lernsky wrote:

I mean, there is really no reason, that this shouldn't work!

Except, you know, the laws of the universe as we understand them.

He refuses to prove his process other than by running a test for only the buyer.  My stance is that it would stand up to scrutiny if it were possible, and he's probably either hoodwinked the buyer, or the buyer is in on it.

On the other hand, with all the idiots that make fun of cold fusion, but don't understand anything about it, if I had invented it...  Well, I wouldn't prove it either.  I'd do exactly what he's doing:  Profit off it for as long as possible before patenting it.  And then continue to profit.

Sounds super fishy.

On an unrelated note, have any of you heard of expanding earth theory?
I hope this is true. It somehow seems much more plausible to me than the standard theory, though I'm no geologist...

I'm baffled that this has gotten so much attention. They haven't really proved anything, the guy himself sounds and looks like a totally obvious scammer, the outdrawn business transactions (some unidentified customer who was totally going to buy it couldn't but it because of "contractual problems"! oh no!) and general shadiness all imply that this is just a witchcrafting dude.

(oh aphasiac posted before me. nice post aphasiac!)
(nadiatims: what. that video is hella annoying and doesn't make any sense. also there is a guy right there in the 'most thumbs up' comments linking a paper debunking that... theory, if it can be called that)

Last edited by Surreal (2011 November 08, 11:47 am)

nadiatims wrote:

Sounds super fishy.

On an unrelated note, have any of you heard of expanding earth theory?
I hope this is true. It somehow seems much more plausible to me than the standard theory, though I'm no geologist...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=epwg6Od4 … re=related

aphasiac wrote:

At first with all the scientist and university involvement, it seemed very real, but unfortunately...

This is what makes it also to me seem very real. I mean, I could imagine that these were actors or retired science staff, that are in for some attention. But that would seem like a giant joke that leads nowhere, whereas Mr. Rossi seems to take his case very seriously. I deem these 'scientific' gentlemen very credible. There is just a lot of coherence in what they're telling and how they 'act out' the whole situation.

aphasiac wrote:

At first it seemed odd and was put down to his poor scientific credentials, by now it's extremely suspicious.
Even treating the device as complete a black box and not revealing any of the internal workings, it should be simple to prove that it is producing energy from an un-known source. This still hasn't been done conclusively.

The case is that he doesn't hold an international patent (only national), for the reasons stated in the Wikipedia-article, and there seem to be already greedy investors who try to take this away and market it for their own profit.
My guess is that the technology hidden in the small 50ccm chamber isn't too difficult to reverse-engineer, so he should be extremely careful not to give this out of his hand. If made public beforehand, there is no way of getting 'copyright protection'. So maybe - this is a guess - he raises just the attention needed to resolve this patent issue soon. The public eye is witness for he's in posession of the technology. He wont keep it back, because he's selfish, but he's wise enough to take care of copycats. I think this behaviour would make sense and could account for all this 'fishiness'.

aphasiac wrote:

He was also involved in a scam where he claimed he had invented a new high-efficiency solar panel, which was subsequently proven to be fake with the test results falsified.

Do you have a source for that? Unfortunately I can't find any hints...

aphasiac wrote:

The New Energy Times (http://blog.newenergytimes.com/), a leading cold fusion site, sent their editor to one of the tests - and they now believe it's a scam. This to me is the most damning evidence.

All the same, I can't find any hint that they rule out the possibility of a successful experiment. I only noticed a begrudging tone in Krivits' interviews and the attempt to elicit anything that would discredit Focardi and Rossi. Just my feeling that Krivits is the only fishy guy in the pool...

aphasiac wrote:

Why would he stage something like this? Like all other before him, it'll be for money or fame. Most energy scams end in 2 ways; being found out, or delay-delay-delay then disappear. Of course I'm still slightly open (i.e. really hoping) this is real, so very interested to see how this plays out.

Hmm... well, do you think he could keep the money if it came out everything was faked? To become a famous cheater would he pick this field which is soaked with doubts? I think Pons and Fleischmann in 1989 found infinitesimal traces of this phenomenon (using Pd), that were just too easy to be brushed aside. Also consider, that the "oil mafia" is comfortable with a projected rise of fusion energy in the range of 2050 (they're willing to pay the bill, only peanuts...), which is the case with hot fusion, but scared of a sudden unexpectedly cheap source of energy. I think it just can't be held back any further...

I'm curious but skeptical, I'll believe it when I see it.

Though I've read on some physics forum an interesting dissection of this experiment/demonstration done by supposedly renowned physicist (Nobel Prize involved or something) and it raised very interesting points, mainly in favor of this Italian guy. Maybe he is onto something

It obviously doesn't work--if it did Rossi would be able to cooperate with other scientists to set up an actual test that would give real evidence.  That hasn't happened, because it's a scam.

IceCream wrote:

nadiatims wrote:

Sounds super fishy.

On an unrelated note, have any of you heard of expanding earth theory?
I hope this is true. It somehow seems much more plausible to me than the standard theory, though I'm no geologist...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=epwg6Od4 … re=related

This "theory" beats the expanding earth "theory" by an inch or two

Introducing the Hollow Earth Theory
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cDNo3kHMLEk

Last edited by oregum (2011 November 08, 7:18 pm)

The problem isn't that it's not verified--the problem is that he won't let the scientific community verify it.  The only reason for that is because the scientific community would find his claims to be false.  Hence, it's a scam.

If the scientific community verifies it, he'll make more money, not less.  After all, that's the only way he'll get a large amount of people to take him seriously.  He'll also win the Nobel prize.  So, you can't say that he won't let people verify it to protect his rights over the product.

Whenever someone is making a ridiculous scientific claim, and not putting it through the proper channels, it's a scam.  It's always been that way.

IceCream wrote:

nadiatims wrote:

Sounds super fishy.

On an unrelated note, have any of you heard of expanding earth theory?
I hope this is true. It somehow seems much more plausible to me than the standard theory, though I'm no geologist...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=epwg6Od4 … re=related

One problem with that rebuttal is that lack of an explained mechanism for expansion can't be used to dismiss the observed evidence for expansion. The mechanism for gravity isn't known either. Evolution is observable, but the details are yet to be ironed out. The video I posted doesn't really present the evidence for expansion, just a neat visualization. The main evidence is data on the age of the sea floor as explained more in this longer video. Neil Adam's explanation of nuclear fusion sounds crazy to me, but I figure the extra mass could be explained as coming from the 37000-78000 tons of meteors and dust that rains down on the Earth per year. The earth is gaining mass, so it makes sense that's growing. That is how it formed initially anyway, matter accumulating about a common center of gravity (correct me if I'm wrong). Evidence for subduction, which must be occurring for the Earth's size to remain fixed is seems far from conclusive.

SomeCallMeChris wrote:

Please. If it was legitimately this great discovery, he could -give- away the science and still make, if not a fortune, then a comfortable living with books (ghost-written, of course!), speaking engagements, and television appearances on popular science shows.

Haha

Tzadeck wrote:

The problem isn't that it's not verified--the problem is that he won't let the scientific community verify it. The only reason for that is because the scientific community would find his claims to be false.  Hence, it's a scam.

You just don't know if this is the only reason, do you? On what base does your conclusion therfore stand?

Tzadeck wrote:

If the scientific community verifies it, he'll make more money, not less.  After all, that's the only way he'll get a large amount of people to take him seriously.  He'll also win the Nobel prize.  So, you can't say that he won't let people verify it to protect his rights over the product.

Oh yes, I can say that, because I'm assuming, whereas you are stating. No offense, just saying...

I believe that Rossi is the kind of person who has strong feelings about justice. He wouldn't be the one who follows the path of least resistance, and let this be 'stolen' by greedy investors, who will not only steal from him but also from customers.
On the other hand he seems to be very smart about this. He's not the kind of headless professor who doesn't care about money stuff, he's doing business.

Assume that his device really works. Then revenue is one thing he particularly has to care about. Winning a nobel prize so far doesn't compare moneywise to marketing a big invention. Besides most people get it best-aged, plus, he would obviously share it. Being famous doesn't pay the bills, right?

It's an irony of history that most famous inventors were also those who were bullheaded enough to market their invention themselves, think of Edison. My conclusion: there is no such thing as a free lunch.

Tzadeck wrote:

Whenever someone is making a ridiculous scientific claim, and not putting it through the proper channels, it's a scam. It's always been that way.

What about just this year's winner of the Nobel Prize in Chemistry, Dan Shechtman? He was rejected by scientific society for years, having discovered quasi-crystals.

Wikipedia wrote:

Shechtman experienced several years of hostility toward his non-periodic interpretation (no less a figure than Linus Pauling said he was "talking nonsense" and "There is no such thing as quasicrystals, only quasi-scientists.").

The head of Shechtman's research group told him to "go back and read the textbook" and then "asked him to leave for 'bringing disgrace' on the team." Shechtman felt rejected.

Also read about the Wright brothers. They often flew secretly or showed so little performance at their demonstrations that the press lost interest. They were extremely reclusive as long as they hadn't legal protection for their invention.

Wikipedia wrote:

The Wright brothers were certainly complicit in the lack of attention they received. Fearful of competitors stealing their ideas, and still without a patent, they flew on only one more day after October 5. From then on, they refused to fly anywhere unless they had a firm contract to sell their aircraft.

Wikipedia wrote:

The Wright brothers did not have the luxury of giving away their invention; it was to be their livelihood. Thus, their secrecy intensified, encouraged by advice from their patent attorney, Henry Toulmin, not to reveal details of their machine.

^^ yes, this is true Tzadeck, but we're talking about a possible scientific invention, NOT your traditional miracle story.

If science took that attitude about everything, no new breakthroughs would be made. In any case, that IS a problem with scienctific discovery, where unexpected results are often cast aside because they don't fit with current theories.

In any case, if it IS a fraud (which it may well be), it doesn't seem to be as much of a shabby, obvious fraud as some people are suggesting. It does seem worth talking about and investigating, rather than just writing it off as an obvious fraud. There do seem to be lots of scientists, that while reserved and sceptical, ARE interested nonetheless. They want to know what the mistake or fraud is based in, if nothing else.

For instance, here's a video from Cambridge University (linked from the wiki page): http://sms.cam.ac.uk/media/1150242

in other words, as long as it's an interesting scam, it's interesting, at least. For those of you thinking it's definately a scam, anyone got any interesting theories about how he's doing it?

Last edited by IceCream (2011 November 09, 11:10 am)