November Now for E-Cat QX Presentation? (Update: Rossi Confirms November)

Andrea Rossi has made some comments on the Journal of Nuclear Physics recently that seem to indicate that the upcoming test he has been planning for will not now be held in October, but rather November. Here’s the latest Q&As on the topic from the Journal of Nuclear Physics.

Brett
September 23, 2017 at 2:57 PM
Dr Andrea Rossi,
How much are the probabilities you will make the presentation of the Ecat QX before November 2017?

Andrea Rossi
September 23, 2017 at 4:12 PM
Brett:
The probabilities that we will present the E-Cat QX before the end of November 2017 are 100%.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

Conception
September 24, 2017 at 9:33 PM
Dear Dr Andrea Rossi,
Please confirm once and forever that the presentation of the Ecat QX will be made not later than November 2017, with 100% of probabilities!
Conception

Andrea Rossi
September 25, 2017 at 7:49 AM
Conception:
I confirm.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

If there is indeed a delay, I’m not terribly surprised — there always seems to be delays of one kind of another in this story. Rossi was saying for some time that the presentation would be held near the end of October, if it’s bumped to November I don’t think it’s that big of a deal, however we would all prefer new information to be provided sooner rather than later — but I think we’re pretty good at waiting.

UPDATE (October 1, 2017):

The following confirms that the date of the presentation has been moved to November:

Prof
October 1, 2017 at 1:19 PM
Dr Andrea Rossi:
Will, during the demo of November, be also given any information about the progress as for what concerns the development of the theory behind the Rossi effect?

Andrea Rossi
October 1, 2017 at 4:10 PM
Prof:
I think yes, also because in these days I am working with Carl-Oscar Gullstrom very thoroughly on it. He will attend the November presentation and after the test we will also talk of the theoretical developments, after our last paper published on Arxiv Physics.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

  • LarryJ

    Agreeing that the demo will take place before the end of November does not exactly say it is off for October. Someone posted earlier on his blog and asked what was the probability of it happening by the end of November. Rossi said 100%. But he has never said or even implied the October demo is postponed. That is purely an assumption by the readers.

  • John Littlemist

    Damn this vagueness, but October 2017 is also before the end of November 2017. Why did Brett ask about November instead of October?

    • It’s widely suspected, though not known with certainty, that Rossi often uses his JONP forum in sly ways to get out information and that he does this by posing as a questioner under another name and then answering.

      I suppose this affords him the ability to be vague when he wants to be as well as ask questions that seem to contain a little inside knowledge that no real person has gotten around to asking.

      • Axil Axil

        For a long time now, I have wondered why the questioners all have adopted Rossi’s unique ways of turning a phase.

        • HS61AF91

          donna tella mea, I’mama Americana througha anda outsidea too! Such is the state of anticipation, that one wonders about self questioning and then answering? Not pretty smart if you blend in non-native speaker phraseology. Of course, you could make believe you’re Italian, and then unique ways of phraseology could hide under native speaker cloak, typing English. Come on December, by then we should know. Know just how it is becoming very evident. Obvious that new energy technologies may be the only way. The sole way to combat the increase in naturally occurring natural disasters. Storms, volcanoes, quakes; now extant on our orb.

  • Barbierir

    Nothing in his reply suggests that it has been delayed to november

    • LION

      Hi Barbierir, are you the person interviewed here.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-MAkjgK4HVc

      • Barbierir

        No, I’m not related to him at all 😀

        • LION

          Hi Barbierir,
          THANKS for your clear and prompt reply, appreciated.

        • Toussaint françois

          By the way he is testing dusty plasma at 5.35 on this video

          • Bob Greenyer

            Yes

          • Bruce Williams

            Bob, Jean-Paul is one of the leading lights in France on LENR. In this TV he states quite clearly that he has had several successful experiments using the different possibilities that we read of here. His lab. is in Marseille ; it would astonish me if he were to refuse a visit from MFMP to verify a test. I suggest you contact him to see what can be arranged.. If I can be of help please ask, I spend half my time living in Provence, not too far from Marseiile.

          • Bob Greenyer

            I like JPB a lot.

            We have worked with him in the past. He replicated within 24 hours our “gamma” finding. I was his Mass Flow Calorimeter design that Mathieu Valat built upon in France and Mathieu also worked with him on High Pressure Mizuno cell.

            Jean-Paul does contract work for IH, were we to work with him, would the crowd see that as a good thing?

          • Bruce Williams

            Hi Bob,first of all I dont think it’s important what the crowd think. Secondly ,if the “contract” between you is clear, there should be no conflict of interest issues.What is really important is that LENR “takes off”, that is what I, as a member of the crowd, really want to see and after your 2 recent unfortunate experiences here is a man who you could collaborate with who could be a very important player..Please think about it, I offer my help if possible.

          • Bob Greenyer

            I agree. Making it happen is 100% the focus.

            Thanks again for your offer of assistance.

            For the next week I will be preparing for the NOVA reactors to be tested with Dr. Egely and his colleague in the subsequent weeks.

            I can see what Mathieu’s availability is. What we need is a proposal. Perhaps he could look at a NOVA reactor when it has been verified.

            In the coming months I have more work to do with the LION reactor and so much to analyse and publish it is not even funny.

    • Omega Z

      You’re correct. We still have 5 weeks before the 1st of November. However, I’ve posted before that if it slid by a couple weeks, I would neither be disappointed or surprised. Rossi projected October several months in advance. It’s easy to have things take longer then one expects…

      • Barbierir

        I agree, I always read october as a tentative date but nothing set in stone. Delay to november is fine

  • Stephen Taylor

    I gave up on this foolishness a long time ago after years of personal embarrassment having campaigned heartily in favor of Rossi amongst family, friends and potential business partners.
    Maybe there is something or someone else to provide the magic answer or maybe we better push for solar, wind and better batteries. God help the grandchildren.

    • HAL9000

      The evidence from multiple credible sources for the existence of LENR is quite good; there is indeed fire, and it may even be common place in nature. The challenge is in contolling the process to generate constant benefit with safety. The first electric lights kept burning out until they mastered the ability to sustain incandescent illumination. Imagine the frustration in those days: “We have light… oh no, burned out again!” And the common wisdom of that age: “Light from electricity? Rubbish!”

    • Karl Venter

      I agree
      We will be lucky to get the 100% November test early next year

    • Steve D

      Yes, half the frustration is of our own making in espousing this new energy source to anyone who would listen followed by non-delivery within said time frames. Rossi has been like the doting parent never ready to let his baby explore the wide world. Now with a push also coming from Rossi himself, that could soon change with hopefully another giant leap for mankind. Hope F and P are not overlooked.

      • Omega Z

        Rossi hasn’t done a public demo since 2011. Those public demo’s were done at Focardi’s request due to his health. Focardi stated this himself and that Rossi thought it was much to premature. Thus, this is the 1st public demo at Rossi’s own volition.

        Every thing else that we’ve seen was due to leaks from people who were in or near Rossi’s inner circle. Some of us are even aware of where these leaks originated and that most of those who leaked info are no longer within that circle.

  • Anon2012_2014

    Yes — continue to add random time to the clock ad infinitum. Great.

    • artefact

      IT could mean that it is a stream over several days.

    • artefact

      It could mean that it is a stream over several days.

  • sam

    Andrea Rossi
    September 25, 2017 at 7:11 PM
    Toussaint Francois:
    Between October and November.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

    Translate
    Toussaint françois
    September 25, 2017 at 1:43 PM
    Dear Andrea Rossi

    Does the E-Cat QX Presentation is still scheduled for October ?

    Warm regards

    Toussaint françois

    • LarryJ

      Patrick
      September 25, 2017 at 9:10 PM

      Dear Andrea,

      Does that mean that the presentation will span over the 31st of October and 1st of November?

      Best regards,
      Patrick

      Andrea Rossi
      September 25, 2017 at 10:29 PM

      Patrick:

      No, means between the 25th of October and the 25th of November.
      We are going to release the exact date soon.

      Warm Regards,
      A.R.

  • Steve Swatman

    Ah well, in the great scheme of things, does a month or six really matter either way.

    As I remember, around the mid 80’s a massive plan involving 35 countries was launched to create cheap limitless energy for the world, 32 years later we are still hearing that it will be another decade to 25years before we have a working prototype producing excess energy. But hey, let us expect far more from one man.

    • LION

      Hi Steve,
      I like your astute observation and ironic humour. Why don’t people get off Andrea’s back and direct some of their rage at the Hot Fusion guys?????

      • US_Citizen71

        Because many of the people on Rossi’s back are the hot fusion guys.

      • Steve Swatman

        Thank you Lion,

        I think US_Citizen71 says it quite well, I would add that there (possibly) some “shills” from the oil, gas, coal and renewable industry too. but what do I know.

        its also much easier to criticise 1 man than a whole organisation with quite a powerful PR relations department.

        • Omega Z

          And the “powerful PR relations department” have a secret weapon. Should people in the comments section put forth strong arguments, you just have the comments section discontinued.

          Note they were fine with the comments section of many MSM news sites as long as much of it was gibberish. They became very concerned when strong and reasonable arguments became more common and they started losing the narrative. An educated populous is dangers to them.

  • Rene
    • HS61AF91

      Great memories

  • malkom700

    Personally, I do not think that AR would not want to present it as soon as can be as the competitors are already close to the market. The first person to present a marketable mechanism can enter into history as the savior of humanity.

    • ebevogon

      Really, which competitor is close to the marked? Have seen any working reactor?

  • pg

    Ok. See you all in a month.

    • Omega Z

      NO, You will need to check in and watch for Rossi to give a set date. Coming soon.

      • kenko1

        Has anybody noticed that Nov 25 is Thanksgiving weekend here in the good ole USA.? ain’t gonna happen.

        • Frank Acland

          Seems that AR has the habit of working on holidays.

  • Philip James

    He will delay it to 2018. Cold fusion might be real, but AR give every skeptic the right to call him a con artist. I love how he’s energized the field, but he is his own worst enemy.

    • Omega Z

      Actually, most of the issues arise from the blogs of speculation and projectioning. In the blogs, Rossi says a lot that he never uttered. Add to that those who spread fud and it makes Rossi look bad. Which by the way is their intent.

      Seriously, Most of what we know or think we know came from sources other then Rossi.

  • ☆HadrizHien☆

    Yes

  • Steve Swatman

    I for one expected a lot more from 30+ countries, hundreds of millions of $, 30+ years of heavy investment and promises, lots and lots of promises… (has anyone noticed how much new information comes from the fusion guys just a month or so before refinancing time comes along)

    But hey, you know, lets just slag down a new field and a few engineers for their years of dedication and efforts, because, well, because we do not know or accept a theory, and because we cannot accept the possibility that there might be more to the universe than we were taught, and more importantly let us ignore the mounting evidence, because, well, because it does not fit our narrative.

    • Omega Z

      Just 1 correction Steve, The U.S. has already spent over 5 billion$ of hot fusion alone.

      • Steve Swatman

        Thank you Omega Z, the numbers get so large over the decades one simply cannot keep up with the expenditure of tax payers dollars on $ 100 screws and fittings. 😉

    • interstellar hobo

      You may be thinking of ITER. Most of the real development of late is coming from privately funded concerns like LPP, Helion, Tri-Alpha, General Fusion, etc.

      • Steve Swatman

        Those privately funded research groups, are they the ones finally jumping on the ITER band wagon after 30+ years of experiments by 30+ countries and massive amounts of public money? how many of those companies actually have a working prototype producing excess energy, or are we still looking at promises? I just checked all of their websites, I do not see any claims of excess energy, although it was a brief scan, I would expect such mega news to be front page on any site.

  • Acecrafter99

    Agreeing that the demo will take place before the end of November does not exactly say it is off for October. Someone posted earlier on his blog and asked what was the probability of it happening by the end of November. Rossi said 100%. But he has never said or even implied the October demo is postponed. That is purely an assumption by the readers.

    • Omega Z

      Dear Andrea,

      Does that mean that the presentation will span over the 31st of October and 1st of November? 🙂

      Best regards, Patrick
      ————————————————
      Patrick:
      No, means between the 25th of October and the 25th of November.
      We are going to release the exact date soon.
      Warm Regards,
      A.R.

  • HS61AF91

    The good Doctore’s next iteration, and hopefully a realization of success! The world need such now, more than ever.

  • LION

    Hi interstellar hobo,
    we have been waiting a very long time:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Cockcroft

    http://www.joh.cam.ac.uk/sir-john-cockcroft-–-man-behind-science

    https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=E5cfW1r05eoC&pg=PA166&lpg=PA166&dq=sir+john+cockroft+and+hot+fusion&source=bl&ots=K8CTp8OSDX&sig=JcHi5CVNswxj2ilyjF0vbSztb1Q&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiYjbf9jcbWAhVGKVAKHS01DJQQ6AEIWTAM#v=onepage&q=sir%20john%20cockroft%20and%20hot%20fusion&f=false

    I however of course wish them well. Their present record for confinement is?????? after how long????? after how many BILLIONS?????? etc and they have the GALL to bad mouth the LENR community??????
    In all honesty I think they should be very quiet and have a long hard look at themselves. I look forward to the day that ITER or a later model works as advertised.
    Just for clarity I have not taken (as yet) any investment money from the British Goverment or any one else, yet I have produced something of interest.
    May they remain Focused on their GOAL and wish the LENR community well, who knows what they might learn, that will help them solve some of their own problems. That is the way REAL Science works.

  • georgehants

    The Crunch
    The cost of solar plants in the United States has dropped by 30% in one year and in the United Kingdom, the price of offshore wind has dropped by half in less than two years.
    France will pass legislation later this year to phase out all oil and
    gas exploration and production by 2040, becoming the first country to do
    so. Bloomberg

    • Jonnyb

      I find it hard to understand why a Government would give £30bn to a naff Energy Project when £1bn in LENR Research and others areas may solve all the problems?

      • Bob Greenyer

        Because they all ready know how to do LENR and that it implies?

        For so long we have all been looking at this wrong.

    • Omega Z

      “France will pass legislation later this year to phase out all oil and
      gas exploration and production by 2040”

      That’s what happens when you let the insane run the asylum. Guess France is returning to the stone age and the days of hunter gatherer.

      No more wind turbines or solar powered generators to start. Anyone who thinks you can produce steel with electricity/heat only are clueless as to how things are made. Of course you can use trees until there gone for steel making, but it will be cost prohibitive and the quality will be to low for many uses. Trillions spent on higher education all for not. How do these people get into positions of power. Note steel is just one of 100’s of things that depend on fossil sources.

      • georgehants

        Omega, if I could understand a word of what you are trying to say beyond I agree that we live in an insane asylum today, I may be able to give a better reply.

        • Omega Z

          You appear to like putting words in other peoples mouth.
          No where in my post did I say forget cold fusion.

          Also, all processing of ore result in toxic wastes of some sort. Pulling iron out of rocks. Iron & steel are not the same thing. Steel is made from iron, a wholly different end product that requires carbon released from the natural gas. I notice also that the process you posted about “could be viable // Not Is” for production of a few hundred thousand tons per year. The world produces about 1.7 Billion tons of steel per year. Probably another 1/2 billion tons of iron.

          Like most people you’re unaware of elements that are infused back into iron that makes steel. There is a bearing manufacturer where I live. They create 200,000 cubic foot an hour of RX gas. Made by infusing air with natural gas at 2100`F. It serves 1 purpose. A neutral atmosphere in the carbonizing furnace. It’s not used for heat, but only to keep the steel from absorbing or desorbing elements from the steel. In addition, they pump in hundreds of cubic feet of natural gas per hour that is actually absorbed into the steel creating a specific structure of high carbon steel(All done at 1800`F). These structures consist of hundreds of fine layers(some just millionths of an inch) that have to be within specific tolerances or the final product is worthless. None of this gas adds to the heating. The heating could actually be done with electricity if it were cheap enough, however the process of structuring the steel requires natural gas. It actually becomes a part of the product. There is no alternative if you want high quality long lasting bearings.

          Note: It requires 10 to 72 hours to Carbonize a batch of bearings dependent on size and the facility near me probably produces well over 10,000 bearings and components every day mostly 24/7 360 days a year. You would think everybody in the world had 100’s in there home. Yet the facility only produces about 2% of world production.

          This facility has it’s own state of the art metallurgy lab with 3 metallurgists(1 considered in the worlds top 10) and 3 lab techs. They work 3 shifts mostly 24/7 of about 360 days a year. They cut polish and analyze hundreds of finished bearings every week for quality control and continually work at improvements.

          Metallurgy is very complex. According to the top metallurgist, a 100 years from now we will still be working on improvements. If you think this is a simple process, note that China has spent 40 years and Billion$ just to create the metal for high performance jet engines. They’re not there yet. Likely about 10/20 more years to achieving this.

          This is just 1 of hundreds of things that need/require hydrocarbons. Not everything is about producing energy. You would likely be amazed at the drugs extracted from these sources that are far more expensive to extract elsewhere if at all. Also hydrocarbons-Oil, Coal, Natural gas are used as feed stock to produce 200 million tons of fertilizer a year and increasing. Yes, it can be obtained from other sources, but not nearly enough and at much higher cost. Think of all the children that will starve. Banning the production and use of hydrocarbons is very foolish. Prepare for major shortages of many things you currently take for granted. They either wont exist or be cost prohibitive. The above is why I agree we need new energy sources. Hydrocarbons are to valuable to waste.

          You seem to read a lot of headline articles George, but you lack very much depth of details. Everything in life is simple when you don’t have any in depth knowledge of the subject or how things work.

          • georgehants

            Morning Omega, taking on board all you have said above that there will always be a need for some hydrocarbons, could you enlighten me on the amount that could be replaced by the method I linked above (assuming success) Rossi’s Cold Fusion and BLP, again assuming that they turn out to be genuine?

          • Omega Z

            could you enlighten me on the amount that could be saved by the method I linked above (assuming success)
            .
            Simple answer is NO. 1st it needs to become successful for any data to be reliable.

            If we had new energy sources leaving hydrocarbons only for feed stock, I would guess 70% or more. But I could and probably am totally wrong. Hydrocarbons can be used for many things that they’re currently not because of cost. Should new energy sources lower demand thus cost, they may be used in new ways. This is just common business practice. If you can do something cheaper, you do. Business can then lower prices and due to higher sales volume, maintain or increase overall profit. Both the business and the consumer benefit.

            In addition, with cheaper energy, the 2 billion or so people in 3rd world or developing countries will want products that also require those feed stocks.
            That doesn’t matter. Burning less hydrocarbons means less air pollution. I’m not concerned if they use them for other purposes.

            Poverty: When you read people in Canada or the U.S. have an income below the poverty level does not mean they live in poverty. The income poverty line is used to determine how much tax payer funded help those people will get. In the U.S.. That amount varies by income and number of people in the household and I believe in the U.S. the amount is intended to bring them to 25% above poverty level. According to a liberal think tank, those in poverty in the U.S. after receiving government help brings them to the equivalent of a middle class French family. I do know a family getting government assistance who own 2 vehicles, a camper they use for summer camping and a small fishing boat. Shoot, Maybe I should earn less as they seem better off then I.

    • Albert D. Kallal

      Unfortunately, France had a good LENR program, and it was a threat to their nuclear industry so they killed the research project (and they were making good progress).

      The drops in PV panel cost is causing a “mini” revolution in this area and regards. A great trend! If we get a battery breakthrough, then this is a really big deal.

      At the end of the day, the key here is low cost energy. When you walk into a store we see food piled up to the rafters. A UN report points out that for the first time in
      history we have more obese people then we having starving people.

      So even today, the food problem and feeding the poor been solved – and solved with lower cost energy.

      A farmer tomorrow is still going to fill up his tractor with fuel to create food for his family
      and his children.

      If we lose low cost energy, then we have to go back to beating slaves with sticks to grow food for some theft Dom kind of system.

      Energy means we have food piled up to the rafters, and we achieve this miracle without the use of slaves. Energy is the key here!!

      So any talk of dumping oil will mean more starving children around the world.

      LENR is poised to become a game changer. However, emerging technologies and a battery breakthrough could serve mankind rather well without LENR. I mean, we all did quite well without VERY low cost computers, but the computer revolution occurred and
      benefited us all.

      The lowering of solar panels is a really amazing story and deserves its own post.

      However, in regards to Nuclear power, there is also a “small” revolution occurring – and that is Thorium. All we have to do is combine thorium reactors and adopt molten salt. The result is clean and save nuclear reactors. Norway is a country much dependant on oil. The result is they have a “many” billions state fund. This pays for
      hospitals, schools and gives the country a great standard of living. (Kind of
      like some middle east countries – say Kuwait). Norway is spending that state
      mega fund money on several interesting energy projects and one is thorium. They
      been running a thorium reactor for two years now (very little press coverage).
      And they also have flew in consultants to talk about LENR (should they continue
      investing in oil, or will oil be a dead duck in 10 years?).

      So I am of the view that if LENR does not pan out, then a breakthrough in battery technology and thorium nuclear reactors will easy be able to serve mankind and feed us for many generations to come.

      However, LENR still presents one of the greatest technologies to change the world in a way not imagined.

      Regards,
      Albert D. Kallal
      Edmonton, Alberta Canada

      • georgehants

        Albert, I agree that Cold Fusion (if genuinely able to be industrialised) could help change the World for the better.
        I also agree that the technology and work force to supply everybody’s fair needs in the World has been available for many years, but the lack of a caring sharing philosophy of many people keeps the human race at a very low level of morality.
        It is the old saying that where there is a will there is a way, a poverty stricken child from the poorest country in a sane World, deserves exactly the same equal opportunities as a child from the most obscenely rich family.
        Very pleasant and thank you for giving the time to think of helping those that at present are just left to die and suffer.
        Best

        • Albert D. Kallal

          The problem is the term “sharing” tends to be read by people as a ticket for a country to adopt socialism. Just look a Venezuela
          to see how that works.

          So as long as your calls for caring and sharing ALSO includes the caveat that countries need to reject socialism and the result is no starving children, then we see eye to eye.

          The problem is 99% of people reading your response will equate socialism with sharing – and we all know how that causes children to starve around the world. So as long as you spend your time telling people to reject your philosophy of socialism ideas,
          then the less starving children we will have on this planet.

          So just make sure you sending out the right message to prevent starving children around the world.

          Venezuela is blowing up, and people are hunting birds, and dogs in parks for food. All of their suffering could have SIMPLY been avoided by rejecting their socialist views, and those socialist views were sold on this “sharing” idea.

          So nothing wrong with ideas of sharing, but don’t use that word in the context of socialist ideas – since those children are starving in Venezuela as a DIRECT result of adopting socialism and your kind of thinking.

          Regards,
          Albert D. Kallal
          Edmonton, Alberta Canada

          • georgehants

            Albert, you are taking a negative example and generalising it to cover all situations.
            If the technology and manpower is available to achieve equality, which it certainly is, then the logical task is to find the best method of utilizing those resources to solve the problems in the most efficient and fair to all way, do you not agree.
            Anybody can go along finding excuses to not act, that of course can be traced back to pure selfishness, greed and lack of concern for others.
            We pays our money and makes our choice.

          • Albert D. Kallal

            That is all find and dandy, but YOU ARE the one bringing up the issue of starving children here constantly – not me.

            At the end of the day as long as you care about and post about starving children, then it becomes a simple act of logic to look at any country that adopted western capitalism and see that VERY few children starve for lack of food or medicine compared to
            those countries that adopted socialism.

            As long as you on your quest for a better “system” ALSO includes that RIGHT NOW for the time being the BEST way to stop starving children is for those nations to reject their socialist policies.

            We already have the best, first in class means system to solve this starving children problem.

            It all fun and games to “talk” about some “hope” for some new system of creating wealth that in turns creates the resources that in turn feeds hungry people.

            Until you start offering something better than those countries that have little problem feeding their children, then you better ensure your message is authentic and not mascaraing as a socialist trogon horse.
            From what I see your only motivation to post here
            is to spread your socialist ideas of which I pointed out is the MAIN cause of starving children.

            The simple matter is you are on the left if you give higher values to equality of outcome then that of equality of opportunity.

            There is really little if any reason for these countries to have problems feeding their poor – simply none and no excuse EXCEPT that of the simple act of rejecting their socialist policies.

            This information and means to take care of needy people can be had and adopted for free – we don’t need LENR to fix this issue. And the advent of LENR will not change those nations that reject the means and systems to feed their poor.

            We can all sit around and wait and talk about and “hope” for something better to come along, but in the meantime little if any reason exists for a nation to be poor. We ALREADY found the best method to utilize resources and it certainly is not socialism.

            Regards,
            Albert D. Kallal
            Edmonton, Alberta Canada

          • georgehants

            Albert, thank you for your view that nothing can change for the better, just leave your Canadian children in poverty.
            ——–
            Canada ranks 37th on a list of 41 rich countries for children having
            access to enough nutritious food, and higher-than-average rates of child
            homicide and teen suicide also point to a need for action, a UNICEF
            report says.
            https://beta.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/canada-ranked-25th-on-childrens-well-being-amongst-rich-countries-unicef/article35314091/?ref=http://www.theglobeandmail.com&

          • Albert D. Kallal

            Like I said, compared to what other countries?

            And those in poverty and having those issues are OVER 80% coming from people that rejected conservative and traditional family values (single parent families are the ones with problem children) – again the direct result of socialists attacking the family unit.

            In fact we see over 70% of the black population in jail are from single families in the USA.

            In the USA we see only a 7% poverty rate among black families (note the word “family” here – two married parents). For a single white women with children we see a poverty rate of 40%.

            So all those issues of suicide and problems are a DIRECT result of rejecting traditional family uses – again all this rejecting of family values comes from the left and socialists.

            The simply matter is go to school, get married, stay married and adopt traditional values. This SIMPLE adoption of these traditional rules will eliminate near all family issues – including that of poverty.

            At the end of the day 99% of these issues with children is a DIRECT result of the choices their parents made – and in the vast majority of the cases these issues don’t exist with traditional family units. So just like the starving children issue, AGAIN we see these
            issues are the DIRECT result of the choices people make.

            I mean where is all that white privilege for that single mother with children and the 40% poverty rate? Yet only 7% among black families – and I stress the word “family” meaning two parents and children.

            Like I said, this is why people on the left prompte equality of outcome over that of equality of opportunity. The simple issue is socialist attempt to reject their OWN responsibility for their OWN choices that in turn directly affect their outcome and standard of living.

            It is the life choices and values that one adopts that determines how well one’s children will fair. In fact it is the SIMPLE act of adopting the correct values and that in term MOSTLY determines how one will fair in today’s world.

            There no reason for all these issues with children in Canada – just adopt traditional family values and the statistics in this regards shows astounding results.

            Socialists simply don’t want to admit their choices affect outcomes (so they push for equality of outcome!!).

            Once again the SIMPLE act of adopting the correct values solves this problem – just like it does for countries that adopt policies that results in their children starving.

            This all comes down to the values you adopt – and the destruction of the family unit is again coming from the left and socialists.

            Regards,
            Albert D. Kallal
            Edmonton, Alberta Canada

          • georgehants

            Albert, thank you for confirming that you are happy with these children in Canada being brought up in poverty and that you do not believe they should live in a system where they have an equal chance with the richest children, a little hard for a five year old to conform to your conditions.
            Your thinking is clear and nothing can be gained from any more repetition.
            Enough said, I think,

          • Albert D. Kallal

            To put words in my
            mouth and state I am happy with these children is a low and disgusting claim and ascertain on your part. To attack me and my message means you already lost this round and badly at that!

            What I REALLY not happy with is you ignoring the results of your left and socialists ideas and the resulting suffering of those children.

            Like I said, those people and their children would be ok in the VAST majority of cases if such people made better decisions. The problem here is you attempting to ignore this issue that outcomes are determined MOSTLY by the decisions people make. And this
            comes down to the values that people adopt. Your values are #1 factor in determine outcomes.

            You the one being closed minded here and are rejecting that outcomes are determined by the choices people make. Until you accept this basic fact of human nature then any and all solutions you propose simply will not work anymore then attempting to
            reject the concept of gravity.

            My thinking is crystal clear here – and I provided numbers to back up my position. I don’t even have to like or even want such solutions to these problems – but they CLEARY work and solve these problems regardless of what I think or do!

            This all comes down to the values you accept or reject. Until such time you accept the results of making better choices and rejecting socialist ideas, then you not be offering solution to problems that exist with children in Canada.

            I have offered the solution for those children – simply to accept traditional family values. And we KNOW this solution works.

            If you care about these children so much, then exactly what solution are you offering for this problem that works better than mine? And we KNOW my solution works and the numbers cleary bear this fact out.

            It not a question of me changing my thinking. I can think anything I want and that will NOT change the numbers and results above I posted.

            The issue is you rejecting the basic numbers and facts I pointed out. Exactly who is being closed minded here?

            Regards,
            Albert D. Kallal
            Edmonton, Alberta Canada

          • georgehants

            Albert, please my figures above show clearly that many very young children are living in poverty in Canada, you respond that the system is the best and give no ides how to remove those children who cannot on there own avoid that poverty, to bring their lives into equality with those that are not in poverty.
            you keep repeating you live in the best system, so you are clearly “happy” with the situation.
            I am saying those children matter and in your system are unable to change their own situation, only changing that system can ever remove all children etc. from their disadvantageous.
            Now if you are not going to agree that “the system” is at fault and needs to change to include everybody into an equal position then I can live with your view, but never agree with it.

          • Albert D. Kallal

            I said that adopting the correct set of values are the solution here.

            What good is having a solution and system if people reject the ideas and values that such a system and solution has to offer?

            The old story about leading a horse t water comes to mind here.

            And yes, compared to any other system such as socialism yes such people are better off under such systems I am telling them to adopt.

            That does mean everything is all good – it is a question of what the best choices are now and the best outcomes based on those choices. This does not suggest that better choices down the road can appear and be adopted.

            I mean what good is it to point out that some people in China are tall when I simply point out they in general tend to be shorter people? The “general” point I am making still stands. Telling me that you know someone in China who is tall is a moot point and changes nothing here.

            What you not agreeing about and accepting is the disaster that socialism is.

            You have to FIRST identity what system causes the most starving children, and I have pointed out that system is socialism.

            And yes, I MOST certainly did offer the solution – that solution was to adopt traditional family values and stop the socialists from attacking the family unit and their traditional values.

            And you have to define what you mean by “equal” position. You not going to be a pro basketball player no matter how often someone tells you are in an equal position to play basketball if you are only 5.1

            If you saying that you want the outcome to be the same for everyone regardless of their choices they make in life then no, I don’t agree with that idea. (because it is stupid and ignores reality).

            If you eat too much or put you hand in a fire, then consequences exist for such actions. Now you want everyone to be in a equal position and ignore their choices?

            So I am making two points:

            The systems I point out are a GAZILLION times better then socialism ideas and systems you are offering. So yes, take the best one we have now. Does that mean I don’t care about the excepting of someone being tall in China? (of course not – lets not be silly here!).

            Exceptions to what I am saying are not a valid argument to the overall results.

            Next up I am saying that the choices people make and the values they accept (or reject) have the greatest impact on their
            outcomes.

            So I gave the solution for those children – that is reject the socialist ideas that attack the family unit.

            So you have to define what you mean by equal position. Should someone who works 12 hours in a day have the same outcome as someone who works 1 hour per day? Again, you have
            to define what you mean here.
            As I stated the idea of equal outcome that ignores one choices makes no sense at all.

            So yes, as long as we talking about equal rights and equal opportunity, then we are on the same planet.

            And who exactly is preventing these people from adopting sets of values that would change their lives for the better? Well it is them adopting your socialist values and rejecting mine – it really that simple.

            If you really care about those children then it is a simple matter to promote and adopt the set of values that results in the best outcome for such children.

            You not offered better solutions then mine. So yes, at this point in time I am saying the values and what I am offering are without a doubt the best solutions we have.

            Until you find a better idea then what I am offering you don’t have a leg or argument to stand on.

            This idea that this translates into not caring about people is beyond stupid on your part.

            So saying I am perfectly happy with some people’s lot in life is insane on your part. Of course things should become better for people.

            However we have to adopt the best set of values that will result in the best outcome for people – there will never be ANY solution that works without adopting a set of values.

            Any solution that works will be based on a set of values that people are free to accept or reject.

            Of course the socialists don’t believe in freedom and those choices – they want to make them for everyone else and ignore the consequences of such choices – and that’s the real
            problem right now.

            Regards,
            Albert D. Kallal
            Edmonton, Alberta Canada

          • georgehants

            Morning Albert you spend hours writing long rambling reply’s that completely miss the point.
            It does not matter what system is used only the result is of importance, if there is one child or person anywhere in the World that does not have enough to eat, no clean water to drink, no medical attention, no adequate education, then the system has failed.
            At present there are millions dying and suffering even in your own country, one of the worst in the rich world.
            One either cares or one does not, your position is plain and my position is plain, so unless you are going to reply with any ideas to improve the present pathetic system then we have nothing to discuss.

          • Albert D. Kallal

            No, you are missing the point.

            No one is claiming that any system we have is perfect. However since we BOTH know this, then the ONLY reasonable solution is to adopt the best choices that cause the least
            amount of suffering.

            And there are not millions dying of starvation Canada – let’s not be silly here.

            So why would one not adopt known ideas that reduce poverty for children? I mean exactly how silly is it not to adopt ideas that help children?

            It is of zero logic to point out that such systems are not 100% fail safe, but that’s all we got.
            To sit around and not adopt these choices to reduce suffering thus makes no
            sense since “some” still will suffer? How does that make any sense? It is outright cruel and mean to children right now to not adopt the above ideas.

            So yes, I have responded with ideas – why have you not? More double speak on your part?

            I stated that countries who reject socialism have MASSIVE less starving children. That doe not mean it is perfect, but it is BETTER than anything else we have known to mankind.

            And in fact obesity rates are HIGHER among the lower income groups in Canada then the upper class.

            The other issue I pointed out in regards to children poverty and issues like suicide etc. are
            ALSO shown to be MASSIVELY less in those children being raised by a traditional
            family.

            So I given two solitons to reduce starving children. That is rejection of socialism, and that of adopting traditional family values.

            As I stated we see only a 7% poverty rate for traditional black families with children, yet we see 40% poverty rate for single white mothers with children. Cleary then that child
            is going to suffer far more then such children being brought up by traditional families.

            So the solution here is to stop the left and socialist attacking the family unit. The result will be far less poverty for children and far less suffering by children. Note how I said
            far less – but again that’s all we have. Why would you not want less poverty? I am at a loss for words here?

            You floating the concept that some solution must be all nice and 100% perfect. Why wait and not adopt ideas now that can reduce massive amounts of suffering now? Why wait 100
            or 1000 years for a perfect system when we have to deal with people staring
            now?

            We don’t have that perfect system, but that is ZERO reason not to act now to do things that will benefit the most people possible.

            So right now the best solution we have on the planet is to reject socialism since history and
            facts shows this results in the most amounts of people starving. And in those
            counties that rejected socialism, they have the least amount of people
            starving.

            This does NOT suggest nor imply that such counties could and should do better. That does not suggest that such counties don’t have people in need. However that is ZERO logic
            and reason to reject these solutions until such time a better solution comes
            along.

            For what possible reason and logic would we reject something that gives the best outcome? Might not be an outcome you like, but it certainly better than any other solution we have to offer.

            Why would you not adopt the best choice possible we have?

            And the same goes for traditional family values. The set of values adopted by people raising children is the #1 determine factor as to how well such people will fare when
            compared to children raised outside of traditional families.

            So I offered ideas to improve the system. What ideas have you offered here? Please now, it is your turn to offer some ideas.

            Again: your turn for some ideas.

            Regards,
            Albert D. Kallal
            Edmonton, Alberta Canada

          • Chapman

            Mr. Kallal,

            I just wanted to take a moment to personally THANK YOU for your recent series of posts. It is some of the best stated, and logically presented, arguments in defense of basic common sense and the reality of the modern social dynamic that I have read in a great while.

            You are a credit to THINKING people everywhere.

            It is clear that it is not your personal WISHES concerning the human condition that you are presenting, but a logical expression of what IS the human condition, and a straightforward presentation of natural cause and effect. We can ALL dream of a better world, but one has to properly identify and confront WHAT is wrong before they can attempt to prescribe solutions. You have done this with great clarity.

            Count me as an official “FAN”…
            (can I call myself a KALLALITE? Is that the proper term???)

          • Albert D. Kallal

            Thank you kindly.

            Rather amazing the poverty rate among single white women vs that of a married black family (7% vs 40% poverty rate).

            All we can do is present our case. I mean this is never some kind of “all” or “nothing” kind of deal.

            The problem for most is this idea that everyone deserves an equal outcome regardless of their life choices. The simple matter is many people start out VERY disadvantaged compared to others. This is true and less than ideal. However you can’t force equal outcomes unless you by force take away from others.

            The ideas I present does not then require we give up our “natural” human spirit to help those in need.

            And most important is to realize that becomes someone is successful, that does mean someone else it not (the economy does not work that way). Because someone created a billion dollar Computer Company next to you in their garage does NOT mean you don’t have any more or less money! Because someone wins does not mean someone loses – and I try to explain WHY this is a case some other time – but it is a key concept to grasp.

            So the fix for such differences in society is not some forced theft of property by the state and then turning over such resources to other people. You don’t force an equal outcome, but provide equal opportunity and rights for everyone. To force an outcome means that you MUST take away rights from others and that is un-just, and cruel.

            So the real solution is for government to provide an environment in which individual rights are stronger than that of state rights. And absolute ensure that everyone is the same under law etc. And then make sure we give people the best chances and opportunism in life.

            And that includes government funding of schools (but I question the government running schools – they screwed that system up so bad that NEAR ALL government employees in the State of New York will NOT even send their own kids to the public school system! – we are talking about government employees that would not even consider sending their own child to the system they work for!!).

            So while I believe in “reduced” government intervention, that does not suggest I don’t want government to provide services to their people. So governments should provide school funding directly to parents which then in turn decide how to spend and where to spend this education money on their children. And that number hovers around $10,000 per child. So I in fact support people who home school their children – and they should still get that government school funding per child!

            And wow – would schools improve fast, or people would simple adopt alternatives. Education funding has become a black hole, and the results get worse and worse with more and more money being thrown at this problem (all with terrible results).

            I also reject the concept of “every man” for himself type of economy view. So there is often this promoted idea of “survival of the fittest” type of un-bridged free market that supposed will solve everything (this was very British in its origins). Nothing could be farther from the truth. I mean, just look at the rapid rise of “crony” capitalism where governments + industry are in bed together. It is the government’s power being used by industry is one of the major issues here. So people rights and powers need to be greater then that of the state.

            I mean the working people of Britain had enough.
            The government was selling out to big “free trade” deals that simply allowed
            large companies to shut down their industry and pack their bags and move to
            China. This was simply a sellout of industry with full cooperation of the
            Government.

            Finally the working class people figured out the heck what was going on, why no jobs, and why no extra money to take a summer holiday in the last 15 years. The result was the rise of Brexit vote. That vote was not about race, but about people finally figuring out how governments are cooperating with business to shaft them.

            So I am not at all big on some of these blind that free market ideas are “always” good (they are NOT when it is a sellout of the people’s right to control their own nation).

            For example, I am against many places that sell out the electoral grid to the private sector – that is an insane policy because that’s used to “float” the electric prices to a trading floor. Buying and selling electric futures makes zero sense and just siphons off billions to the electric traders for ZERO benefit to consumers.

            So I don’t buy into that free for all every man for himself that is OFTEN floated as the alternative to socialism. We do not want or need a society based on “every man” for himself kind of thinking. However forced theft and enslavement by governments is certainly the wrong approach the socialist are pushing, and history is full of solid history examples of how important it is to avoid that socialist pink cloud dream that destroys everything in its path.

            The only way to ensure that you have food for everyone is to ensure those doing the work have incentive for such work. In the Soviet union, they
            had people starving at one time with state run farms, and in the USA we put
            lights on our tractors and drove them into the late night – the result was one
            of the greatest food surpluses a nation has ever seen vs other nations with
            starving children.
            I suspect that many on the left agree that we need to help and feed people of the world – but we vastly disagree on how we go about accomplishing this goal.

            Regards,
            Albert D. Kallal
            Edmonton, Alberta Canada

          • TomR

            Thank you Albert, for trying to help George understand that all his talk about socialism and communism are doing more harm than good.

  • Bob Greenyer
  • Bob Greenyer

    This is the aftermath of the explosion once the fire had been extinguished.

    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/7bb491feff6699b61f34b870f782e113af8b5e55b1411bda7d8e82eadda16106.png

    • Jag Kaurah

      Delight you are ok enough to blog Bob.

      How did it happen?

    • Andreas Moraitis

      Oops…that must have been a fundamental experience. Good to hear that you are OK!

      https://brnodaily.cz/2017/09/28/breaking-news/explosion-at-moravske-namesti/

      • Bob Greenyer

        Yes, it sure was, that chunk of metal was blasted over 7 stories into the sky from the roof of the van and came down just behind me. Really made me think.

        Thanks for your well wishes.

    • Eyedoc

      WTH !! Things like this are why it is so important for yourself, A Rossi, and any other frontrunners to be sure you have backup to your info ( either trusted persons or auto system to retain and push the info out) …too easy to end 🙁

      • Bob Greenyer

        Everything I learn or insight, I immediately share the information ASAP with a group of trusted people in its most raw form, even before I can research around it and package it up for wider coherent publication.

        Now though, more than ever, I feel that I must go day to day on Youtube and just say as much as I can, even if I am wrong or misguided.

    • cashmemorz

      Bob, you seem to attract extremes of coincidences, like a mathematical attractor or focal point of extreme kinds of phenomena. LENR was just the beginning, your hypothesis of what caused the damage to the World Trade Center is another, now this. If, like bad luck, your experiences also come in three’s, then you have had your three extreme incidences. What do you have to look forward to now?

      • Bob Greenyer

        There are comfort zones, if one stays within them, one can avoid discovery and circumstance.

        I am in a very good place right now, so much to share – just finding the time is the challenge.

        I see a world of abundance and a resetting of what it means to be human and in tune with nature – but there will be some hard truths and some difficult mental adjustments for many. Things happen for a reason.

        All that people are herded to fear in the world right now is just contrived nonsense based on fallacy and misdirection – and so I have a deep sense of inner peace and strength for the road ahead.

        • Toussaint françois

          Bob, do you think it was not just bad luck ?

        • georgehants

          Morning Bob, glad all is well, you say ——–
          “I see a world of abundance and a resetting of what it means to be human
          and in tune with nature – but there will be some hard truths and some
          difficult mental adjustments for many. Things happen for a reason.”
          You are fully aware this will lead to many attacks from many people, it is Wonderful that you see a clear path to continue with your discoveries and there will always be those seeking the “Truth” right behind you.

          • Bob Greenyer

            I am aware there will be adjustment driven attacks – I do not fear them.

        • LesioQ

          Bob, You sound as if Your DMT level was elevated 🙂

          • Bob Greenyer

            Just understanding.

    • Albert D. Kallal

      Stay well and safe in your travels! Seems you are ok! May the wind of life keep your sails full of energy and keep you moving forward.
      Regards,
      Albert.

      • Bob Greenyer

        Thanks Albert

  • Bob Greenyer

    Such a shame.

  • georgehants

    There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy. – Hamlet

    • Carl Wilson

      Use the 2nd meaning of “your”:
      1.
      belonging to or associated with the person or people that the speaker is addressing.”what is your name?”
      2.
      belonging to or associated with any person in general.”the sight is enough to break your heart”

      • georgehants

        Carl, yes, these things are out there just waiting for us poor sad humans to open our eyes.
        Shakespeare was like many over history (mostly lost or kept hidden today) a very wise thinker.

  • artefact

    On JONP:

    “Tom Conover September 29, 2017 at 2:09 PM …
    Q1: Will the improvements be completed before the presentation?
    Q2: Are the improvements for 1) Manufacturing; 2) Functionality; 3) Sigma 5; 4) All of the above.
    Q3: Your partner expresses interest in making electricity. Will this
    be directly from the 1) QuarkX or using the 2) Carnot cycle?

    Andrea Rossi September 29, 2017 at 2:28 PM
    Tom Conover:
    Thank you for your insight.
    Answers:
    1- yes
    2- 4
    3- both plus something new
    Warm Regards A.R.”

    • Axil Axil

      Something new must have something to do with the production of light. Alan Smith mentioned that first hand observation of the Quark revealed that light can be produced in any color and the generation of that color is controllable by the operator.

      Some background on theory.

      Marrying superconductors, lasers, and Bose-Einstein condensates

      http://phys.org/news/2016-06-superconductors-lasers-bose-einstein-condensates.html

      A polariton condinsate produces energy output in three ways.

      First, electrons are produced as a decay product of meson production. This type of energy output supports direct electric production.

      Second, the Bose condensate produces heat output like a blackhole from hawkings radiation

      Three, the Bose condinsate produces light as a subchannel visible light output from deep red to very beep blue. The collar that is produced is determined by the density of the polaritons constrained in the condensate.

      This third type of reaction output is what I predict that Rossi is referring to.

      The referenced article states:

      “They observed high-energy side-peak emission that cannot be explained by two mechanisms known to date: Bose-Einstein condensation of exciton-polaritons, nor conventional semiconductor lasing driven by the optical gain from unbound electron hole plasma.”

      For details of this mechanism see as follows:

      https://www.nature.com/articles/srep25655

      High-energy side-peak emission of exciton-polariton condensates in high density regime

  • sam

    Ruth
    September 30, 2017 at 9:45 PM
    Dr Andrea Rossi:
    Can you tell us the value of the power density you reached so far with the E-Cat QX?
    Cheers,
    Ruth

    Andrea Rossi
    September 30, 2017 at 10:02 PM
    Ruth:
    Circa 30 Wcm^-3, without the heat exchangers.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

    • Andreas Moraitis

      30 W / cm^3 is quite a lot. It’s in the order of magnitude that supercapacitors reach. One would have to consider the differences between electric and (mainly) thermal power, though.

      • Jamie Sibley

        30 Watts, from 1cc of fuel, for 1 year, is ~26300x more energy per liter than gasoline.

        • artefact

          I think the amount of fuel in the 1cc is much smaller. There needs to be room for the plasma.

    • US_Citizen71

      My comparison to coal on another thread: http://disq.us/p/1mmq91l

    • artefact

      On JONP:

      “Colin Watters October 1, 2017 at 12:46 PM
      Dear Mr Rossi,
      If possible, can you tell us when operating at 30Wcm^-3 how long does the fuel last (eg time between refueling)? Thank you.

      Andrea Rossi October 1, 2017 at 4:21 PM
      Colin Watters:
      One year.
      Warm Regards, A.R.”

  • Omega Z

    So overly simplistic and wrong. Their socialist policies caused the problem. Oil production declined over 30% under their management when it should have increased. They didn’t invest in the future. They invested in buying power from the masses…

    Prior to their socialist promotion, Venezuela was all but 100% self sufficient in producing their own food. Even exportable surplus that allowed for a variety of imported food. Now, 50% of farms are left barren of crops and the other 50% greatly underutilized. Socialism does not promote self sufficiency, but dependency. Better for controlling the masses. Vote for me and I’ll give you things for free. Until the money runs out anyway. Oil prices collapsed…Oh My.

  • Buck

    The following exchange suggests that the demonstration will be in November, not October. I capitalized to highlight his choice of words.

    ===================================

    Prof
    October 1, 2017 at 1:19 PM

    Dr Andrea Rossi:

    Will, during the demo of November, be also given any information about the progress as for what concerns the development of the theory behind the Rossi effect?

    Godspeed
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    Andrea Rossi
    October 1, 2017 at 4:10 PM

    Prof:

    I think yes, also because in these days I am working with Carl-Oscar Gullstrom very thoroughly on it. He will attend the NOVEMBER presentation and after the test we will also talk of the theoretical developments, after our last paper published on Arxiv Physics.

    Warm Regards,

    A.R.

    • Frank Acland

      Thanks, Buck. I have also heard from AR directly that it will be in November.

  • Omega Z

    You should open a business in Venezuela. It may remain yours, but your state official partner will be there right by your side. Semantics. It’s still under the Venezuelan governments control even if not officially nationalized. Also, most grocery stores have little or no product and you must go to government facilities to purchase your needs. Your partly right in a sense. It has become a socialist dictatorship like most.

  • Albert D. Kallal

    That 70% is very suspect. If that was the case, then why the financial meltdown? I mean places in the Middle East that have oil dependant economies, or Norway, or even Alberta did not see their economies collapse due to some drop in oil. If 70% of their GDP was private, then the oil shock would have been much like Alberta or Norway, or in fact like many Middle East countries that are VERY dependent on oil income. In other words some cut backs in jobs etc. would have occurred, but no meltdown.

    So if 70% of GDP is private, then why the economic meltdown? That does not fly or make sense at all.

    They nationalized just about everything from farms, food production. IN fact they even nationalized cement production. Same goes for telecommunication, electrical system and just about anything the government could get their hands on. They even nationalized the GM plant – which is now closed.

    I can’t think of anything in that country that was production wealth that not been taken over by that socialist government.

    So “nice” try at saying this was NOT real socialist polices – in fact the WHOLE problem is they did a bag up job of REALLY pushing their socialist system on their nation – that’s why everything is so bad in that country. The other surrounding nations have similar people, similar economies, but the ONLY major difference is their governments did not go hog wild on the socialist dream and spending like Venezuela did. Their spectacular meltdown is because they REALLY DID a great job in regards to implementing socialist polices on their people and business.

    I guess if you nationalized everything and they don’t make ANY money, then 70% of GDP of nothing left over may well still be 70% of near nothing left over! In other words if you nationalized everything and such companies don’t make money, then a tiny bit of GDP left over can easy be 70% of GDP since their nothing really left over anyway. Heck 100% of a nothing GDP still means that people are starving to death in that country.

    And then we have Chile – a similar country in a similar type region compared to Venezuela. For 20 years Chile had the fastest growing economy in that region. Standards of living are now 3rd, only behind USA and Canada. In fact if they keep growing, they will surpass us!!

    So why then are other heavy depend oil nations like Norway, or Alberta etc. not suffering such huge meltdowns due to the shock in oil prices? From what I can see, the quote of 70% GDP being private is rather meaning less since their no real GDP left in that country anyway.

    The simple matter was Chavez was made out to be a socialist hero, and he said I will show the world how socialism can work! And students all over the world would wear those Chavez shirts proudly to show off their socialist miracle.

    But the whole miracle turned into a nightmare – like it ALWAYS does.

    He blew a bunch of money like a gambler spending on drugs and booze. After that huge spending spree ended, they had not built up any of their economy for that money spent (you have to re-invest into business, infrastructure, power, water etc.)

    So the great socialist spending spree and party lasted about 10 years – really a great party on a socialist credit card. Now we seeing the result of these crazy socialist policies.

    Other counters in that region are not suffering such
    meltdowns, so some figure of 70% gdp being private makes no sense and does not explain the meltdown – but the socialist spending spree and policies most certainly does.

    Regards,
    Albert D. Kallal
    Edmonton, Alberta Canada

  • Bruce__H

    Not being an academic Mr Rossi may not understand that to say that the paper he Gullstrom posted on Archiv Physics has been “published” is not right. This is simply a paper that has been posted on an internet site which does not require any form of peer review. And that is about it! It isn’t “published” in the way science usually requires when that term is used and shouldn’t be thought of as having passed any particular sort of intellectual or scientific hurdle to appear where it does.

    • Still really pretty interesting that Gullstrom continues to work with him. I’d expect that by now if something smelled fishy to him or his colleagues he’d have walked away.

      I’ve been looking for confirmation that Gullstrom has actually verified the measurements in person. That would be a huge confidence booster (for me at least). I worry that Gullstrom may just be crafting a theory around numbers provided by Rossi, which leaves us smack dab in the middle of Rossi Says purgatory.

      • Bruce__H

        Gullstrom is still working on his PhD as far as I know. I think it is also pretty interesting that his supervisor (Bo Hoistad?) is not an author on the paper.

        • I have been talking to Gullström and will provide a post on that when I have time. He has no detailed verification of the measurements. He’s not working on his PhD at the moment, for private reasons. Bo Höistad is not his supervisor.
          But my impression is that he’s is intelligent and has a profound theoretic understanding of quantum mechanics, and that he is using all his knowledge and intellectual capacity to investigate the very borders of our understanding of some crucial elementary particles. Yet, what he is lacking are more experimental data.

          • Looking forward to that post! Thanks, Mats.

          • Robert Dorr

            Mats, just wondering if you will be in attendance at the Rossi demo in November? If so I hope you will post your impressions of the demonstration.

    • Anon2012_2014

      You’re being unfair. Published means to make public. Same root word. It’s been published on-line.

      That the website is not peer reviewed doesn’t mean that the paper is bad. It means that the for-profit journals have not decided to include it in their monopoly.

      The quality or non-quality of the paper stands on its own. The journal vs arxiv is only material as the journal is peer reviewed and more prestigious.

      • Bruce__H

        “That the website is not peer reviewed doesn’t mean that the paper is bad.”

        > Of course not! That is 100% my opinion too. Most of the preprints on Archiv will eventually go on to be submitted for publication. I hope the Gullstrom & Rossi paper is too.

        “It means that the for-profit journals have not decided to include it in their monopoly.”

        > As far as I know this is untrue. But maybe I am wrong. Is it your information that Gullstrom and Rossi submitted the paper to a peer-reviewed journal and it was rejected? Because that is what you seem to be saying.

        “The quality or non-quality of the paper stands on its own. The journal vs arxiv is only material as the journal is peer reviewed and more prestigious.”

        > Of course!

    • Steve Swatman

      lol, Bruce and his peer review requirements.

      And yet he expects everyone to accept the opinions and experiments of critics and amateurs on Rossi’s works.

      • Bruce__H

        “And yet he expects everyone to accept the opinions and experiments of critics and amateurs on Rossi’s works.”

        No I don’t. But do I hope that Rossi or his defenders will address them. What’s wrong with that?

        LENR has suffered under the “pathological science” label and a large part of this is due to the incredibly low standards of the fan base. Mr. Swatman’s contributions don’t help in this regard.

        • Steve Swatman

          Surely you remember our last long drawn out conversation Bruce, where you were constantly critical of Mr Rossi, all the people who work with him, the Lugano test scientists, in fact every one has been posiyive about the Ecat, QX and Mr Rossis work, and all you had to back up your claims was 1 guys experiments with a single piece of equipment, but enough of that, the good thing about the internet is that your conversations are saved for all to see.

          However you are correct in saying my contributions don’t help, but they do maintain a certain perspective when looking at Mr Rossi’s work, effort and continued contributions to LENR,

          I apologise if you took offence at my comment, but, well, you know, people in glass houses and all that.

  • Jerry Soloman

    We would like to see eCatworld readers represented at the eCat QX DEMO in Miami, this would
    include Frank Ackland and the MFMF with Bob Greenyer and company.

    I will donate the first 200 as soon as Frank sets up the paypal for the Miami Fund drive.

  • Steve Swatman

    I do not believe I am misinterpreting your posts and comments at all.

    You do appear to have a double standard when it comes to the Technical arguments against Mr Rossi and the Lugano guys and Gullstrom, in fact against anyone “positively” involved in the whole circus.

    I would say that the Lugano guys did their experiments, wrote their paper, listened to the litany of ‘amateur” criticism and decided that there was no real need to amateurs, no real need to return to the paper and qualify the critique of amateurs. I am of course just guessing that was/is their situation, (I would not feel the need to revisit a paper to satisfy the critique of amateurs) I would not be so interested in revisiting a paper to satisfy the critique of professionals in the field unless I saw something of nte that required a revisit.

    As for Gullstrom, i do not know and do not profess to know who is guiding his PhD path, who is offering him Guided feedback, why does it sound to you that he is not getting guidance? because he does not adhere to your ideas?

    My posts as you may or may not have noted are always in reply to what i perceive as unwarranted criticism, double standard statements, continued and prolific critique, and in your particular case I find the double standard of you mocking anyone involved with MR Rossi, anyone who has first hand knowledge and experience with the actual experiments and equipment to be, as you say “political”, and when you compare the years of experience, work and commitment to one amateurs tests on one piece of equipment as proof that all these hard working guys are incompetent at best, conmen at worse, I feel a certain need to point this out.

    You are obviously well practised in the field of social media manipulation, your comments are well defined and deliberately structured (which remind me greatly of the PR and Government social media manipulation on reddit ) if I were to speculate in a negative manner, I might say that you are actually using the same handbook as Academi, and getting a great deal of structured feedback from your desk manager and the people in the oil and gas industry, However to speculate in such a manner would be insulting, would it not.

  • Steve Swatman

    Indeed Bruce, I am not,

    However I am surprised that you drop your exacting standards so easily.

    I would have expected that only once those replicator’s have gone through your own required replication procedures and expert analysis , had professionals test the results, written a paper and had that paper peer reviewed, That you would even entertain the thought that they may be in fact proving a point.

    It does seem Bruce, that you suffer from a quantifiable set of double standards.

    • Bruce__H

      Both Paradigmnoia and Thomas Clarke have their critics. But they have responded to them, extensively, on the LENR Forum website. This all began about a year ago so I would have to do some research, but if you like I will put together some links to the conversation and post them.

      Members of the Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project also hold that the Lugano authors have made technical mistakes in measuring the temperature of the ecat generator they were looking at. They have also participated in much back-and-forth with people who do not see eye-to-eye with them. I can dig up some of that too if you would like.

      • Steve Swatman

        no point in you wasting your time there Bruce, I am aware of MFMP and their work, I admire them for their efforts and follow them and their exploits quite closely.

        As for your two friends on LENR forum, I am sure they have replied to critique extensively, afteral that is their aim, to inform/misinform as many people as possible of their findings, because they have made the effort. but you know, you dont seem to hold the same standards to them as you do to Mr Rossi and his team, you are not asking them to publish a paper, have their work peer reviewed, checked an double checked etc

        I remember the days when Mr Rossi was open and extensively answering his critiques too.

        To be honest “I rather enjoy watching the show” and get quite bored by the people who eat chips and look at their phones, all the while talking about how bad the show is and the actors.
        In the cinema I am one the people who turn around and tell such people to stop spoiling the show for everyone else.

        Here is the thing, my mom, bless her, taught me that if I was not enjoying the movie, to get up and leave the cinema, don’t spoil it for everyone who is there to enjoy the show.

        Its a simple attitude, but one that I try to adhere too in life.

        Here, most people come to enjoy the show, they enjoy the dream and the possibilities, and entry to the theatre is free, why criticise the show when you are invited for free to enjoy the possibilities and share the dreams of the actors.

        The world is a simple place, enjoy it, revel in the day, smile at the potential, what’s the point in been negative and passing negativity to others who are already smiling. 😉 do you get where I am coming from.

  • Omega Z

    Lugano authors do not reply because they are involved in their own replication work.

    • Bruce__H

      I have heard that too. Is this a rumor or is it based on information from one of the participants?

      If it is true then I look forward to hearing from them and hope they directly address some of the concerns of their critics.

      • Steve Swatman

        Will that be before or after they submit for peer review by peers of your choosing Bruce. because, well, you know, if they are not vetted by you they will not be acceptable peers will they. 😉

  • Rene
    • Frank Acland

      I believe that is not the time of the demo.

      • Rene

        The demo was supposed to have been beginning off October, then Rossi said 100% likelihood it will happen before end of November, so I split the difference. If you have an actual date, It is easy enough to adjust the clock.