On October 29 2011 17:46 Zidane wrote: 500k euro doesn't sound really that ridiculous, I would think he'd be able to get off with more if he was really trying his best to scam someone.
Here's to hoping that his independent testing produces something.
Yeah, no way a scam this elaborate (if it is a scam! ) would be simply to get 500k euro.
I would still imagine that if this technology was real he could have developed and marketed it way faster. These experements have been going on for over a year now.
I don't know how much he sold or will sell it for. But the University of Bologna wants 500k Euro + tax to do independent testing for 24 months.
Also those people who say "if this was real then he would already have ..." should read how previous cold fusion researchers have been treated. The careers of Pons and Fleischman were destroyed because they published too early when reproducibility was still low. After 20 years, there is a lot more evidence in favor of cold fusion and reproducibility is much higher, but cold fusion is still being treated as if it was a delusion by most. Don't rely on third-hand info, go read some papers or watch interviews of researchers (like this for example http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=4967330n&tag=contentBody;storyMediaBox). Many of the people who are actually actively involved in this research think that knowledge of these phenomena is becoming goodenough to make sudden breakthroughs possible.
Once you understand this, and the lack of an international patent, Rossi's behavior and paranoia make a lot of sense.
On October 29 2011 18:37 Marradron wrote: I would still imagine that if this technology was real he could have developed and marketed it way faster. These experements have been going on for over a year now.
You have no idea what you are talking about. If anything it has progressed rather quickly.
On October 29 2011 07:06 Integra wrote: LOL good ol Andrea Rossi is back! And of course he has some new amazing gadget that will revolutionize everything! I can't wait to see what kind of crap he is going to trick people into this time.
What other scams has Rossi pulled? I have never heard of any of them.
I doubt there has been a single one. Otherwise everybody would know about it, and nobody would care about this in the slightest. He's under some pretty heavy scrutiny.
On October 29 2011 19:23 rubio91 wrote: Some years ago he claimed to have invented a way to convert litter into hydrocarbons (petroleum). Didn't work. All litter gathered by his company to be converted was stored abusively. He somewhat managed to get out with no major legal consequences Relevant: http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petroldragon (Italian) http://www.thermaldepolymerization.org/ (English) http://ingandrearossi.net/ (IT and EN)
Well, today we know that thermal depolymerization is real and can transform waste into oil. So Rossi had the right idea and was ahead of his time, even though the venture failed in the end for whatever reasons it had.
On October 29 2011 12:59 Desti wrote: Again, why was no observer allowed to use his own measuring instruments? Why were the heat exchangers hidden behind high walls, so no one could control their temperature? Why was the "test" only running 3 hours and not for several days?
You do know all observers were / are allowed to use their own measurement instruments during all of the experiments. The only instruments that were banned are radiation detectors.
On October 29 2011 19:45 rubio91 wrote: Yes, thermal depolymerization is possible. But HIS project wasn't able to do that. I'm starting to expect the same thing with e-cat.
I think this is certainly possible. I think it was mentioned somewhere on one of the dedicated e-cat sites that Rossi likely doesn't know the physics of how it actually works.
Also, NASA is working on LENR, and some physicist whose name I forgot starts with a P (who was affiliated with Rossi) is also working on his own version of Rossi's reactor. He might know the particular physics of it.
I'm still a bit skeptical myself, but if it's good enough for someone to put 500k euro down on it then there's probably something of value there.
“according to the customer’s controller, Domenico Fioravanti, the plant released 2,635 kWh during five and a half hours of self sustained mode, which is equivalent to an average power of 479 kilowatts.”
That's pretty damn impressive. If he can hoax that up, I'm sure it will be revealed soon when the "customer" will start taking a harder look at the product(s) they purchased.
On October 29 2011 07:06 Integra wrote: LOL good ol Andrea Rossi is back! And of course he has some new amazing gadget that will revolutionize everything! I can't wait to see what kind of crap he is going to trick people into this time.
What other scams has Rossi pulled? I have never heard of any of them.
On October 29 2011 12:59 Desti wrote: Again, why was no observer allowed to use his own measuring instruments? Why were the heat exchangers hidden behind high walls, so no one could control their temperature? Why was the "test" only running 3 hours and not for several days?
You do know all observers were / are allowed to use their own measurement instruments during all of the experiments. The only instruments that were banned are radiation detectors.
Then show me a video where named non affiliated observers are using their own instruments.
On October 29 2011 12:59 Desti wrote: Again, why was no observer allowed to use his own measuring instruments? Why were the heat exchangers hidden behind high walls, so no one could control their temperature? Why was the "test" only running 3 hours and not for several days?
You do know all observers were / are allowed to use their own measurement instruments during all of the experiments. The only instruments that were banned are radiation detectors.
Then show me a video where named non affiliated observers are using their own instruments.
lol, why would I go waste my time trying to do that. This is the best I'll give you because you can go do it yourself.
Here's non-biased info from all of the experiments (ruling in and ruling out fakes and whatnot).
It must, however be noted that Rossi made the "Calorimetric Black Box" eCAT available without any restrictions (other than the use of radioactive spectral detectors), so the lack of proof is due to defects in the observers instruments or techniques.
On October 29 2011 21:43 Desti wrote: Then show me a video where named non affiliated observers are using their own instruments.
It's the video in my second post in this thread. Dr. Francesco Celani, a nuclear physicist, talks about the instruments he brought and used, and what results he got. He mentions some radioactivity spikes consistent with an unstable unknown reaction, and Rossi getting pissed because of his spectrometer. Starts at 20:10
Of course that won't be enough to convince skeptics either. They just start doubting that this person is competent, independent, etc He's working at the Italian National Institute of Nuclear Physics by the way (the INFN).
I have to agree that this looks very very promising and I hope that its true. I do however belive that its some sort of hokas. To much secrecy inolved and too little proof. I guess well just have to wait and see.
In light of this topic, I thought I'd tell a short story on the concept of scientific dogma:
Prior to the 1950s, the idea that neurogenesis (the growth of new neurons) could occur in adult organisms was considered utterly ridiculous. Spanish neuroscientist and artist Santiago Ramón y Cajal had ago determined that neurons are not born in the adult organism, and that new neurons only emerge before birth and perhaps for a short, transient period after birth. In fact, the idea of adult neurogenesis was considered SO incorrect that postulating such a thing would have led to losing a job and research funding as a nascent scientist within the burgeoning field of developmental/neurobiology.
In any case, after DNA was discovered and established as the common basis of genetic material across all animals in the late 50s and early 60s, new research was conducted, aimed at elucidating the old, mysterious topic of adult neurogenesis only briefly and incompletely addressed by Cajal so long ago in Spain. Remember, Cajal had brought to the modern world almost everything we had then known about neurobiology. Indeed, Cajal was brilliant, and to this day almost all of his findings hold true with strong support. He was wrong about one thing, however, and that thing just so happened to be the concept of adult neurogenesis.
Joseph Altman, a neuroscientist at MIT, began examining the possibility of adult neurogenesis by examining hippocampus sections from rat brain in the 60s. By using a newly established method for marking dividing cells (tritiated thymidine), Altman demonstrated the first evidence for neurogenesis in hippocampal brain sections. Within the dentate gyrus of the hippocampus, Altman found a small proportion of adult neurons that were marked by his administration of tritiated thymidine -- the marker for replicating cells (or cells being "born").
Altman had stumbled upon something absolutely amazing. Essentially, he had found evidence for something that had previously been established as absolutely impossible -- that new neurons could emerge within the adult organism. His research, although preliminary and without supporting research from other labs, demonstrated at least the possibility of neurogenesis in rat hippocampal sections. But guess what? Altman was now going against the flow of what had been established for decades -- if not hundreds of years -- in developmental/neurobiology. Altman was basically saying, "Look guys I think I may have found something that goes COMPLETELY against the dogma of neurobiology!" -- just as Rossi seems to be saying, "Look guys I think I may have found something that goes COMPLETELY against the dogma of 'no-free-energy'!"
Altman ended up being denied tenure at MIT for his blasphemous work. Almost everybody thought he was crazy, or thought he had some ulterior motive for his work that was so egregiously "against the grain" of the dogma. Because of this dogma, Altman never received the Nobel prize he deserved. He ended up living a quiet life doing unrelated neuro-research at Purdue where he retired. It was not until advances in research from the 70s all the way to the 90s that Altman's work was accepted as the basis for the establishment of the topic of adult neurogenesis.
So why was Altman ignored for so long? Simple. He went against the dogma that had been previously established. Dogma is as powerful and dangerous a tool in science as it is anywhere. I do not know the details of the physics behind Rossi's work (I'm a bio guy, not a physics guy), but what I do know is that his work should not be discredited due to simple dogmatic reasons. Every criticism must be evidence-based and well supported. I also realize the story here with Rossi gets a bit complicated because of the secret nature of this project -- but the secrecy is obviously a necessary step in light of the financial benefits associated with the project. In any case, the point of not falling under the sway of dogma is the key here.
So why was Altman ignored for so long? Simple. He went against the dogma that had been previously established. Dogma is as powerful and dangerous a tool in science as it is anywhere. I do not know the details of the physics behind Rossi's work (I'm a bio guy, not a physics guy), but what I do know is that his work should not be discredited due to simple dogmatic reasons. Every criticism must be evidence-based and well supported. I also realize the story here with Rossi gets a bit complicated because of the secret nature of this project -- but the secrecy is obviously a necessary step in light of the financial benefits associated with the project. In any case, the point of not falling under the sway of dogma is the key here.
Thanks for this enlightening post. I'll add some more examples, there are plenty in history:
Wright brothers After their Kitty Hawk success, The Wrights flew their machine in open fields next to a busy rail line in Dayton Ohio for almost an entire year. American authorities refused to come to the demos, and Scientific American Magazine published stories about "The Lying Brothers." Even the local Dayton newspapers never sent a reporter (but they did complain about all the letters they were receiving from local "crazies" who reported the many flights.) Finally the Wrights packed up and moved to Europe, where they caused an overnight sensation and sold aircraft contracts to France, Germany, Britain, etc.
Semmelweiss Semmelweis brought the medical community the idea that they were killing large numbers of new mothers by working with festering wounds in surgery, then immediately assisting with births without even washing hands. Such a truth was far too shameful for a community of experts to accept, so he was ignored. Semmelweis finally ended up in a mental hospital, and his ideas caught fire after he had died.
Marshall Stomach ulcers are caused by acid. All physicians knew this. Marshall needed about ?? years to convince the medical establishment to change their beliefs and accept that their confident knowledge was wrong; was nothing but a widespread believe, and that ulcers are actually a bacterial disease.
Goddard (rocket powered space ships) "This foolish idea of shooting at the moon is an example of the absurd lengths to which vicious specialisation will carry scientists." -A.W. Bickerton, physicist, NZ, 1926
Chladni The scientific community regarded Meteorites in the same way that modern scientists regard UFO abductions and psychic phenomenon: quaint superstitions only believed by peasant folk. All the eyewitness reports were disbelieved. At one point the ridicule became so intense that many museums with meteorites in their geology collections decided to trash those valuable samples. (Sometimes hostile skepticism controls reality, and the strongest evidence is edited to conform to concensus disbeliefs.) Finally in the early 1800's Ernst Chladni actually sat down and inspected the evidence professionally, and found that claimed meteorites were entirely unlike known earth rocks. His study changed some minds. At the same time some large meteor falls were witnessed by scientists, and the majority who insisted that only ignorant peasants ever saw such things were shamed into silence. The tide of disbelief shifted... yet this important event is not taught to science students, and those ignorant of such history repeat such failures over and over, as with the hostile disbelief regarding Ball Lightning.
As for cold fusion, regardless of whether Rossi succeeds or not, I think it's an area that is unfairly ostracized by mainstream science because the idea that nuclear reactions could occur without "breaking" the Coloumb barrier and without deadly neutron radiation is thought of as preposterous.
You both are just saying that sometimes scientists have hard times "accepting" new theories. This is a well known statement, but has almost nothing to do with this case. LENR (low energy nuclear reaction) are already known to be possible, the fact is that Rossi still don't want any independent examination of his apparatus. It may just be a scam, it may even become dangerous, we don't know.
On October 29 2011 23:13 rubio91 wrote: You both are just saying that sometimes scientists have hard times "accepting" new theories. This is a well known statement----
Well known to science-enthusiasts, but not to others :-D
Also, the point is not quite "sometimes scientists have hard times 'accepting' new theories". It's a little bit more severe than that -- it's that sometimes an entire field is vastly fettered by old-standing dogma.
I did address the uniqueness of Rossi's situation though -- in that he is not totally transparent due to the financial implications, etc. The lack of total transparency obfuscates the situation and I'm not sure whether it's because of shoddy research or genuine concern for patent infringement, so you can't really criticize him in that regard right away. Perhaps he can't be transparent for genuine reasons, as stated.
Anyone looking to create sustainable alternate forms of energy should feel paranoid. Think of the all the people who've been made rich by the continued use of fossil fuels. They see a replacement coming and they'll do what it takes to squash it so they can remain in power.
It ain't pretty, but the rich will do anything to stay rich. History has shown us this repeatedly. (Insert comment about the US invading / assisting oil rich countries instead of others...)
On October 29 2011 22:45 FallDownMarigold wrote: In light of this topic, I thought I'd tell a short story on the concept of scientific dogma:
There's only one point I disagree with.
The (hidden) assumption that his work is being rejected because of dogma.
But realistically this isn't a scientific debate. That would mean being open about the aparatus and letting others reproduce his results. This also means that there's no way to evaluate his work from the outside. The best people can do is to rule out certain forms of cheating.
He's specifically ruling out having his results reproduced or explaining the mechanism in detail or allowing others to look for it. There's no reason to complain about scientific dogma since no one seems to be doing any science (except maybe him, if it's not a scam).
EPT
) would be simply to get 500k euro.
He's working at the Italian National Institute of Nuclear Physics by the way (the INFN).
