides. Your speculation about politics and I.H.'s motivations are unfounded nonsense. You know nothing about the technical details of the calorimetry or why I.H. does not agree with Rossi's analysis. Until you have a chance to review the technical data, you cannot know what is going on here and you have no reason to think Rossi is right and I.H. is wrong.
Discussion continues with my answer NOW
Dear Jed
I thank you for the fast answer. The most important thing I have learnt from it was - a great linguistic truth you have revealed to me. You said about IH's answer:
It was expressed in plain English. With unrefined Anglo-Saxon words, as opposed to ornate Latinate circumlocutions.
Thst means if you want to speak more directly, call the things on their real names straightly, use nude facts and not their cosmeticized forms-it is better to use words of Anglo-Saxon origin. Great idea! Because I want to improve my English and the efficacy of communication I have already started to study my favorite book re English language:
THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE
by G.L. Wren
HOME STUDY BOOKS Fifth Edition, 1963
However, we live in a new era so I made a fast Web search and found for example:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_English_words_of_Anglo-Saxon_origin I still need better access to the good Anglo Saxon words and have to explore a sysetm of translation from English to plain English is it Anglo-Saxon indeed?
I will take in consideration your implicit advice, thanks (see the Mottos chosen for today)
Now re the "meat" of your answer; first you have direct response at SiFFERKOLL- they think in words or Norse-Nordic origin too probably even more straight than the Anglo-Saxon words.
But I have an answer too. You say that zero excess heat, ERV has also zero professional value, you heard the plant does not work many month ago but you cannot say exactly when and how just it was in plain Anglo-Saxon English- these are
distorted facts. The text is there and anybody can decide if it is so. I will not insist
the idea of zero excess heat seems to be surrealistic to me.
However now the essence of your messages is this: "IH was not happy with the calorimetry" In plain English, at the level of kWatts we have to speak about heat and energy measurement - heat is Anglo Saxon whilecalorimetry not. Obviously their degree of discontent has increased hugely after the start of the trial- however you are right, this is technical problem that will be solved but the difference between COp50 and COP 1 is indeed hyperbolic- one part is right the other not.
I like such discussions but I do not fear from the more violent ones- I told about my degrees in verbal karate.However these more normal and decent discussions are connected to an other sport of fighting.
A popular expression in Romanian says: " a fi uns cu toate alifiile"- literally to be smeared with all the ointments in English it is "to be up to all the dodges, fiddles, tricks"- which one is genuinely Anglo-Saxon? It also applies to an individual with a very broad life experience.
In a way the expression is derived from the practise of the ancient Greek wrestling, the fighters bodies were as oily and as unctous as possible- two factors were decisive for a victory: force and lubriciousness.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_wrestling
I hope in our discussions too, the force of facts will decide and not the lubricity of the words.
1) The great news of the day- actually yesterday as I have guessed:
U.S. House Armed Services Committee Calls for New Report on LENR
3) Uwe Doms' ideas:
Investment in the Future – The Leonardo ECAT – as value-based brand
DAILY NOTES
Jed Rothwell's answer to my editorial of yesterday.
You wrote: "One of our colleagues here who seems to have excellent connection with IH now reveals now says that he knew from them - from months ago- that the !MW plant has never, ever produced a single Watt of excess heat!"
Again you have distorted the facts. I did not say anything like that. I said that during the test, experts from I.H. and elsewhere told me they were not happy with the calorimetry. I said -- repeatedly, very clearly -- that I was hoping the problems would be fixed and that I.H. and Rossi would agree on the results. I was hoping for a positive final report. That is why I agreed to take part in Mats Lewan's symposium, which was predicated on a positive report.Unfortunately, as you see in the I.H. March 10 press release, they did not reach agreement:
http://lenr-canr.org/
Then, in the I.H. response to the lawsuit, I.H. said:
"Industrial Heat has worked for over three years to substantiate the results claimed by Mr. Rossi from the E-Cat technology – all without success."
They told that means the 1 MW reactor does not produce excess heat. They disagree with Rossi's conclusions. They think his calorimetry is invalid. I was not aware of this conclusion until this press release was published. I had only heard there were disagreements.
I know a great deal about both Rossi's work and I.H.'s work. Based on what I know, in my opinion it likely that I.H. is correct and Rossi is wrong. That is all there is to it.
This is a technical dispute. It has nothing to do with politics or money. If the reactor worked as claimed, I am sure I.H. would be happy to pay for it. As things now stand, if they do not pay, they will not get any intellectual property. Why would they throw away an $11 million investment if they thought the reactor works? That makes no sense.
You need to wait and read I.H.'s response to the lawsuit before you take sides. Your speculation about politics and I.H.'s motivations are unfounded nonsense. You know nothing about the technical details of the calorimetry or why I.H. does not agree with Rossi's analysis. Until you have a chance to review the technical data, you cannot know what is going on here and you have no reason to think Rossi is right and I.H. is wrong.
Discussion continues with my answer NOW
Dear Jed
I thank you for the fast answer. The most important thing I have learnt from it was - a great linguistic truth you have revealed to me. You said about IH's answer:
It was expressed in plain English. With unrefined Anglo-Saxon words, as opposed to ornate Latinate circumlocutions.
Thst means if you want to speak more directly, call the things on their real names straightly, use nude facts and not their cosmeticized forms-it is better to use words of Anglo-Saxon origin. Great idea! Because I want to improve my English and the efficacy of communication I have already started to study my favorite book re English language:
THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE
by G.L. Wren
HOME STUDY BOOKS Fifth Edition, 1963
However, we live in a new era so I made a fast Web search and found for example:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_English_words_of_Anglo-Saxon_origin I still need better access to the good Anglo Saxon words and have to explore a sysetm of translation from English to plain English is it Anglo-Saxon indeed?
I will take in consideration your implicit advice, thanks (see the Mottos chosen for today)
Now re the "meat" of your answer; first you have direct response at SiFFERKOLL- they think in words or Norse-Nordic origin too probably even more straight than the Anglo-Saxon words.
But I have an answer too. You say that zero excess heat, ERV has also zero professional value, you heard the plant does not work many month ago but you cannot say exactly when and how just it was in plain Anglo-Saxon English- these are
distorted facts. The text is there and anybody can decide if it is so. I will not insist
the idea of zero excess heat seems to be surrealistic to me.
However now the essence of your messages is this: "IH was not happy with the calorimetry" In plain English, at the level of kWatts we have to speak about heat and energy measurement - heat is Anglo Saxon whilecalorimetry not. Obviously their degree of discontent has increased hugely after the start of the trial- however you are right, this is technical problem that will be solved but the difference between COp50 and COP 1 is indeed hyperbolic- one part is right the other not.
I like such discussions but I do not fear from the more violent ones- I told about my degrees in verbal karate.However these more normal and decent discussions are connected to an other sport of fighting.
A popular expression in Romanian says: " a fi uns cu toate alifiile"- literally to be smeared with all the ointments in English it is "to be up to all the dodges, fiddles, tricks"- which one is genuinely Anglo-Saxon? It also applies to an individual with a very broad life experience.
In a way the expression is derived from the practise of the ancient Greek wrestling, the fighters bodies were as oily and as unctous as possible- two factors were decisive for a victory: force and lubriciousness.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_wrestling
I hope in our discussions too, the force of facts will decide and not the lubricity of the words.
1) The great news of the day- actually yesterday as I have guessed:
U.S. House Armed Services Committee Calls for New Report on LENR
http://www.e-catworld.com/2016/05/11/us-secretary-of-defense-directed-to-provide-a-briefing-on-lenr-to-the-us-house-armed-services-committee/https://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/index.php/Thread/3240-U-S-House-Armed-Services-Committee-Calls-for-New-Report-on-LENR-in-FY2017-Nation/
https://twitter.com/The_New_Fire/status/730241029446709248
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_B._Jones_Jr.
Uwe Doms comments this:
concerning Rossi, as you can see DIA and DARPA and others are well informed and the text of the House Committee on Armed Services is nearly exact what I have written in my petition to the German Bundestag. I think Andrea Rossi is under deep investigation from all sides not only the Internet community, but business, intelligence, military, and so on, because the LENR issue and especially the ECAT with a COP>50 are by far the biggest invention of the century, if not of the millennium and will change everything (and this with more or less a prototype, imagine what will be the performance of an optimized ECAT in 10 years!)
https://thenewfire.wordpress.
This information in Russian too-here:
2) #LENR #ECAT @ApcoWorldwide Saga: Jed
Rothwell – Transforming Into a Primary IH Spinner or Simply Lost in Emotions?
http://www.sifferkoll.se/sifferkoll/lenr-ecat-jed-rothwell-transforming-into-a-primary-ih-spinner-or-simply-lost-in-emotions/
https://twitter.com/The_New_Fire/status/730241029446709248
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_B._Jones_Jr.
Uwe Doms comments this:
concerning Rossi, as you can see DIA and DARPA and others are well informed and the text of the House Committee on Armed Services is nearly exact what I have written in my petition to the German Bundestag. I think Andrea Rossi is under deep investigation from all sides not only the Internet community, but business, intelligence, military, and so on, because the LENR issue and especially the ECAT with a COP>50 are by far the biggest invention of the century, if not of the millennium and will change everything (and this with more or less a prototype, imagine what will be the performance of an optimized ECAT in 10 years!)
https://thenewfire.wordpress.
This information in Russian too-here:
Комитет по вооруженным силам Конгресса запрашивает новый Отчет о растущей деятельности в ЛЕНР НИОКР в свой Национальный закон авторизации обороны 2017
http://lenr.seplm.ru/novosti/komitet-po-vooruzhennym-silam-kongressa-zaprashivaet-novyi-otchet-o-rastushchei-deyatelnosti-v-lenr-niokr-v-svoi-natsionalnyi-zakon-avtorizatsii-oborony-2017
This is an important recognition of Andrea Rossi's work!
This is an important recognition of Andrea Rossi's work!
2) #LENR #ECAT @ApcoWorldwide Saga: Jed
Rothwell – Transforming Into a Primary IH Spinner or Simply Lost in Emotions?
http://www.sifferkoll.se/sifferkoll/lenr-ecat-jed-rothwell-transforming-into-a-primary-ih-spinner-or-simply-lost-in-emotions/
Investment in the Future – The Leonardo ECAT – as value-based brand
https://thenewfire.wordpress.com/investment-in-the-future-the-leonardo-ecat-as-value-based-brand/
4) Aleluia aleluia- by David Fojt
H-B11 inertial fusion-LENR that maybe works:
http://www.talk-polywell.org/bb/viewtopic.php?f=10&p=125618
Nuclear physics' interdisciplinary progress
Theoretical nuclear physics could yield unique insights by extending methods and observations from other research fields
4) Aleluia aleluia- by David Fojt
It says Ed Storms made an important discovery- NAE is a dynamic entitty
Dear David please read about the The Six Pillars of LENR or LENR vs. LENR+ at this blog. Merci!
5) From Gregory Goble
Ripe for Theory Consider LENR by Jamal Shrair
Ripe for Theory Consider LENR by Jamal Shrair
H-B11 inertial fusion-LENR that maybe works:
http://www.talk-polywell.org/bb/viewtopic.php?f=10&p=125618
Nuclear physics' interdisciplinary progress
Theoretical nuclear physics could yield unique insights by extending methods and observations from other research fields
This paper could be important for LENR too!
LENR IN CONTEXT-2
Care About People And Planet? Time To Add A Third 'P' -- Profit
Care About People And Planet? Time To Add A Third 'P' -- Profit
http://www.forbes.com/sites/bhaskarchakravorti/2016/05/10/care-about-people-and-planet-time-to-add-a-third-p-profit/#13b599b83430
You left out the context of my statement. You asked me: "Jed, when have you heard the first time from IH that the plant does not work- in which form was this expressed?"
ReplyDeleteMy response: "I don't recall when. Many months ago. It was expressed in plain English. With unrefined Anglo-Saxon words . . ."
You asked "how was it expressed?" My answer, "plain English" or "Anglo-Saxon" is an old fashioned way of saying "they were upset" or "they used rough language" or "they said it very clearly."
"But I have an answer too. You say that zero excess heat, ERV has also zero professional value, you heard the plant does not work many month ago but you cannot say exactly when and how just it was in plain Anglo-Saxon English- these are
distorted facts."
No, those facts are not distorted. I heard a long time ago; I do not recall when; and I am not free to tell you exactly why or what was said. The ERV, Penon, is an idiot, and he not qualified to evaluate calorimetry, as you see from his previously published evaluations.
"The text is there and anybody can decide if it is so."
Of course it is so. Do you think I am lying? Why would I? I have no motivation to lie about this. To use another old fashioned American idiom, I have no dog in this fight. (Meaning I have no personal stake in the matter.)
"I will not insist the idea of zero excess heat seems to be surrealistic to me."
Surrealistic or not, there is no excess heat. Facts are facts.
". . . however you are right, this is technical problem that will be solved but the difference between COp50 and COP 1 is indeed hyperbolic- one part is right the other not."
Correct.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteWgeb it comes to evvaluating incompitance, the buck stops at the top. It was the responciblity to setup a test to satisfy them if the reactor performes based on a specification.
DeleteIH passed that responsibility to the ERV and he became the duly authorised representative to administer the test of the Rossi reactor for IH.
The court will determine if the ERV findings are fully authorized by IH and binding on IH irrespective of what those finding resolved to be.
If IH contracted an idiot, where does the buck stop for the activities of that idiot> Clearly, IH is totally responsible and bound by what the ERV has done.
So we can conclude that JR has not read the ERV report, and is merely IH's 'pipe'
ReplyDeleteMost of all I cannot understand Jeds statement "the erv is an idiot".
ReplyDeleteTasteless is because I do not use the Anglo Saxon straight forward language, which probably would put sensors hip on Peter'so blog.
Most of all I cannot understand Jeds statement "the erv is an idiot".
ReplyDeleteTasteless is because I do not use the Anglo Saxon straight forward language, which probably would put sensors hip on Peter'so blog.
If you cannot understand why I say Penon is an idiot, I suppose that is because you have not seen as much of his work as I have.
DeleteOr, perhaps because you have looked at the same reports I have, but you think he is smart, whereas I think he is very, very stupid. It is possible I am wrong and he is actually smart. In that case, I am the stupid one.
See? That's not complicated.
I am sure you have encountered similar evaluations of people's intelligence and capabilities in the past. I think your dismay and your "more in sadness than in anger" act is fake. You sit up on your high horse pretending to be oh-so-fair minded and objective. It is bullshit.
Who's the more foolish; the fool or the fool who empowers him? ...
DeleteIH accepted Penon as a expert in the vision and construction of the test. They commented to Penon judgment in absolute terms without any direction or structure, pre-approval, or direction or feedback during his tenure of employment.
IH has demonstrated criminal incompetence to the interests of their shareholders.
Jed said why would they throw away $11
ReplyDeletemillion if reactor worked.It makes more sense to say why throw away another$89
million unless you are 100 percent sure it
does work.
They say they are 100% sure it does not work. Based on what I know, I agree with them.
Delete(As I have said many times, I have not revealed everything I know.)
Regarding the $11 million, they are writing that off. It is a loss. They will get no intellectual property (IP), because they cancelled the contract. So what I meant was, if they knew the machine actually works -- or even if they thought it might work -- they would never write off the $11 million. They would pay the rest to secure the IP.
They think the IP is worthless, because they think the machine does not produce any excess heat. It not worth $89 million. It is not worth 1 dollar.
If I were Rossi and I thought the machine works, I would not sue I.H. I would take the IP and try to find someone else who wants to buy it. He already got $11 million, and he gets to keep the IP. He should be satisfied with that.
How can IH now claim any expertise or competence of the operability of the reactor if during the test of the reactor they gave Penon absolute discretion in the evaluation of the reactor?
DeleteHow could this knowledge spring to life so quickly?
The new definition of LENR becomes clear... Lunatic Emissions Noxious Rothwell
ReplyDeleteAndrea? Is that you?
Deletehe, he, he.
DeleteJed
ReplyDeleteThanks for a clear picture of what you think
I wish we could get a clear picture from T.D
A clear picture of the E cat working from A.R
Then maybe we could have this matter settled one way or other.
Sam
Unless the suit is settled out of court, I am pretty sure you will get a clear picture from T.D. They will have to present the technical evidence showing why they think there is no excess heat. That is what lawyers outside of I.H. told me. If I.H. and I are right about the calorimetry, that will settle the matter once and for all.
DeleteThe deadline for filing a response is soon. June 10 I think. If they do not file a response, they lose $89 million by default. However, the deadline can be extended by the judge, or by mutual agreement between Rossi and I.H. Another lawyer told me it might drag on for years.
I know little about the law so I am just reporting what lawyers told me.
The legal case will not cover the merits or substance of the test, it will discover who gave absolute authority to the tester, how the tester was initially instructed, what feedback the tester received during the test, and the technical and managerial incompetence of the employer of the tester.
DeleteYou wrote: "The legal case will not cover the merits or substance of the test . . ."
DeleteHow do you know this? Are you a lawyer? I asked two lawyers. They told me a legal case will cover the merits of the test. As I said, I know little about lawsuits, but I doubt you know more than the people I talked to.
So if I interpret Jed's words well: IH claims that Rossi and Penon installed a flow meter with secret mini electro motor that runs 50 times the real flow speed? I guess Rossi has patented this?
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWho has written this?
DeleteMary Yugo does not publish comments on my Blog
peter
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeletePETER, as I have explained to you previously I am being hassled by some limey faggot called Roger Barker.
DeleteHe posts various stupid innuendo's towards me, which make me feel very uncomfortable.
PLEASE DELETE ALL WEIRD COMMENTS FROM THIS LOSER.
Anyone wanting to check if this message is really from me can email maryyugo [at symbol] yahoo [dot] com.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteYuck... Pass me some soap please.
DeleteI'm sorry, I was out of line. I apologize to everyone especially Roger Barker.
DeleteI've just been very frustrated recently with everything going on. Roger's a good guy once you get to know him. It's just sometimes he gets me really hot and bothered.
PETER, offer is always open to you for a solid circle jerk discussion at ecatnews.
Anyone wanting to check if this message is really from me can email maryyugo [at symbol] in [dot] ass
Stop pretending to be me you stupid moron.
DeletePeter
ReplyDeleteYou should delete garbage comments.
Sam
l
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteJed
ReplyDeleteYou said that during the test, experts from I.H. and elsewhere told me they were not happy with the calorimetry. I said -- repeatedly, very clearly -- that I was hoping the problems would be fixed and that I.H. and Rossi would agree on the results
Jed could you tell me how they could have
fixed the problem.
Thanks Sam
"Jed could you tell me how they could have fixed the problem."
DeleteI cannot discuss details. I will say I do not think it would have been difficult to fix the problems.
No one should doubt that I sincerely hoped the problems would be addressed and a positive report would be published. I would never have signed up for Mats Lewan's symposium if I thought it was hopeless. Mats can tell you I wrote an abstract and I was hard at work on the presentation.
I have been following the problem with ECAT and the difficulty of reproducing the effect. To me it seems that only AR can get good results, so during the years of working with ECATs he has developed skills and expertise to be able to monitor and control the inner workings of the units and he is able to surpass anyone else with excellent results. IH ordered ECAT to be copied by Bruillion or somebody else to verify the technology, but it didn't work, because there is no way you can do what AR is doing just by following patents. IH is claiming ECAT doesn't work (it is not transferable) and they are right but AR claim that it works(with him at the helm) and he is right too. The lawyers will have a field day, I hope it will go to out of court agreement.
DeleteI hope AR has developed a computerized monitoring and controlling system for the new Quark-X, otherwise it is much the same as ECAT. Just my two pennies.
John