|
On May 21 2013 03:14 xDaunt wrote:
Patent applications are matters of public record in the US (I presume that they would be internationally as well because of notice issues). If Rossi did file apply for a patent, we'd know about it. Also, whatever he is doing is certainly patentable (presuming that it is legit).
There is a US patent application: http://www.freepatentsonline.com/y2011/0005506.html
|
On May 21 2013 03:04 AmorphousPhoenix wrote:
I'm laughing at all the pages of people getting excited, thinking Rossi just revolutionized the planet. We need to place a bit more emphasis on scientific thinking/skepticism in science classes. Sort of ironic, given all the anti-faith religion bashing that goes on online.
Scientific thinking outside of science is not strong these days. Looks like a hoax, i hope nobody invested money in this in any form.
|
i don't think it works, plain and simple.
the situation is such that rossi must be an incredibly selfish man or a liar.
assuming the ecat works and he detailed his work in a scientific journal, other people would definitely copy it, but no one would be able to claim it was anyone but his work. he'd win a nobel, collect pretty much every award out there for an alternative energy source (and combined, those are definitely substantial) and be time's man of the century. even if he did not profit financially directly from his invention, his reputation as the inventor would ensure that he'd be set for life extremely comfortably.
|
On May 21 2013 02:39 Traeon wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2013 02:31 Integra wrote:
Wait a second, so they performed an experiment and are trying to find out what is happening inside the machine by examining the output and it's by-products. You would think just opening the machine or ask it's inventor what it does would be the real way to do it. This just got even more strange. The inventor does not want to disclose the secret just yet, presumably until he has a commercial product. It's not possible to patent chemical or nuclear reactions, so he has no patent protection. Everybody would be building e-cat clones in a few weeks if the secret additive was published because the apparatus is simple.
If he cant be protected by patents and this device is as revolutionary as it sounds, then they will be manufacturing it the day after he releases it anyway. I will believe it when I see it.
|
On May 21 2013 03:24 Ropid wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2013 03:14 xDaunt wrote:
Patent applications are matters of public record in the US (I presume that they would be internationally as well because of notice issues). If Rossi did file apply for a patent, we'd know about it. Also, whatever he is doing is certainly patentable (presuming that it is legit). There is a US patent application: http://www.freepatentsonline.com/y2011/0005506.html
Well, there is a lot of detail in there about the suspected chemical/nuclear reaction. Basically, he claims that he is turning nickel into radioactive copper, which quickly decays back into nickel. Interesting idea. Any thoughts from the more scientifically inclined? I don't think that I have seen any commentary about this.
|
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. I'm more inclined to believe Rossi is just another liar if we go by Occam's razor, if you will.
|
On May 21 2013 03:04 AmorphousPhoenix wrote:
I'm laughing at all the pages of people getting excited, thinking Rossi just revolutionized the planet. We need to place a bit more emphasis on scientific thinking/skepticism in science classes. Sort of ironic, given all the anti-faith religion bashing that goes on online.
At some point most rational people stop posting. I'm sure 99% of the people who looked at it in any detail know it's a scam. You can only point out the obvious signs so many times before you stop caring.
|
On May 21 2013 03:24 Ropid wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2013 03:14 xDaunt wrote:
Patent applications are matters of public record in the US (I presume that they would be internationally as well because of notice issues). If Rossi did file apply for a patent, we'd know about it. Also, whatever he is doing is certainly patentable (presuming that it is legit). There is a US patent application: http://www.freepatentsonline.com/y2011/0005506.html
This doesn't mean the invention necessarily works as advertised. Look at all the patents for flying cars.
What this area of research desperately needs is honest, peer reviewed science.
|
On May 21 2013 03:39 hypercube wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2013 03:04 AmorphousPhoenix wrote:
I'm laughing at all the pages of people getting excited, thinking Rossi just revolutionized the planet. We need to place a bit more emphasis on scientific thinking/skepticism in science classes. Sort of ironic, given all the anti-faith religion bashing that goes on online. At some point most rational people stop posting. I'm sure 99% of the people who looked at it in any detail know it's a scam. You can only point out the obvious signs so many times before you stop caring.
Yes, that is a good point. All the converts will be visible, while the skeptics refrain more often. I'm just surprised by how many people start thinking "this will revolutionize the whole world!" without their bullshit detectors going haywire.
|
Or people like me, who see it now for the first time, and need to become skeptical for themselves (without reading the whole thread again lol).
I think I've seen enough to join the skeptical group, if they never gonna open up the box, it's nonsense.
|
On May 21 2013 03:26 gingerfluffmuff wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2013 03:04 AmorphousPhoenix wrote:
I'm laughing at all the pages of people getting excited, thinking Rossi just revolutionized the planet. We need to place a bit more emphasis on scientific thinking/skepticism in science classes. Sort of ironic, given all the anti-faith religion bashing that goes on online. Scientific thinking outside of science is not strong these days. Looks like a hoax, i hope nobody invested money in this in any form.
It's specifically the people that invest money into it and end up empty handed that frequently prove it is a hoax. He's shielded many aspects of it from scientific analysis, so it is only those investors that reveal its genuineness or falseness. He got one backer and then another for a reactor, and disappeared from the news altogether, so it's easy to presume that the investors are disappointed or still being led on, and the device is not what Rossi claims it to be.
|
Gotta love how people ignore the the seven scientists who made the study. They are:
Giuseppe Levi, physicist from University of Bologna.
Evelyn Foschi, Italian National Institute of Nuclear Physics.
Torbjörn Hartman, Bo Höistad, Roland Pettersson and Lars Tegnér from Uppsala University, Sweden.
Hanno Essén, Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden (also former chairman of the Swedish Skeptics Society).
They are willing to put their names on the study and would not do so if they weren't 100% sure that it's real.
|
On May 21 2013 04:01 Traeon wrote:
Gotta love how people ignore the the seven scientists who made the study. They are:
Giuseppe Levi, physicist from University of Bologna.
Evelyn Foschi, Italian National Institute of Nuclear Physics.
Torbjörn Hartman, Bo Höistad, Roland Pettersson and Lars Tegnér from Uppsala University, Sweden.
Hanno Essén, Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden (also former chairman of the Swedish Skeptics Society).
They are willing to put their names on the study and would not do so if they weren't 100% sure that it's real.
We are not ignoring it. Even the study itself claims that nothing can really be concluded from it. Nowhere does it state that the device is creating energy, they are simply making conclusions of the amount of output and what it could consist of. No where in the paper do they actually discuss the machines ability to create energy out of nothing so in that sense regardless where the machine gets the energy from is irrelevant for the aim of the study.
|
On May 21 2013 04:01 Traeon wrote:
Gotta love how people ignore the the seven scientists who made the study. They are:
Giuseppe Levi, physicist from University of Bologna.
Evelyn Foschi, Italian National Institute of Nuclear Physics.
Torbjörn Hartman, Bo Höistad, Roland Pettersson and Lars Tegnér from Uppsala University, Sweden.
Hanno Essén, Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden (also former chairman of the Swedish Skeptics Society).
They are willing to put their names on the study and would not do so if they weren't 100% sure that it's real.
You're name-dropping, by the way. Read the study, none of those 7 scientists is saying "this works".
They could have Samuel L. Jackson too and it wouldn't make an inch of difference. They could have Stephen Hawking and Albert Einstein looking at the device at the distance, but none of them are saying that it definitely works.
|
On May 21 2013 04:01 Traeon wrote:
Gotta love how people ignore the the seven scientists who made the study. They are:
Giuseppe Levi, physicist from University of Bologna.
Evelyn Foschi, Italian National Institute of Nuclear Physics.
Torbjörn Hartman, Bo Höistad, Roland Pettersson and Lars Tegnér from Uppsala University, Sweden.
Hanno Essén, Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden (also former chairman of the Swedish Skeptics Society).
They are willing to put their names on the study and would not do so if they weren't 100% sure that it's real.
We are not ignoring it. Even the study itself claims that nothing can really be concluded from it. Nowhere does it state that the device is creating energy, they are simply making conclusions of the amount of output and what it could consist of. No where in the paper do they actually discuss the machines ability to create energy out of nothing so in that sense regardless where the machine gets the energy from is irrelevant for the aim of the study.
The next paper however, if they even make one which i doubt, is apparently to find out through the output and by-product how the machine actually works, now this is interesting and will be a great read.
|
On May 21 2013 04:01 Traeon wrote:
Gotta love how people ignore the the seven scientists who made the study. They are:
Giuseppe Levi, physicist from University of Bologna.
Evelyn Foschi, Italian National Institute of Nuclear Physics.
Torbjörn Hartman, Bo Höistad, Roland Pettersson and Lars Tegnér from Uppsala University, Sweden.
Hanno Essén, Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden (also former chairman of the Swedish Skeptics Society).
They are willing to put their names on the study and would not do so if they weren't 100% sure that it's real.
No studies will do until we send our TL Skeptics Society squad to Rossi! 
|
On May 21 2013 04:05 Integra wrote:We are not ignoring it. Even the study itself claims that nothing can really be concluded from it.
The study states that the apparatus is generating energy beyond any known chemical source.
No where in the paper do they actually discuss the machines ability to create energy out of nothing so in that sense regardless where the machine gets the energy from is irrelevant for the aim of the study.
Nobody ever claimed that. You should pay more attention. Page 1 of the paper reads:
As in the original E-Cat, the reaction is fueled by a mixture of nickel, hydrogen, and a catalyst, which is kept as an industrial trade secret.
|
If they're not opening up the box, I hope the buyers have the sense to simply buy energy at lower than market price, rather than buy any generators.
|
On May 21 2013 04:11 Traeon wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2013 04:05 Integra wrote:We are not ignoring it. Even the study itself claims that nothing can really be concluded from it. The study states that the apparatus is generating energy beyond any known chemical source.
Which relates to the output of the energy, which I also stated in my previous post.
|
On May 21 2013 03:30 ticklishmusic wrote:
i don't think it works, plain and simple.
the situation is such that rossi must be an incredibly selfish man or a liar.
assuming the ecat works and he detailed his work in a scientific journal, other people would definitely copy it, but no one would be able to claim it was anyone but his work. he'd win a nobel, collect pretty much every award out there for an alternative energy source (and combined, those are definitely substantial) and be time's man of the century. even if he did not profit financially directly from his invention, his reputation as the inventor would ensure that he'd be set for life extremely comfortably.
Being covered in awards is fine and dandy... Being a multi billionare is a bit better while being covered in awards. It'd be better for him to guise the product until his commerical model rather then show it.
I'm still on the fence, just as everyone should, he has reasonable reason to keep it secret meaning that its just his word we can believe which means we can take it for a grain of salt and wait. There's no reason anyone should deny or support his claims since they're just him talking and a few eye witnesses.
Best to be both pessimistic and optimistic, sit and wait in the middle and see what happens.
That is to say unless you have some reason what you think it doesn't work that we all should hear as you must be better informed then me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
