Quote from: bullsnbears1 on November 24, 2011, 12:47:47 PM
I tend to be on the side of the E-cat believers.

But it sure would be nice to be able to confirm the existence of this "customer" beyond the words out of Rossi's mouth. Can anyone provide more information that would help the average guy feel comfortable that this customer does in fact exist?

@bullsnbears1:
If Rossi revealed the name of his mystery customer, he would probably lose this customer as this customer does not want to be named.  It has to be a contractual agreement in which Rossi has agreed to keep this customer's identity concealed, otherwise it would have obviously been released.  Yes, it would obviously benefit Rossi's company to showcase this customer's identity and even develop a promotional video of his 1 megawatt power plants in operation in the field, but Rossi must respect his client's wishes first and foremost. 

Would I want to be showcased as the first commercial E-Cat owner and operator in the United States?  A technology that undermines a multi-trillion dollar energy industry such as Big Oil?  A technology which basically will cause the very richest individuals in the U.S. to go broke?  After watching what they did to Stanley Meyer, absolutely NOT.  So I can't say that I blame his client for their decision to remain confidential.


Regards,

Chess

Quote from: chessnyt on November 25, 2011, 05:42:39 PM
@Rosemary:
I'm sorry to learn that your article was rejected for publication.  The original Cold Fusion story that headlined all the major newspapers lacked ANY credibility as it was making claims far outside the received scientific paradigm yet it was published around the world.  This is precisely why the mainstream media can not be trusted. 

This breakthrough in L.E.N.R. technology is the biggest discovery in modern science since the discovery of electricity but if you watch the entire new documentary "Thrive", you may soon start to understand why the major networks have eclipsed this story.  It is also time for mainstream America to eclipse the entire major networks altogether as they do not have our best interests at heart.

You have to follow the money.  Who sponsors the major networks (buys commercial air time for thousands of dollars per second) that dominate our news outlets?  It is corporate America that sponsors and owns them just as they own (have already purchased) the U.S. government.


Warm regards,

Chess

Quite right Chess.  I did watch that video more than once.   It's brilliantly produced.  And it's a compelling argument.  I'm finding more and more of these things being really well explained.  Ancient aliens is another series that's captivated me.  Not sure if it's on the internet but it's been fielded by our History channel.  Also very brilliant.  And frankly before I saw either of these I was rather sceptical as I'd heard of both theories before.  Clearly one is never too old to learn.

I believe that Rossi may yet get to read my thesis.  It's being forwarded by a mutual friend.  If so, then there may be something there that he could use.  I very much doubt that the weak nuclear interaction explains it.  But - who knows?   If he does use it then the beauty is that there is no major confrontation with mainstream and the standard model.  That's the problem - as I see it.  Contradict our Learned and Revered and you're likely to become a pariah.  I'm holding my breath here.

Take care Chess. 
Kindest as ever,
Rosemary

Quote from: Rosemary Ainslie on November 26, 2011, 10:39:58 AM
Quite right Chess.  I did watch that video more than once.   It's brilliantly produced.  And it's a compelling argument.  I'm finding more and more of these things being really well explained.  Ancient aliens is another series that's captivated me.  Not sure if it's on the internet but it's been fielded by our History channel.  Also very brilliant.  And frankly before I saw either of these I was rather sceptical as I'd heard of both theories before.  Clearly one is never too old to learn.

I believe that Rossi may yet get to read my thesis.  It's being forwarded by a mutual friend.  If so, then there may be something there that he could use.  I very much doubt that the weak nuclear interaction explains it.  But - who knows?   If he does use it then the beauty is that there is no major confrontation with mainstream and the standard model.  That's the problem - as I see it.  Contradict our Learned and Revered and you're likely to become a pariah.  I'm holding my breath here.

Take care Chess. 
Kindest as ever,
Rosemary

@Rosemary:
The success of the E-Cat, having made it to market on schedule, is a huge milestone in and of itself.  I seriously doubt this would be the case if the inventor were a U.S. citizen.  Causing harm to befall upon Rossi would certainly spark an international incident so it is of great advantage to Rossi to be out of the reach of such forces that stand to lose their monopoly and thus their strangle hold on us all. 

The hidden benefit of the E-Cat's success is the future avenue it paves for various other types of technologies that otherwise could not emerge into unhampered commercialization.

My expertise is in another technology that I would like to bring forth in due time but because I lack the expertise, experience and am unable to facilitate the experimentation in the field of LENRs, I will leave it to those who are able to do so.  I will come back to the field I am currently involved in at a latter date once I perfect it to the point of being ready for public usage.  This is Rossi's moment and he has beaten everyone here to market (please correct me if I am mistaken) and we should be very grateful for his contribution to mankind on so many different levels besides the obvious ones.


Take care,

Chess

Dear Chess

You must have read what was written about Rossi even on this forum?  The writer is otherwise understood to be a supporter of over unity.  He catalogued a series of allegations that included, among others, the insinuation that Rossi was imprisoned for perpetrating a con related to Petroldragon?  He took the trouble to keep that post OFF this, your thread, being the appropriate forum.  And he somehow managed to get that exact same post into the dialogue of a second thread that he had started - and the SAME thing into another forum entirely - also with some clumsy relevance worked into that dialogue to pretend a topicality with what was being discussed. Following on from those allegations was also a tedious debate where the writer pretended to be some kind of ultimate authority on the question of emissions  and even to be in a position - HIMSELF - to independently evaluate the 'truth' about the toxicity of those emissions. I haven't even touched on the full reach of that little exercise in psyops propagandising - where amongst other things he insinuated that he was in direct correspondence with Rossi.  But.  Nota bene.  He went to some pains to stress this much.  Either there are emissions - in which case it's a valid nuclear interaction - OR there not - in which case the CLAIM is spurious and, in the light of all those innuendos - LIKELY TO BE A CON.  Which puts the value of Rossi's device somewhere between a rock and a hard place - which was the intended 'lose lose' condition of those alternatives.  Gamma rays - or bust. 

The truth of the matter was that Rossi was INDEED imprisoned, on a trumped up charge of 'pollution'.  One does not need to dig too far to find a motive for this.  He was subsequently released - due to an entire lack of evidence which, as a rule, is not a critical condition for imprisonment in Italy.  As in France, the general rule there is that a person is guilty until proved innocent.  Some six years later, I believe, he was entirely EXONERATED from any such charges and his NAME WAS CLEARED.  And there's proof of innocence.  Because criminals, as a rule, cannot emigrate to America.  And Rossi is an American citizien.  But that imprisonment and that ALLEGATION OF POLLUTION was enough to sink a well funded project which then collapsed like a pack of cards.  And many investors lost their money together with Rossi's good name.

Now.  Onto another point.  We all know that Nobel Laureate, Professor Brian Josephsson - has been speaking out 'openly' in support of cold fusion.  I believe Brian Josephsson is a supporter of the work of Professor Celani who was working, independently on LENR.  Josephsson's motto is to the let the facts speak for themselves.  Let the evidence be the argument.  Or - to the point.  'Fag the explanation.  Just deal with the results'.  He's on record.  And whatever the intentions of either of those two esteemed academics - the fact is that Celani did not manage to get this to heavy duty wattage - or, if he did, he did NOT advise the public of this.  THEN was that surprise move - where Josephsson wrote an OPEN letter to Rossi to ask him to allow Celani to do all the independent verifications required for Rossi's technology.  What was he thinking?  It is absolutely against all acceptable protocols to EVER confine accreditation of anything at all - to one person.  The whole purpose of any accreditation is to first allow academic publication to secure a wide range of talents to replicate an effect.  In the absence of being able to publish - for whatever reason, then the accreditation must be handled by more than one person.  And Rossi's intelligent solution is to let an entire university do this.  That's a very good thing.  Because it only needs one replication to secure a claim - regardless of how many try and fail.  And if there is only one nominated representative to do that accreditation - then it is likely to be corrupted by anything at all, including lack of talent or even, God forbid, a required agenda to disclaim benefit. Not a solution.  AT all.  Not even our academics would support it - let alone Rossi.  One must therefore ask why someone with the acknowledged genius of Josephsson, would propose that a competitor to Rossi's claim - ever be called on to endorse Rossi's claim - when he would be so much better served to propose a variation which will advance his own interests and deny Rossi's.  And what part then -  in all this - does Josephsson play?  I have no idea.  It seems to be an extraordinary abuse of influence somehow.  Fortunately Rossi's refusal was utterly reasonable.  He has already nominated those who can study this with the required impartiality and, more to the point when they're under contracted NDA's.

Which brings me back to Rossi's dilemma.  In order to secure patents on his technology the technology must first be published - or the results must be explicable in terms of known physics.  This much is impossible - precisely because, whatever else everyone is measuring - toxic emissions appropriate to nuclear processes - are ENTIRELY ABSENT.  I have no doubt that there is that pesky evidence of copper and, according to the evidence - it is not in an isotopic form which is required for a nuclear process.  Which means that he has to argue this as a weak nuclear interaction.  And, as far as we know, weak nuclear interactions do NOT allow for the entire transmutation of elements.  Which is where, I hope, that our own 'solution' is considered as the explanation.  Because, you see this I hope.  Our own solution DOES NOT deviate from the standard model.  Indeed, in terms of that very same STANDARD MODEL - it can be argued that these over unity results are actually REQUIRED.  Certainly it argues for the existence of all that copper in the aftermath of that reaction. 

And this, in turn brings me back to that 'agenda' thing which is always the 'background' theme of these forums.  I am reasonably satisfied that anyone reading here will be able to discount whatever it is that I communicate based on the almost hysterical need of sundry trolls to assure all and sundry that - not only am I something of an idiot - but also a CON and - I believe as it's claimed - A FRAUD.  Now.  Let me plain about this.  Whatever results we have managed are ENTIRELY ECLIPSED by Rossi's findings.  To the extent that I've effectively closed my own thread on this matter.  And nor will I be doing any further experimentation unless and as it's required.  I cannot, for the life of me, see any point in advancing a technology based on the availability of batteries when all that is needed is a teaspoon full of nickle and a small injection of hydrogen.  The ONLY way I may be compelled to continue with this work is in the unlikely event that something happens that Rossi's work is effectively discounted and denied.  And I say 'UNLIKELY' advisedly.  Because his results speak for themselves. 

But, by the same token, I would be sorry to find that they also ignore the fact that there's an entire explanation in the standard model.  It has eluded detection simply because it has NEVER been argued that a magnetic field may be a primary force as the foundational construct of all the forces.  When this is seen, then I am entirely satisfied that our learned academics will be able to argue the need for over unity - for themselves.  And THAT is my entire 'raison d'etre'.  Because I also know that therein lies - not only the location of all this energy - but the key to unlocking it's potential.  We have found NOTHING new.  We have NOTHING to add to the standard model.  And that would be more than enough justification - not only for Rossi's patent - but for the work that so many of us are progressing. 

So Chess.  This is not an attempt at self promotion.  On the contrary.  I am most anxious to suggest that Rossi 'blow' all that theoretical requirement and simply lean on the obvious explanations that are already there.  That's what I'm trying to point him to.  And it most assuredly falls well within our existing paradigms.  If anything - it also endorses our dark force enthusiasts who, thus far, have unfortunately been on the outskirts of popular theories.  Not sure that I'll ever be forgiven for the prosaic nature of this solution.  But I also have the uncomfortable realisation that these explanations are bang on target.  It's unfortunate that they've been so widely discredited - is all. I certainly DO NOT want to detract from Rossi's moment - if that's what you're advising me.  Very, VERY far from it.

Kindest,
Rosemary 

Added.  Guys, Here's a reference to that paper and our attempts at getting this published. If you're not in the habit of reading between the lines - the fact is that we are not getting ANY response from the editor - AT ALL.  Extraordinary.

http://newlightondarkenergy.blogspot.com/2011/11/199-heres-hoping-our-reviewers-will-put.html

Quote from: chessnyt on November 26, 2011, 09:19:21 AM

@bullsnbears1:
If Rossi revealed the name of his mystery customer, he would probably lose this customer as this customer does not want to be named.  It has to be a contractual agreement in which Rossi has agreed to keep this customer's identity concealed, otherwise it would have obviously been released.  Yes, it would obviously benefit Rossi's company to showcase this customer's identity and even develop a promotional video of his 1 megawatt power plants in operation in the field, but Rossi must respect his client's wishes first and foremost. 

Would I want to be showcased as the first commercial E-Cat owner and operator in the United States?  A technology that undermines a multi-trillion dollar energy industry such as Big Oil?  A technology which basically will cause the very richest individuals in the U.S. to go broke?  After watching what they did to Stanley Meyer, absolutely NOT.  So I can't say that I blame his client for their decision to remain confidential.


Regards,

Chess

Of course! I fully understand and empathize with their position.

Personally, I was disappointed on the date of the 1MW plant because leading up to the test we were told that we would know who the customer was, and I believe we were told the underlying theory of the technology would be explained.

Now that that hasn't happened, I was hoping someone could clarify what facts we could use to assure ourselves that this customer actually exists.