FIRST FREE ENERGY DEVICE REACHES MARKET IN OCTOBER -- The Game Changer is Here

[IronShell3d]

Lewis Larsen is interviewed on the WL theory of LENR reactions. It's well worth the time (about 1 hour) to listen to it all, especially the historic references to what he believes are past LENR occurrences that have been brushed aside and forgotten. He starts talking at 3:20: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OVRLcC21F14

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Lewis Larsen is interviewed on the WL theory of LENR reactions. It's well worth the time (about 1 hour) to listen to it all, especially the historic references to what he believes are past LENR occurrences that have been brushed aside and forgotten. He starts talking at 3:20: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OVRLcC21F14

I've been over and over that clip IronShell.  Very intrigued by some of the statements.  On the whole though Larson seems to be suggesting that LENR can be used directly as a battery source to generate electric currents rather than heat?  Is that right?  It will be interesting and I wish him well.  That would certainly be an improvement.  But frankly I think that the he will not be able to side step the 'heat signature' and - sensibly - that's what Rossi has managed and USED  - to amazing effect.

If indeed, LENR is a unifying theory - then that's a very good thing.  And if he can get it to a battery operated number - then that's better yet.  There's one thing that I know - with absolute certainty.  IF indeed LENR is a complete explanation for energy abundance - then our theoreticians will endorse it.  That's a given.  It is a constant source of comfort that - whatever else one says against our academics - they do NOT argue when the logic stacks.  It's only in the absence of logic that they 'attack'.  That was, as he mentioned, the Achilles heel of Fleishman and Pons.  The sad part here is that neither Fleishman nor Pons suggested that Cold Fusion was the explanation.  Only that it was the 'effect'.  The attack that they generated from our academics was disproportionate and undeserved. And I'm of the opinion that this 'contempt' was widely broadcasted by our media by the timeous intervention of our trolls with their competing interests.  They broadcasted an alleged claim which was never fact, and then capitalised on it. Which brings me back to that conspiracy thing and the unwitting part our media play in this.

Kindest regards,
Rosemary

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Actually guys - I'm irritated.  I went to great lengths to be tactful in my previous post.  Here's what makes me want to climb walls.  Larson states, unequivocally - that Fleishman and Pons deserved that flaunted disrespect because they 'claimed' a non-existent 'fusion' effect when there was no evidence of transmutations.  Yet Larson is claiming transmutations and that he's effecting this with ease.  He says that the 'key' to finding this is in nano technology.  But he has not, apparently, even got the funding for his research into this - yet.

I would suggest that it is as important to vindicate Fleishman and Pons as it is to study the EXPERIMENTAL EVIDENCE of Rossi.  And then, when LENR is EVER accepted as a COMPLETE THEORY - then we can all be grateful to Larson.  Frankly NASA have NOT endorsed their theory.  Nor has anyone.  Not publicly.  It will certainly be incontestable when, and if, they manage those 'batteries' that generate NOT HEAT - but electric current flow.  Then I would strongly recommend endorsement. As he mentioned it's still 5 or so years away.  And until we have that evidence - I'd suggest we simply concentrate on using all that efficiency that Rossi has made available to us. At lest we won't have to wait.

Kindest regards,
Rosemary

[chessnyt]

@Everybody:

Great discussions are happening here and it is wonderful to see this technology get its well deserved attention.  Kudos to everyone who is contributing.  And if there are people on the sidelines that are a little nervous or intimidated to feel like posting here; please don't be because the science behind this technology is not fully understood as of yet and therefore there are no wrong answers.  At least that anyone can prove. 

And if there are those who find "LENR" to be out of their area of expertise; then at least feel free to share your thoughts and opinions (e.g. maybe about how this will effect the world and in what specific way).  It is certainly out of my area of expertise so you would be joining my own category. 

I just thought I would post some of the latest comments/statements from Andrea Rossi himself.  These statement were quoted from PESN.com  Enjoy:

Latest from Rossi   Andrea Rossi   December 8th, 2011 at 4:23 PM  Dear Steve:
We are working very hard to make our plants. Today, for example, we have finally selected the primary liquid that will run through the primary circuit to make electric power, a very important achievement along the path of the evolution of out plants, working with our Customer.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
   * * * *
   Andrea Rossi   December 8th, 2011 at 10:06 AM  Dear Franco Morici:
[...]
2- The amount of hydrogen we charge is enormously redundant: only picograms of H react, so that when we charge the reactors most of the H goes away with the purge
3- how we get the pressure inside the reactor is a confidential information
[...]
Warm Regards,
A.R.
   * * * *
   Andrea Rossi   December 8th, 2011 at 9:56 AM  Dear Felize:
1- no. We are not yet ready to produce electric power, even if we are very close. I want also to say that an agreement we reached yesterday will accelerate this development.
[...]
Warm Regards,
A.R.
   * * * *
   Andrea Rossi   December 6th, 2011 at 3:55 PM  Dear A.Casali:
1- At the price we apply now the 1 MW plant pays back itself in 3 years. The expected life is 30 years. Anyway, we foresee to lower the price with the increase of the orders, to allow more economy scale. Our target is to arrive within the year to 1000 Euro/kW.
2- We are working on this issue, see point 1.
3- yes [the industrialization process going to lower the price considerably in the short term]
4- As soon as possible, when the Customer will allow it. Consider that when the name of a Customer of us is published, he is buried under thousands of inquiries, emails, insults, together with good considerations. It is not an issue as easy as you can think. We all need to work in peace, and we have an army of enemies who want to forbid this. Among them the wannabe “third parties who have to make a real test” ( which turned out to be all competitors or consultants of them, what a strange coincidence!)
5- I am holding nothing, we are already making our R&D with all our Consultants, and our Customers are accepting our technology already. They don’t care too much who is testing our plants, they care the plants work properly, that’s all they want.
Thank you for your direct and useful questions,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
   * * * *
  Andrea Rossi   December 4th, 2011 at 9:01 AM  Dear Italo:
I cannot open a camera on our test room, because we make also confidential operations. Only a plant in regular operation in our Customers’ concerns is possible.
Warm Regards,
A.R


Chess

[Bernie7]

Rosemary:  I had the same reaction to Larson and his disrespect for P & F.  Good post thanks.