I’ve often wondered the exact reason why the long term validation tests that are currently being done with the E-Cat are of such great importance to Andrea Rossi’s work. I would have thought that Rossi and his team don’t really need to prove to themselves that the ‘Rossi effect’ is real, and especially take six months or more to do that. And if, as Rossi has said, they are not concerned with silencing the skeptics, why go through this exercise?
I asked Rossi about this topic on the Journal of Nuclear Physics yesterday, asking whether the purpose of this test was for internal R&D purposes, or for an external audience, and this was his response:
“The R&D and validation work in course is necessary to improve our science, to improve our theoretical interpretation of the so called Rossi Effect, to verify the positivity of the same effect in order to decide and define the Investments ( if any) necessary for the industrialization in large and international scale.
Hundreds of million dollars cannot be invested without a precise and validated background. As I said, joking: we are not here to sharpen the tips of the skyscrapers”.
Not sure I quite get the joke, but it seems to me that one of the most important goals connected with this validation report is for Rossi and Cherokee to be able to attract investment money so they can industrialize the production of their technology — on an international scale, as AR puts it.
In my opinion, nothing less than a rock solid report showing unquestionable excess energy in useful quantities would suffice to induce big time investors to part with hundreds of millions of dollars to put behind the E-Cat. Rossi said recently that the exact nature of how that investing will be structured has not yet been decided yet — that they are waiting until after the report has been released to determine that.
So there’s a lot resting on this report — I know there’s been some concern about the possibility of ‘negative’ results, but Andrea Rossi sounded a little more optimistic yesterday when he explained, “I hope the results will be positive, but my duty as a scientist is to say that until the work is not finished, the possibility of negative results must be considered not impossible.”