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

[MileHigh]

Some more:

Doktor M
Nice choice of words... but why let Rossi show some ACTUAL TRANSMUTATION before hailing him as the new saviour? I mean, transmutations would pretty much prove his claim. As would gamma, neutrons, caliometry or whatever. Talk is cheap but doesn't relly prove anything... 
 
Also, has the Department of Defense and the Department of Energy really tested the e-cat? I don't recall this. Is there any documantation about these tests or is this just more talk from Rossi which I have missed? In fact, to be honest do not recall anyone actually testing the e-cat. I do recall Essén, Kullander, Lewan and Kritvik OBSERVING Rossi demonstrating the e-cat (and drawing completely different conclusions from the experience).
Doktor M
Sorry. Should read "...why NOT let Rossi show some ACTUAL TRANSMUTATION".

Nixter
You can't blame people who are initially skeptical about LENR, I was,... after all how can there be such a thing as "Free Energy?" Until someone tells you that, "Yes, there is free energy, that is what solar, wind and water generated power is, the energy used to make it is free." So now you know that something you assumed to be impossible all of your life, was a mistake, and what other things have you also been wrong about that had the same degree of certainty? 
 
The same mental process can happen with the E-Cat, at first it is an obvious fraud, only brainless fools would believe such a thing, it is utterly impossible to get more energy out than goes in, such a thing is a version of the perpetual motion scam, right? Then you find that legitimate peer reviewed journals have published works that have good data showing more energy measured out than going in, so it IS possible in the laboratory! If it has been done in the lab, then suddenly Andrea Rossi's E-Cat claims do not seem too far fetched, perhaps, even plausible. Add into the mix, University based researchers, Companies developing LENR Hardware, Companies like National Instruments sponsoring University studies and the various LENR conferences and symposiums all forming a far reaching consensus that something new and exciting is being observed, measured and studied. 
 
If Rossi actually releases a solid, accurate science based report, and it has been generated by vetted professionals, it will be the straw that breaks the camels back. A delayed reaction will ensue for most, as the big players in the background will go into action quickly, while the detectable layer of LENR skeptics will continue to deny, because they are still too early in the acceptance curve, the same curve we all had to go through. The World Energy sectors will have to do something and fast, what that action will be is impossible to know, but we will know it when we see it. I would be best for them join in and become active participants, rather that becoming blunt obstructions to LENR progress. 
 
Was anyone following the "Directly Downwind Faster Than The Wind" controversy last year? I see similarities in that reputable Scientists said that going faster than the wind with wind power only was absolutely impossible, they produced reams of mathematical proofs showing it, but eventually the DDWFTTW team, (Who was backed by Google.), succeeded, they made heavily instrumented runs that proved the cart went faster than the wind. Many of the "experts" who said it was not possible, were forced to concede that they were wrong, BUT the point here is that they only relented AFTER the functioning hardware operated as predicted. Also of interest was how some of the skeptics continued to say it was impossible, long after most considered it settled. I see similarities in the two cases, and I think it can be used as an accurate predictor of what will likely follow.

Mark Dancy
Hank, your a nice gut but this is just another example of your own ignorance, lack of qualifications to be writing an editorial on such matters. You also assume and believe every thing Rossi tells you. 
Rossi has no peer reviewed data, a criminal record and responsible for environmental damage worth millions. On the other hand we have a team of some of the best scientist in the world dealing with real data and experiments that can be peer reviewed. 
I agree some funding needs to be put towards LENR, that we agree on. 
Go back and read your articles 12 months ago, all we got is delusional promises, and more failed deadlines. 
keep up the writing it makes for amusing reading. 
Mark

[MileHigh]

Some more:

Scienceguy
Well said Mark, very well said. In reading the "background" on Rossi's claims I found a really big problem (i.e. "whopper"). He claims to be using isotopic enriched nickel. He further claims that he has a process to enrich the nickel at "very little cost". Isotopic enrichment has been studied and perfected for the last 70 years for applications from medical imagining/treatment to fission/fusion devices. The processes (while very efficient) are extremely hazardous and profoundly expensive. I find no credible way that Rossi has achieved this enrichment without having billions in research money and a whole slew of research staff to do it. Keep in mind that oak ridge, Hanford and savannah river plant all worked on this (to the tune of millions of people hours) to get the current technology in place

Chuck Hansen
I appreciate your diligence in verifying these claims.  However, what does Domenicio Fioravanti have to say about the technology, at least as-of Oct 28 2011?  Is he to be trusted?  What I would call speculation is speculating LARC is testing and helping to engineer with Rossi, as per Bushnell stating "There are estimates using just the performance of some of the devices under study that 1% of the nickel mined on the planet each year could produce the world's energy requirements at the order of 25% the cost of coal."  Those words practically echo a very early 'Rossi-says' statement.  Also speculation that Fioravanti signed off for DARPA (or other military entity).  Any progress in CF at this point is definitely worthwhile, even if it becomes exaggerated.  I don't share many of the author's sentiments with the e-cat, especially the 'cheerleading' aspect, however I do at least agree there is more that just 'Rossi says', granted there is still a lot of that  
 
Besides, the real hurdle comes if the claims of even just a working product really are true.  Bureaucracy (at least in the US) has the potential to delay this.  However if governments are smart, they will realize the rest of the world will embrace this openly and could easily surpass other nations that adopt slowly.  Probably meaning, less developed nations will take a huge jump in their productivity while more established (US?) may as well but in a much smaller relative capacity. I'm a realist and realize there are current US investors wanting to milk their investments as much they can, lobbyists permitting.  There's no conspiracy in that, all good, legal tactics promoted by neo-luddism. I'm in the US and have 'speculated' for a while that I may have to buy the non-epa version of CF when it comes out, at least until DC 'gets the point'. 
 
In general, I dislike how Rossi basically 'steals' the work of all previous CF research, maybe does some edisonian engineering to find the 'right mix', and leaves the rest of the CF community in the dark essentially.  I'll still give him a part of the credit if it ends up a great contribution to the field.  He's not going to be at ICCF-17 as I understand.  Defkalion will be, and hope their upcoming openness proves that CF is indeed capable of industrial-level performance.  As we both know there are a lot of 'revealings' and open validations in danger of expiring in the next few months... lets hope at least one has the goods (Defkalion, Plasmerg, etc).  Not sure what the e-cat open validation date is slated for... or what is being tested right now for the EU certification.  Anyone skeptical of Rossi's claims (hopefully everyone to some degree) and in the position to investigate should definitely start there I'd say, to see if those claims are at least valid.

Dave
"operating with an agenda" is very strong assertion.  Prove it!  On the one hand you the extordinary claim of a nuclear reaction.  On the other hand it is just "known" to be perfectly safe.  Hydrogen bombs are based on nuclear reactions.  LENR is based on nuclear reactions. Without a proven theoretical model that can be tested we do not know what the limitations are for the nuclear reactions.  I think it would be just common sense not to have 20 reactors all going at once until the reaction is well understood. 
 
I don't think developers should stop what they are doing.  Assuming the questioning of safety is meant to stop current development is a completely paranoid conclusion.  The real issue here is to emphasize the importance of publishing a proven theoretical model as soon as possible.  Once a proven theoretical model has been published ALL safety concerns can accurately be assessed by real science.   Real science as opposed to opinions based on a personal bias. 
 
Looks like the new boss is the same as the old boss.

[WilbyInebriated]

Some more:

Dave
"operating with an agenda" is very strong assertion.  Prove it!  On the one hand you the extordinary claim of a nuclear reaction.  On the other hand it is just "known" to be perfectly safe.  Hydrogen bombs are based on nuclear reactions.  LENR is based on nuclear reactions. Without a proven theoretical model that can be tested we do not know what the limitations are for the nuclear reactions.  I think it would be just common sense not to have 20 reactors all going at once until the reaction is well understood.

I don't think developers should stop what they are doing.  Assuming the questioning of safety is meant to stop current development is a completely paranoid conclusion.  The real issue here is to emphasize the importance of publishing a proven theoretical modelas soon as possible.  Once a proven theoretical model has been published ALL safety concerns can accurately be assessed by real science.   Real science as opposed to opinions based on a personal bias.

Looks like the new boss is the same as the old boss.

what the hell is this guy even talking about? surely he and milelow know that scientific theories are not "proven"? surely this guy and milelow at least know that much about science... real science. right?

[MileHigh]

So there you go.  That was from comments from the last four or five Rossi articles on PESN.  I have read comments on other web sites with similar themes.

Many serious minded people are very concerned about whether this is real and being implemented by a person that is not particularly credible, or on the other hand this is all just a make-work project that will never produce anything useful at all.

You don't have to be a bloody Spy vs. Spy "agent" to have an opinion like this.  Arguably you just have to have some common sense.

Take this for example:  http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/410964/neutron-beam

neutron beam, a stream of neutrons that is used to study samples in physics, chemistry, and biology. Neutron beams are extracted from nuclear reactors and particle accelerators.

Have any people reading this ever in their lives heard about aiming a beam of neutrons at some nickel and hearing reports of copper being produced?  Or any anomalies related to fusion energy signatures or fusion byproducts?  They have been playing with neutron beams for who knows how many decades?

Before the advent of alleged Nickel-Hydrogen LENR, had any of you heard about an electron and a proton condensing into a neutron?

There are a lot of new concepts and unknowns here and my choice is to PROCEED WITH CAUTION and demand SOLID DATA.

Just because I want to wait for that groundswell of confirmation and approval coming from the physicists on up does not mean that I am a "disinformation agent."  That's simply ridiculous.

MileHigh

[WilbyInebriated]

Take this for example:  http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/410964/neutron-beam

Have any people reading this ever in their lives heard about aiming a beam of neutrons at some nickel and hearing reports of copper being produced?  Or any anomalies related to fusion energy signatures or fusion byproducts?  They have been playing with neutron beams for who knows how many decades?

you talk about common sense and then you say something as asinine as this?  particle accelerators require HUGE amounts of energy. why would anyone spend so much to make copper when it is simply cheaper to mine it.  particle accelerators are used to synthesize precious metals like gold, palladium, osmium.

and... you don't have to be a bloody spy vs. spy "agent" to recognize this.  arguably you just have to have some common sense.

Just because I want to wait for that groundswell of confirmation and approval coming from the physicists on up does not mean that I am a "disinformation agent."  That's simply ridiculous.

MileHigh

but you're not just waiting... you are countering EVERY post that isn't anti-rossi with your anti-rossi fanboi posts. which usually consist of one logical fallacy or another. as chess said, if it looks like a duck...