Rossi – Let the eCat Speak For Itself

Replying to a comment by ‘Dwayne’ on his blog, Andrea Rossi (rather elegantly considering the language issues) explains why he ignores the calls for more ‘proof’. We have heard it before but this is one of the longest posts I’ve seen him make except in anger.

I would guess that he has heard about Krivit’s impending report and this has sharpened his feelings for the subject. With such a short time between now and the 1MW demo, I find such calls puzzling. People want to make better steam or hot water tests or to analyze, frame by frame, videos of a demo that they themselves complain is not set up to measure properly – all this when a 1MW plant will be shown in a few weeks. If we were told by a drug company that they had a pill to cure cancer and would show its fruits at the end of October, we would not demand better proof now or sweat over film of the pill being swallowed by a patient in the meantime – unless you were trying to queer the pitch in some way or were just anally retentive. Anyway, here’s AR’s take on it:

I agree with your attitude. By the way: my only real problem is to manufacture plants which satisfy the needs of my Customers. Skepticism is not my business. Nor is my business if a person is convinced or not, so far he is not a Customer. Your comment is very smart also on another point: I cannot lose my very limited time to answer or to convince the so called “skeptics”, because whatever I answer they will always have new objections: I saw that Skeptics are divided in the following categories:

1- honest skeptics (like you): they do not need to be convinced by chatters, they are like you, they wait for a 1 MW plant in operation, and after that to the thousands of 1 MW plant in operation which will follow up

2- Competitors: they want to know how my toy works: they will never accept an explication unless they are put in condition to copy my tech: with them my time should be totally lost, or negatively (for me) employed;

3- Lobbysts against my tech and “journalists” paid by competitors or lobbysts : whatever I will say, they will shoot. Ignoring them. their shoots will make the effect of tennis balls against a tank

4- Imbeciles: an army of persons that have nothing to do and play the scientists, without even understanding what they are talking about; to talk with them is a pure loss of time

The categories 2 and 3 are the most vociferous in asking new public tests in “indipendent” labs, wherein “indipendent” means a lab in competition with us and in contact with them…one among the most called for is also the one that has organized a campaign against me, to try to discredit my work, buying a “journalist”. Never mind: just other tennis balls against my tank: the 1 MW plant that I will put in operation in October and that will be the first of a long sery. My plants will talk for me: FACTS, AGAINST CHATTERS. Let them chatter, we will see. And I am sure you will be glad to know that from our analysis we understood that in the Skeptics universe most of People thinks like you. The competitors, lobbysts, corrupt journalists, imbeciles battalion is made of a small number of persons that to try to appear more persons than they are invent a lot of fake names. Our informatics have found one imbecile who has coined for himself 11 different names and email addresses…basically, is a small and not significant self- referencing community. If my plants will work well for my Customers, they will be the last of my problems. If my plants will not satisfy my Customers, they will be the last of my problems. Definitely, in any case they will be the last of my problems, so there is no reason for me to lose my time to repeat thousands of time the same things. I am putting my life on this stake, I have bertter to do than to listen these guys.

After this analysis, it is clear why I have chosen to employ my time only to work as hard as possible. While the imbeciles chatter, you have not idea of the difficulties I have to overcome every day.

His response to #2 makes it sound fake. He would get a patent and then be able to sue anyone that uses it.

Your response makes it sound like you don't know the background of trying to get a patent on a device like this. For the most part it is summarily dismissed as being impossible. His approach is better. If what he has really works, getting large numbers of units in successful operation by a large number of clients will

a) give him all the proof he needs to finally ram through a successful patent that will protect all particulars of his device,

b) establish his dominance in the market and protect him against start-ups trying to reverse engineer his product or figure out a way around the specifics of the patent, and

c) provide him with sufficient revenue to pay the attorneys needed to sue them (especially since some attorneys may not consider taking the case on a contingency fee if they believe, like those who run some patent offices, his technology is impossible and his case, therefore, is a losing one--and he'd then have to wait until the competitors start producing devices in a large enough amount and under enough circumstances to be believable, after which point he may be able to sue, but would have missed out on dominating the initial marketplace).

Non-disclosure agreements have to be defended in court if they’re broken. Little guys don’t have the kind of money if their tech is stolen by someone with deep pockets. I’ve seen it happen before. And, how exactly are you going to defend yourself in Chinese kangaroo court? They’ll just railroad you and throw you in jail on trumped up charges.

Anyone that knows anything about proprietary technology knows you keep as tight a lock on it as you can till you get it developed, working, and making money. That’s capitalism, and I’m not interested in the opinions of a bunch of socialist a-holes who think they are the Holy Tribunal of Truth and Societal Protection that judges all that passes before them.

We have less than 3 months for Rossi to prove himself. If he flops he’ll flop spectacularly.

>>And, to boot, a patent in Russia and China are only as respected as long as the government cares to respect it. The moment those governments want your product, they’ll just take it.<<

Here in the US we say it is National Security and therefore it shall not be shown or discussed in public.

DB;SpaceBar
>NIST, Underwriters Laboratories, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, or any number of outfits under non-disclosure agreements could easily verify or debunk it without breaking a sweat.<

Do you think he’ll sleep better with a NIST/UL/LLNL sticker on his ass? They are the three labs that would succumb to corporate or political pressure and declare it a National Security issue? Independent Labs, who are you kidding.

This is a trillions upon trillions dollar energy revolution so you need a winning strategy to prevail over the rip off artists.... unless this Rossi is a faker. Then all bets are off.

Thanks. Given that others who are not working with him have reported similar systems yielding excess heat, I'm leaning toward not fake. If LENR is real and can be refined, controlled, and finally understood (though not completely necessary to benefit from the effects), then it will be revolutionary in the way that light water nuclear energy was portrayed and never completely fulfilled--if we can keep the same nut jobs that spoiled that (and who are behind trying to wreck oil, coal, and gas) away from it. Here's a list of institutions (LINK is to a pdf by Edmund Storms responding to reviewers in the 2004 DOE evaluation of LENR) that were working on LENR in one form or another as of 2004:

 LUTCH Federal State Unitary Enterprise, Podolsk, Russia
 Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, Dubna, Russia
 Institute in Physical -Technical Problems, 141980, Dubna, Russia
 P.N. Lebedev Physics Institute, Moscow, Russia
 Enikolopov Institute of Synthetic Polymer materials, Russian Academy of Science, Moscow, Russia
 “RECOM”, Russian Research Center “Kurchatov Institute”, Russia
 General Physics Institute, Russian Academy of Science, Russia
 Chelyabinsk State University, Russia
 Proton-21 in Kiev, Ukraine
 Kiev Shevchenko University, Kiev, Ukraine
 University of Lecce, Lecce, Italy
 La Sapienza University, Rome, Italy
 University of Siena, Siena, Italy
 University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy
 Ente per le Nuove Tecnologie, l’Energia e l’Ambiente (ENEA), Rome, Italy
 Instituto Nazionale de Fisica Nucleare, Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati (INFNLNF), Rome, Italy
 EURESYS, Rome, Italy
 ORIM Srl, Macerata, Italy
 Pirelli Labs, Milan, Italy
 Centro Sviluppo Materiali SpA, Rome, Italy
 State University of Genoa, Genova, Italy
 Liceo Scientifico “Leonardo da Vinci”, Milan, Italy
 STMicroelectronics, Milan, Italy
 Department of Physics, University of Catania, Italy
 Hokkaido University, Sapporo, Japan
 Advanced Technology Research Center, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Yokohama, Japan
 Japan Synchrotron Radiation Research Institute, Japan
 Coherent X-ray Optics Laboratory, Spring-8/RIKEN, Japan
 Laboratory for Nuclear Science, Tohoku University, Mikamine, Sendai, Japan
 Center for Advanced Science and Innovation, Osaka University, Osaka, Japan
 Cold Fusion Research Laboratory, Shizuoka, Japan
 Division of Environmental Energy Science, Graduate School of Science and Technology, Kobe University, Japan
 Fukaeminami-machi, Higashinada-ku, Kobe, Japan
 Institute of Quantum Science, Nihon University, Tokyo, Japan
 Institute of Chemistry, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China
 Tsinghua University, Beijing, China
 Institute of Plasma Physics, Hefei, China
 Changchun University of Science and Technology, Changchun, China
 Laboratoire de Recherches Associatives, Franconville, France
 CNAM - Laboratoire des Sciences Nucléaires, Paris, France
 CRMCN-CNRS, Campus de Luminy, Marseille, France
 Howard University, Washington, D.C., US
 Purdue University, Lafayette, Indiana, US
 SRI International, Menlo Park, CA, US
 Naval Research Laboratory, Washington, D.C., US
 Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, US
 Lattice Energy LLC, Chicago, IL, US
 The Greenview Group, Pleasanton, CA, US
 Research Systems, Inc, Burke, VA, US
 Greenwich Corp., Arlington VA, US
 Low Energy Nuclear Laboratory, Portland State University, Portland, OR, US
 Research Laboratory of Electronics, MIT, Cambridge, MA, US
 Fusion Studies Laboratory, University of Illinois, Urbana, IL, US
 Montclair State University, Passaic NJ, US
 University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, US
 First Gate Energies, Kilauea, HI, US
 JET Thermal Products, Wellesley, Massachusetts, US
 SPAWAR Systems Center, San Diego, CA, US
 Earth Tech International, Austin, TX, US
 Institut für Atomare Physik und Fachdidaktik, Technische Universität, Berlin, Germany
 Energetics Technologies, Omer, Israel
 University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia
 University Lucian Blaga, Sibiu, Romania
 Monti America Corporation, Kameloops, British Columbia, Canada
 National Academy of Sciences, Belarus

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.