Rossi patent granted for eCat

I contend that many inventions have been implemented without understanding the process. Simple directions on how to construct a working Ecat would have allowed many interested parties to contribute. The damn thing is reported to be trivial to construct and have hugely more output than input energy. The lack of clarity and reproducible results is troubling. Now that the patent is in place, we should see much more constructive information...right... All Rossi has to do is disclose the secret sauce and retire on the licensing fees.

Color me "skeptical".

When I read about his testing some time ago, it seemed that he was using an infrared detector and color temperature to determine the temperature rise of the device above that attributable to the power of the heaters, and assuming an additional amount of power due to some sort of nuclear reaction. But he did not use a "bomb calorimeter" to determine the temperature rise of the device in an enclosed volume compared to that of a resistive heater in the same volume over the same time period. His measurement methods were highly suspect.

Paul

The patent describes a plausible heater that uses what I would expect to be an expensive fuel. Obviously it can't be presented that way when attempting to scam investors, so somehow it needs to be made to appear to generate much more heat than it actually does, or use less fuel than it actually does, or both.

Sylvia.

I think you're being too kind. We're talking about macro, easily measured, values for input and output energy. I've not seen any measurement setup as good as what you could do in your garage by boiling water and measuring the lost water mass while watching the utility power meter spin around. Your measurement could be off by 50% and still verify that it is working. We're not talking about tiny gains here. If it works it should be OBVIOUS to anybody who can boil water!! And, by now, there'd be thousands of them in garages doing just that.

That is pretty much the bottom line. If this thing worked, why has it been bouncing around on the fringes of science for a decade with absolutely no manifestations of repeatable measurements, even from his own lab?

I seem to recall one of Rossi's experiments measuring the amount of water evaporated by his apparatus but not accounting for the steam not being dry. His setups are always short of being rigorous and any "observers" seem to be rather gullible.

Heck, at one point the guy claimed in a few months he would be shipping units capable of heating large commercial buildings. It never happened.

Back when the Internet was young and dinosaurs roamed the cyberscape, I read a web page about a man who was conning investors regarding a very efficient electric motor. His tactics included public demonstrations which didn't disclose many important details and very limited in scope (some sort of car powered by 9 volt batteries, but how many?, for a short distance on an indoor track), doubletalking presentations with little opportunity to be questioned by anyone knowledgeable in the field and erratic behavior when trying to get any of this built by real electric motor companies. This guy was doing many of the same things Rossi is doing. I think Rossi is doing a better job of getting away with it.

Who is asking him to offer up the family jewels? Rossi has never made a public demonstration which can be verified in any way. His measurements are always in doubt and he won't do anything to convince scientists his work is real, only gullible investors.

But if you needed investment money you would perform public tests which clearly show the concept works, no?

I *can* say his work is pure BS and I will have a smile on my face when he is eventually tried for fraud. I'm really sorry that you can't see the rather clear evidence that he *is* a fraud.

If you read carefully, I am trying not to form a one sided opinion, why? because I think like myself, most of us here do not have a enough facts to say eitherway.

But from what I see, it's very obvious that the majority is convinced that his claim is fraudulent. So that means most everyone that voiced their opinion has done so, either because they actually believe his claim is false or they're just following suite with the others so not to be the odd one in the bunch.

When I was in school, years ago, I had a very good professor, he was very under paid for his knowledge. He would show us various items that were contradictory to known physics, and he had a lot to show.

The point he made and he made it very clear was just because physics says it, does not make it correct.

He also showed historical chances over the years in physics because some one was brave enough to challenge the current beliefs.

I think our research groups have done enough with QM,String, what a mess. have a good day. Jamie

Our definition of physics changes because someone looks deeper and refines it. Others replicate the work and it becomes this year's accepted definition of physics.

Many technological advances are made into useful tools/products without fully understanding how they work. I do not need to understand the physics of water to make a cup of tea.

I'm open to the possibility that Ecat may work. I'd be delighted to see it work. I'd be ecstatic to see some actual evidence that it works.

We're not talking about theory here. We have an inventor who claims to have produced working models. I don't care how it works if I can get the recipe to make it work. The world would pay a FORTUNE to get their hands on it.

The claimed energy output/energy input is enough to measure with trivially simple tools by a mere mortal in his garage. Why the heck can't anybody verify the results? If it worked, It's such a game changer that everybody would be working on commercializing it. You'd be able to buy one in Home Depot by now.

I've seen numbers around 6 as the coefficient of performance. That is if you believe it works.

But what if he believes his invention will change the world? It would be nice if they gave up the name of the company they say bought the 1 megawatt unit. Mikek

Larson of Windom-Larson theory, presented their theory here. And say there are no new physics involved to make it work.

Mikek

This Russian says he did it.

I think Brillouin says the have excess energy from Lenr.

Here's a list of companies doing LENR research.

Mikek

If it worked, It's such a game

I can tell you that. Madeup, Inc.

I believe his claims are fraudulent because I have looked into them as much as I can without direct contact and monitored his statements and actions over the course of several years. No one who was a competent scientist and developing a legitimate invention would do the things he has done. Have you actually read the available info on his research? Have you paid attention to his claims over the years?

He has repeatedly been 6 months away from production for the last four or five years. That alone is enough to convince me he is a fraud.

Such as?

Doesn't make it wrong either.

Again, such as? It is very rare that a new discovery is made the actually contradicts science rather than honing it. Even relativity only made *changes* to science in small ways in terms of then current observations. Mostly it showed how things are different from our expectations in extreme cases such as very fast relative motion and the influence of large gravitational fields which were not so important before then.

The nature of subatomic interactions may well have unexplored areas, but not by a charlatan such as Rossi.

Lol, the cutting edge is just that, the cutting edge which is difficult to understand. But Rossi knows little about this and is not doing anything of value. I'm not sure if he is a very incompetent self-deluded researcher or a very competent fraud.

So why can't the neutrons be detected?

But you can't prove that. Mikek

He showed enough to sell his E-cat technology. $11 Million.

What law of physics is the problem? Mikek

Lol!

It is hard to understand how gullible you are. What makes you think any of this is other than part of the scam?

Are you aware that Rossi has a track record of similar scams and served time in prison for it?

I never said anything about laws of physics. I said I can say for sure Rossi is a con artist. His work has nothing to do with physics.

If Rossi with the LENR scam really is running a nuclear reaction to generate heat *AS HE CLAIMS* then analysis of the resulting fuel ash by isotopic ratio methods before and after will be definitive proof.

I am not talking about microgram samples - they can be too easily faked but tens of grammes would be enough to show that he really was burning Ni60 as he has claimed. You can fake small samples trivially by buying isotopically enriched markers from calutron specialists.

Basically it is the old story that extraordinary claims *require* extraordinary evidence and all we have so far is the word of one man who I would not trust as far as I could throw him. If ever there was an example of CAVEAT EMPTOR writ large then this has to be it.

What astonishes me is how many gullible and credulous fools and sycophants he can persuade to buy into this thing with so little proof and a FAQ which completely misrepresents his so called patent.

There is a gold mining scam which runs pretty much the same way by injecting BDH gold into assay cores (or at least it did until ICPMS was used to show that the impurity fingerprint of the "discovered" gold was the same as that of BDH reagent gold). The scammers pleaded guilty when presented with the scientific forensics without further ado.

Basically unless he submits to rigorous scientific analysis by people who know what they are doing it will always be an investment scam!