EPTsame shit as obama beeing in fact a devilish reptile and not a black lawman
Rossi's energy catalyzer - Page 48
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
Boonbag
France3318 Posts
same shit as obama beeing in fact a devilish reptile and not a black lawman | ||
|
Taf the Ghost
United States11751 Posts
While I don't think this is going to amount to anything too important, I'm going to play Devil's Advocate and assume Rossi's e-Cat does work. Why would he go about it the way he has? Opening it up for everyone to see would let him bask in great glory for the rest of his life. So, his ego alone should dictate to go around, guns-blazing, and getting all of the accolades he can. So these would be my assumptions: 1) He knows how to get investment money with crap, so he's even better at getting more money (for himself) with good science because... 2) The process is fundamentally unpatentable because... 3) It's actually far more simple of a reaction, easily replicated and copied. 4) He stands to actually not make any money from the discovery because there's no practical way to get money from it directly. /end Thought Experiment Now, if Rossi actually has something, I'd be really surprised if he has a clue what's actually going on. Or anyone working with him. But he's been able to get actual investment money from people that should know better. So while we know he's a real good con-man, I'm willing to wait and see what turns up in a few years, when he finally puts the entire thing up for a proper, un-interfered set of tests. | ||
|
Dangermousecatdog
United Kingdom7084 Posts
Anyhow lets play devils advocate and assume Rossi's e-Cat does work. Why would he go about it the way he has? He's actually a Goa'uld from the future with a mini aquadah generator insde the black box of his and is desperately trying to make somemoney to aise funds to build a space ship/time travel to go back home. /end Thought Experiment. | ||
|
Boonbag
France3318 Posts
| ||
|
Cascade
Australia5405 Posts
Sounds plausible.:-P | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States24367 Posts
| ||
|
Deleted User 261926
960 Posts
| ||
|
gruff
Sweden2276 Posts
On October 11 2014 19:12 Cascade wrote: "Known conman finds incredibly valuable physics mechanism before the physics researchers." Sounds plausible.:-P He may be a fraud and a person that's willing to lie and promote himself for self gain. That doesn't mean he doesn't understand physics and energy technology. Don't get me wrong, his past makes this highly suspicious, but I would prefer if people actually tried to counter what's being shown instead of using strawman arguments to dismiss everything that's posted. | ||
|
Jockmcplop
United Kingdom9999 Posts
On October 11 2014 19:39 gruff wrote: He may be a fraud and a person that's willing to lie and promote himself for self gain. That doesn't mean he doesn't understand physics and energy technology. Don't get me wrong, his past makes this highly suspicious, but I would prefer if people actually tried to counter what's being shown instead of using strawman arguments to dismiss everything that's posted. Everything about this points to it being a con. That being said, I would also rather wait until a physicist proves it. | ||
|
ZenithM
France15952 Posts
On October 11 2014 19:16 GreenHorizons wrote: As if a virtually unlimited energy source would help humanity... More energy just means more destruction. Haha perfect ID for that comment :D | ||
|
oBlade
United States6535 Posts
On October 11 2014 08:34 hummingbird23 wrote: I skipped the math, since it's gibberish to me, but I think you should at least read the paper before crapping on it. That's what people who rationally analyse a claim do. The claim being tested here is that there is a device that outputs energy at a rate not accounted for by present knowledge. Your dismissal of it using plausibility on present knowledge is therefore baseless. "Doesn't fit into current models, therefore bullshit" is a pretty poor perspective to have. What's presented in the paper constitutes extraordinary evidence for which the authors cannot explain, if you have a mechanism to explain the facts reported in the paper, feel free to have a crack at it, otherwise you're the one making claims for which there is no evidence. But I provided evidence for the utility of my o-cat invention... I put lead inside and gold came out. I hope you're not just dismissing it out of hand because I have no theoretical basis to explain how it works and didn't tell you anything about what goes on inside it. You have no evidence that it doesn't work just as I (incompletely) described it. I think you are understating when you say cold fusion doesn't fit into current models. Chemistry is built around understanding chemical bonds powered by the electromagnetic force, i.e. the arrangement of electrons around a nucleus is whence chemical properties emerge. An atom of nickel doesn't care if it's in an aluminum box, if there's lithium next to it, if there's hydrogen gas next to it; an atom of nickel doesn't care if is in a powder, doesn't care if it's 1000 degrees C, there is a physical barrier that stops nucleons from just walking into a nucleus, called electromagnetism. Yes. The force that holds molecules together also holds atoms together by not letting atomic nuclei come together and blow up all the time. Atomic nuclei are repulsed by each other more than me and the last girl I tried to seduce. This barrier incidentally also stops the hydrogen in water from spontaneously fusing with itself and flooding you with gamma rays and neutrons every time you drink something. I can't imagine a bigger difference than that between a supernova (where nickel can undergo fusion reactions) and the pathetic aluminum can Rossi has the nerve to call a reactor that just happens to be 10 times as efficient as any energy source now I mean give me a fucking break. It's like saying, I found a dead body, so I can't theoretically rule out that it's Jimmy Hoffa and he committed suicide. So you can't just dismiss that claim. No... where's the analysis of his dental record? DNA test? What's the age of the grave? There's a forensic body farm in the USA, about how long has the body been dead? Where's the suicide note? How did he kill himself? Was it a gun? Where is the gun? Are his fingerprints on the gun? His DNA? Are there powder burns on his hands? Is there a gunshot wound in his head? Was it a noose? Where's the noose? Where's the chair he had to kick out from under him? I mean I went to a LENR website or something it was instantly polluted with conspiracy stuff about energy companies and the government sabotaging research or some other shit like this. Does this mean cold fusion is impossible? No. But it quickly suggests to any dispassionate observer that even if catalyzed fusion is somehow possible, it's doubtful these nitwits are anywhere close to the mark. | ||
|
phil.ipp
Austria1067 Posts
if the US Military or some other countrys would get only the slightest hint that there would be an alternative to oil, they would fucking jump on this thing faster than you could say conspiracy. | ||
|
NIJ
1012 Posts
On October 11 2014 22:24 phil.ipp wrote: everyone believing there is a conspiracy going on from some energy companys .. dont be ridiculous if the US Military or some other countrys would get only the slightest hint that there would be an alternative to oil, they would fucking jump on this thing faster than you could say conspiracy. then its ala qaeda/dem arab conspiracy who is the shadow world govt in collusion with dem jews aka the illuminati/free mason/NWO. trying to control the world with their oil. conspiracy solved | ||
|
Cascade
Australia5405 Posts
On October 11 2014 19:41 Jockmcplop wrote: Everything about this points to it being a con. That being said, I would also rather wait until a physicist proves it. Strictly speaking, no, we can't judge until tested over and over and scientific principle and repeatable blahblah and more buzzwords and yada yada. But do you say that everytime someone claims to have photos of UFOs? Or fairies? At some point you have to say that it is not worth the time to look at the details. I honestly feel that the reasonable choice here is to dismiss without reading a 50 page .pdf of crap. Just posting here is more than I should have done already. | ||
|
Chewbacca.
United States3634 Posts
On October 11 2014 22:52 Cascade wrote: Strictly speaking, no, we can't judge until tested over and over and scientific principle and repeatable blahblah and more buzzwords and yada yada. But do you say that everytime someone claims to have photos of UFOs? Or fairies? At some point you have to say that it is not worth the time to look at the details. I honestly feel that the reasonable choice here is to dismiss without reading a 50 page .pdf of crap. Just posting here is more than I should have done already. Strictly speaking, yes, we can judge. We just may or may not be right in doing so.. | ||
ImbaTosS
United Kingdom1732 Posts
Almost as good as Kafkaesque and his chronic fear of insects :D | ||
|
Integra
Sweden5626 Posts
On October 10 2014 03:14 Ropid wrote: Guys! Do you know what's back again? This thread! There's a new paper out, download is here: http://www.sifferkoll.se/sifferkoll/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/LuganoReportSubmit.pdf It's not yet on arXiv.org as there's some sort of hold-up about that. Rumor has it that there's a request to make some cuts as the paper is too long, but the authors don't want to do that. Anyway... it seems it's actually real. I don't want to link to any blogs and news sites that have an article about this report because I generally don't know those sites and don't know what to trust, but there's stuff out there if you search around. Hey guys, these things are already out in production, some company bought working prototypes of these things already a couple of years ago so why do you need to write another paper in order to prove that they work?  Btw I love that this thread is back up, I really thought Andrea Rossi had given up. E-Cat might not be the eternal cheap source of energy it claims to be but it sure as hell lives up to the eternal cheap source of entertainment. | ||
|
Mafe
Germany5966 Posts
I work at a university, and (even though it's not that bad here) I've heard stories from a professor who at his former university got loads of "results" from people who claimed to have proven the Riemann hypothesis, the Goldbach conjecture or something like that. Understandably, he has better things to do than waste his time reading through all that. To me, this seems to be more of dont-feed-the-troll scenario in reallife. | ||
|
Ropid
Germany3557 Posts
On October 11 2014 21:39 oBlade wrote: [...] I think you are understating when you say cold fusion doesn't fit into current models. Chemistry is built around understanding chemical bonds powered by the electromagnetic force, i.e. the arrangement of electrons around a nucleus is whence chemical properties emerge. An atom of nickel doesn't care if it's in an aluminum box, if there's lithium next to it, if there's hydrogen gas next to it; an atom of nickel doesn't care if is in a powder, doesn't care if it's 1000 degrees C, there is a physical barrier that stops nucleons from just walking into a nucleus, called electromagnetism. Yes. The force that holds molecules together also holds atoms together by not letting atomic nuclei come together and blow up all the time. Atomic nuclei are repulsed by each other more than me and the last girl I tried to seduce. [...] I linked you an example about this over here: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/general/247932-rossis-energy-catalyzer?page=47#923 This is stuff you and I never heard about in our schooling. I have no idea why no one in the media is reporting about these kinds of nuclear reactions being possible. I agree with you about all those suspicious LENR websites. Those say there's "hundreds" of papers describing expeiments like that one from Mitubishi researchers and it all seems weird to read. I'm finished with university and have no access to journals so can't really check if there really are a lot of papers about this. | ||
|
Jockmcplop
United Kingdom9999 Posts
On October 11 2014 22:52 Cascade wrote: Strictly speaking, no, we can't judge until tested over and over and scientific principle and repeatable blahblah and more buzzwords and yada yada. But do you say that everytime someone claims to have photos of UFOs? Or fairies? At some point you have to say that it is not worth the time to look at the details. I honestly feel that the reasonable choice here is to dismiss without reading a 50 page .pdf of crap. Just posting here is more than I should have done already. Actually the scientific method is what created our scientifically advanced civilization, but if you want to blah blah blah then go ahead. | ||
| ||
