Hoaxes or Creativity Suppressed?

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Re: Hoaxes or Creativity Suppressed?

Postby Iamwhomiam » Sun Feb 12, 2012 12:56 am

Sounder wrote:
I wrote:
But you are discussing not metaphysics, but real world 3D material, so I would really appreciate seeing some, any demonstrable 3D material evidence provided to ascertain your claims that such things are not only possible, but provable in the real world.

Sounder wrote:
Iamwhoiam, I have my own idiosyncratic model for 3D physics, but because of it’s lack of correspondence to the existing models I only sound crazy when I talk of it, so I stopped and switched to ontology because I determined that how the mind produces stuff is more relevant to the health of society than is the production of some specific device.

I think that conditioning as to what one believes or thinks of as being possible has more to do with what one may consider as being evidence let alone proof than does any so called rationality that one may apply to the situation.

And please do not call me a twerp again.


And what kind of "stuff" have you had success in creating with your mind, Sounder?

I mean, beside the illusion brought to reality of me having called you "a twerp"? I've never called you "a twerp," not once, ever. It is possible that I may have thought it, but I've never said any such thing to you.

Did you get a postcard in the mail from me calling you "a twerp"?

Now that would be something to write home about, you know, for my mind to have manufactured such a thing and to have it delivered to you by post!

Now that we've cleared that up, but before moving on, "let me remind you of this I've said: "But first let me say that certain new sources of energy probably are being suppressed."

Sounder wrote:

I see much more potential here than I see in 'Carbon Tax Credits', as a proper manner for approaching reality.

Do any of you 'deniers' care to argue the point?


You're unclear as to your definition of "deniers," Sounder, but perhaps you'll explain it, to avoid any misunderstanding by anyone, ok?

And once you've explained what you mean by 'deniers,' please explain for me what a 'Carbon Tax Credit" is and while you're at it, please define what a "Carbon Tax" is. If you're up to it, please factually explain the purpose of each. (A "carbon tax credit" is new to me, though I believe I know what a "carbon tax" is and what its purpose is, but other readers may not.) Being clear on definitions when using unfamiliar terms is best, and lessens the possibility for misunderstanding.

After you clarify these points I will continue. I really don't want to be misunderstood and I'm sure you don't either, Sounder.
User avatar
Iamwhomiam
 
Posts: 6572
Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2007 2:47 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Hoaxes or Creativity Suppressed?

Postby Sounder » Sun Feb 12, 2012 9:08 am

And what kind of "stuff" have you had success in creating with your mind, Sounder?


Well I create beautiful relationships with family, friends and workmates because my method is all about a process for engaging respectfully with my experience.

I mean, beside the illusion brought to reality of me having called you "a twerp"? I've never called you "a twerp," not once, ever. It is possible that I may have thought it, but I've never said any such thing to you.

Did you get a postcard in the mail from me calling you "a twerp"?

Now that would be something to write home about, you know, for my mind to have manufactured such a thing and to have it delivered to you by post!

Now that we've cleared that up, but before moving on, "let me remind you of this I've said: "But first let me say that certain new sources of energy probably are being suppressed."


Yes you are right, what you said was;
I rarely have time to argue here with foolish twits like you.


So it is true, you did not call me a twerp, you called me a foolish twit. You may remain proud of this distinction.

And once you've explained what you mean by 'deniers,' please explain for me what a 'Carbon Tax Credit" is


Hey get this trash off of this thread, don't you know that we are walking on sacred ground here.

Get this shit the FUCK out of here.


That is for you 82-28, but I don't mean it at least in the fuckty fuck meaning of like I'm really serious here, and Iamwhomiam that twerp think was sort of a joke also, you can call me twerp or twit all you want, it lets me see where you are coming from. The give away was that I used a different word for the insult, and you showed that you are of the type that can indeed be jerked around like a dog on a leash.

Quit trying to hit triggers on me and I will most certainly return the favor.
Sounder
 
Posts: 4054
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 8:49 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Hoaxes or Creativity Suppressed?

Postby slimmouse » Sun Feb 12, 2012 10:31 am

One could almost be forgiven for thinking that there are AGW activists who dont want this stuff to work. Dont want any attention paid to it. Attacking the weakest points of an argument and ignoring the rest. Classic "Skeptic" tactics, if that is actually the right word.

They seem to fully understand and recognise the nefarious nature and activities of the big energy cartels in the AGW debate, and indeed many other nefarious activities of similar people in other areas. But the very idea that the same people could be surpressing/ have actively surpressed ideas and experiments and breakthroughs in energy technology that would actually put them out of business is met with the kinds of response I would only expect from the said Oligarchs, rather than the AGW campaigners. Man, does that get confusing to the uninitiated.

Congrats on your mercedes performance going downhill Nordic. That contribution to the discussion sure helped.
slimmouse
 
Posts: 6129
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 7:41 am
Location: Just outside of you.
Blog: View Blog (3)

Re: Hoaxes or Creativity Suppressed?

Postby Sounder » Sun Feb 12, 2012 10:53 am

wintler2 wrote....
Cold fusion eh? So, two years on, what have they got to show? Two years is plenty of time to build a proof-of-concept reactor.


This sentence is classic in exhibiting a lack of faith in humans ability to change the nature of our understanding of reality. Pouring cold water on imagination is no way to march forward into the future.

I remember my physics teacher saying that the average time between the first publication of a new realization and it's incorporation into society is approximately 50 years.

But my question was; do these folk seem like fly-by-nighters?
Sounder
 
Posts: 4054
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 8:49 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Hoaxes or Creativity Suppressed?

Postby Searcher08 » Sun Feb 12, 2012 1:28 pm

Sounder wrote:wintler2 wrote....
Cold fusion eh? So, two years on, what have they got to show? Two years is plenty of time to build a proof-of-concept reactor.


This sentence is classic in exhibiting a lack of faith in humans ability to change the nature of our understanding of reality. Pouring cold water on imagination is no way to march forward into the future.

I remember my physics teacher saying that the average time between the first publication of a new realization and it's incorporation into society is approximately 50 years.

But my question was; do these folk seem like fly-by-nighters?


@wintler2
How do you know how long it takes to produce a 'proof of concept' commercial cold fusion application???

"I will be interested in talking about whether these non-standard energy sources are possible when someone brings me a working model and a international commercial distribution deal and a TV based advertising campaign and an installed base of > 45,000. Then and only then, I might concede that it is worth further investigation and could be a possibility."

@Sounder
What is the purpose of the O.P.? How will you know when you have achieved it?
User avatar
Searcher08
 
Posts: 5887
Joined: Thu Dec 20, 2007 10:21 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Hoaxes or Creativity Suppressed?

Postby Rory » Sun Feb 12, 2012 4:27 pm

exotic technology. What do you mean exactly?

Is it tech that produces no effective pollution?

Is it tech that is cheap, easily manufactured and distributed?

Does it require any expensive, hard to find/mine/extract metals, plastics or other composite materials? (and are any of these likely to be sourced from areas of conflict - such as where precious and rare metals are extracted (Congo region for example) or like the middle east?)

Is this technology some kind of miracle battery/energy cell for home/local use?

Is it big project, clean fusion type national/global use?

Is it some kind of 'energy from thin air' tech, or does it require a fuel of some description?

Now: Let's assume it is best case scenario; Clean, cheap, infinite fuel, local use. Powers houses and cars - no more hydrocarbons whatsoever.

Corporations are going to be even more efficient, able to reach further and further and, able to fulfill 'their customers desires' even better than before. The same psychopathic drive for profit and power will be there.

Military is gona be doing shit but off the leash. MIC r&d guys with unlimited energy point sources? *shudders*

Other stuff is going to need the same resources, such as is being aggressively mined in Africa and Asia. These are finite and massively destructive to the indigenous communities. And also to the Chinese factory workers. Meat will still be ground to a pulp by industry and the military.

And lastly, population and food required to sustain it. Well? It's been growing at an alarming rate with the hydrocarbon bonanza: it will be out of control with unlimited energy. We would turn into a metaphorical hoard of locusts and pick the planet clean.

would it turn out differently to my hypothetical? Would unlimited free energy somehow lead to the combination of world peace/unilateral disarmament, removal of the patriarchal hetronormative paradigm and the corresponding sociopatholigarchy, and, a societeal drive towards collective evolution within a sustainable and symbiotic relationship with all other aspects of the planets flora/fauna system.

I see a perpetuation of all of the worst excesses of the hydrocarbon bonanza, not a change in direction. If others see it differently, I'd like to see reasoning. And I am operating under the assumption that this magical tech exists and indeed is being supressed - for the sake of argument . Because I don't know if any of us here to anything other than suspect it at best
Rory
 
Posts: 1596
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 2:08 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Hoaxes or Creativity Suppressed?

Postby wintler2 » Sun Feb 12, 2012 5:14 pm

Sounder wrote:Pouring cold water on imagination is no way to march forward into the future.

Relying on imagination to feed our children is no way to march forward into the future.

Searcher08 wrote:@wintler2
How do you know how long it takes to produce a 'proof of concept' commercial cold fusion application???

Obviously i don't, no-one does, because no-one has produced a cold-fusion device that passes the repeatability test. But 2 years is long enough to build a skyscraper, so surely if they have any idea what they're doing they'll be able to produce a benchtop device.

Searcher08 wrote:"I will be interested in talking about whether these non-standard energy sources are possible when someone brings me a working model and a international commercial distribution deal and a TV based advertising campaign and an installed base of > 45,000. Then and only then, I might concede that it is worth further investigation and could be a possibility."

If thats you putting words into my mouth, then .. please don't. I am certain you wouldn't like it if i did it to you.


Searcher08 wrote:@Sounder
What is the purpose of the O.P.?


Good question. As someone named and defamed in 1st and subsequent posts, i think i know.
"Wintler2, you are a disgusting example of a human being, the worst kind in existence on God's Earth. This is not just my personal judgement.." BenD

Research question: are all god botherers authoritarians?
User avatar
wintler2
 
Posts: 2884
Joined: Sun Nov 12, 2006 3:43 am
Location: Inland SE Aus.
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Hoaxes or Creativity Suppressed?

Postby slimmouse » Sun Feb 12, 2012 5:42 pm

wintler2 wrote:
Sounder wrote:Pouring cold water on imagination is no way to march forward into the future.

Relying on imagination to feed our children is no way to march forward into the future.



Well, as someone who sees humanity on the precipice, and given that we arent doing enough to feed everyone already, Im wondering what you propose ? One thing is for sure, as sure as eggs are eggs: You can scream about AGW until youre blue in the face, but nothings gonna change unless we have some serious changes to the way energy is produced. And that will almost unquestionably have to involve rupturing the power of the energy cartels.

In short, imagination and alternative energy forms is what we need more than ever if you ask me. And Pretty Damn Quick too. And I for one can think of nothing worse than poo pooing the idea that such things are beyond our capablities, which I have to say is something that it seems to me you have made one of your priorities as far as I can remember from the moment you arrived on this forum.
slimmouse
 
Posts: 6129
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 7:41 am
Location: Just outside of you.
Blog: View Blog (3)

Re: Hoaxes or Creativity Suppressed?

Postby Searcher08 » Sun Feb 12, 2012 5:45 pm

Rory wrote:exotic technology. What do you mean exactly?

Is it tech that produces no effective pollution?

Is it tech that is cheap, easily manufactured and distributed?

Does it require any expensive, hard to find/mine/extract metals, plastics or other composite materials? (and are any of these likely to be sourced from areas of conflict - such as where precious and rare metals are extracted (Congo region for example) or like the middle east?)

Is this technology some kind of miracle battery/energy cell for home/local use?

Is it big project, clean fusion type national/global use?

Is it some kind of 'energy from thin air' tech, or does it require a fuel of some description?

Now: Let's assume it is best case scenario; Clean, cheap, infinite fuel, local use. Powers houses and cars - no more hydrocarbons whatsoever.

Corporations are going to be even more efficient, able to reach further and further and, able to fulfill 'their customers desires' even better than before. The same psychopathic drive for profit and power will be there.

Military is gona be doing shit but off the leash. MIC r&d guys with unlimited energy point sources? *shudders*

Other stuff is going to need the same resources, such as is being aggressively mined in Africa and Asia. These are finite and massively destructive to the indigenous communities. And also to the Chinese factory workers. Meat will still be ground to a pulp by industry and the military.

And lastly, population and food required to sustain it. Well? It's been growing at an alarming rate with the hydrocarbon bonanza: it will be out of control with unlimited energy. We would turn into a metaphorical hoard of locusts and pick the planet clean.

would it turn out differently to my hypothetical? Would unlimited free energy somehow lead to the combination of world peace/unilateral disarmament, removal of the patriarchal hetronormative paradigm and the corresponding sociopatholigarchy, and, a societeal drive towards collective evolution within a sustainable and symbiotic relationship with all other aspects of the planets flora/fauna system.

I see a perpetuation of all of the worst excesses of the hydrocarbon bonanza, not a change in direction. If others see it differently, I'd like to see reasoning. And I am operating under the assumption that this magical tech exists and indeed is being supressed - for the sake of argument . Because I don't know if any of us here to anything other than suspect it at best


Rory, I think those are absolutely essential questions around this technology, which to be honest I have never seen raised in suppressed energy discussions. The questions you raise are in the 'Negative' scenario.

Causal texture theory tells us that there are always four general causal types of alternative scenarios of the future:

1 A future that is mostly constructive and positive
2 A future that is an ambiguous roller-coaster ride with an admixture of constructive and destructive events and outcomes
3 A future that is indifferent, murky, vague, mediocre and indeterminate but in some respects interesting
4 A future that is mostly destructive and negative.


2: Imagine that the degree of traveling that people can undertake goes up exponentially and countries try to lever\age power lost via old energy into power gained by restricting this as privileged. Imagine an explosion of communication as an ubiquitous mobile net is created.

3 Imagine that many societies distrust free energy; perhaps countries in the Middle East are the last to adopt because they lose leverage as they do - or maybe old tech and new tech is run in parallel because someone says the numbers turn out better if they do and the benefits picture is much more unclear that first thought (remember "Computers will create the paperless office!")
Last edited by Searcher08 on Sun Feb 12, 2012 6:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Searcher08
 
Posts: 5887
Joined: Thu Dec 20, 2007 10:21 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Hoaxes or Creativity Suppressed?

Postby Sounder » Sun Feb 12, 2012 6:01 pm

Good question. As someone named and defamed in 1st and subsequent posts, i think i know.


wintler2 there was no intent to defame you at all.


Sounder wrote:
Pouring cold water on imagination is no way to march forward into the future.
wintler2 wrote:
Relying on imagination to feed our children is no way to march forward into the future.


Actually to rely only on imagination would be absurd, but I find that when mixed with equal parts intellect that there is enough for the children and a bit more to boot.

Rory you make necessary points and I will address them soon.

add on edit;

Rory wrote...
would it turn out differently to my hypothetical?


If we retained the same conceptual structures that drive our culture collectively and our psyches individually at this time, it seems certain that your hypothetical would be the likely outcome.

Would unlimited free energy somehow lead to the combination of world peace/unilateral disarmament, removal of the patriarchal hetronormative paradigm and the corresponding sociopatholigarchy, and, a societeal drive towards collective evolution within a sustainable and symbiotic relationship with all other aspects of the planets flora/fauna system.


Lot-O-words, good words, just a lot. Short answer, no. However new forms for understanding might provide the general folk with new found modes of discrimination such that it becomes easier to police the psychopaths because on a continuum based model they are exposed whereas in a split-reality model the sociopath is rewarded for lying. The rewards now come from having a market for two mutually insulting strains of propaganda. A continuum might address rewards toward remediation, who knows, it will depend on the value sets we can distill out of the new forms.

I see a perpetuation of all of the worst excesses of the hydrocarbon bonanza, not a change in direction. If others see it differently, I'd like to see reasoning.


The change in direction that I describe is inherently unpopular because it asserts that we are all wrong, rather than one side or the other being wrong. But humble pie doesn’t taste as bad as people make out.

And I am operating under the assumption that this magical tech exists and indeed is being suppressed - for the sake of argument


We need to allow ourselves to be more subtle here. There are advantages to be accrued from having a common understanding, but when walking new ground there is a tendency to have very poor theoretical models. Many times this comes from good intentions and trying to shoehorn a novel observation into existing model elements.

Almost everybody knows that being original doesn’t pay the same kind of returns that can be had by corruptly stealing the productive efforts of others. Wait that’s not what I meant, but surely imitation pays better than does originality.
Sounder
 
Posts: 4054
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 8:49 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Hoaxes or Creativity Suppressed?

Postby Iamwhomiam » Sun Feb 12, 2012 9:16 pm

And once you've explained what you mean by 'deniers,' please explain for me what a 'Carbon Tax Credit" is

Sounder wrote:

Hey get this trash off of this thread, don't you know that we are walking on sacred ground here.

Get this shit the FUCK out of here.

That is for you 82-28, but I don't mean it at least in the fuckty fuck meaning of like I'm really serious here, and Iamwhomiam that twerp think was sort of a joke also, you can call me twerp or twit all you want, it lets me see where you are coming from. The give away was that I used a different word for the insult, and you showed that you are of the type that can indeed be jerked around like a dog on a leash.

Quit trying to hit triggers on me and I will most certainly return the favor.

The why did you bring it up, Sounder, here* and here** in this thread?

*
I see much more potential here than I see in 'Carbon Tax Credits', as a proper manner for approaching reality.

Do any of you 'deniers' care to argue the point?

**
Feel free to drop by and say hello wintler2 or Rory, and anybody else of course.

It is not surprising, considering that science since Descartes assumes a rather sharp boundary between what has extension and what does not have extension, that the modern psyche tends to limit causality to gross physical effects. In this culture this is much about chemistry and bomb making. Yet this we all co-dependently endorse when we pay the penance for pollution through the carbon tax. What we do is polluting because of the crudity of our processes, but that does not mean that doing stuff has to inherently be harmful.


And here's what I wrote, asking you for clarification, to avoid confusion:
You're unclear as to your definition of "deniers," Sounder, but perhaps you'll explain it, to avoid any misunderstanding by anyone, ok?

And once you've explained what you mean by 'deniers,' please explain for me what a 'Carbon Tax Credit" is and while you're at it, please define what a "Carbon Tax" is. If you're up to it, please factually explain the purpose of each. (A "carbon tax credit" is new to me, though I believe I know what a "carbon tax" is and what its purpose is, but other readers may not.) Being clear on definitions when using unfamiliar terms is best, and lessens the possibility for misunderstanding.


Jeeze, Sounder, i was just going to tell you about a very deep conversation I had on Thursday evening with a GE R&D scientist, all about alternative energy sources, Anti-Gravity devices, and even flying saucers, this one in particular: http://www.ufo-blogger.com/2010/07/ufo-over-oil-platform-gulf-of-mexico.html

Considering you invited me here to discuss "the point," I thought it best to early on overcome any misunderstandings and asked you to clarify for me the two carbon related terms you used as quoted above. Sorry to have offended you.

But sometimes you seem to me to be two different people. First you ask for us to discuss a subject and then you condemn me for attempting to. Also, along this 21st century schizoid man line, you condemn smart people:
Unfortunately for smart people, they carry the baggage of having learned to arrange the categories better than the average joe. And this talent is the thing that defines them as being smart. But their insistence that this is how the categories must be arranged, you know, for stuff to work like churches, machines, commodity exchanges, whatever, the act of leading or telling others what to do makes one into a form addict (and a supporter of a vertical authority distribution system). Nearly all smart people become vested in supporting the existing system because that is what provides the justification for their identity.

It’s the smart people that are fucking up this world, not the stupid ones.

And then refer Nordic to, well by all accounts a bunch of very smart people:
Nordic, check out these folk from this company. Tell me, do they strike you as being fly by night or shady characters?

Their histories are in the middle of the first page of this thread.

http://www.brillouinenergy.com/
The same smart people whose bios you posted on the first page!

You know, Sounder, there's no embarrassment in not knowing something. If you don't know what a Carbon Tax Credit is or what a Carbon Tax is, just say so. But I'd advise you, at least here at RI, not to use terms you do not understand because inevitably, someone will challenge your improper use of them.
User avatar
Iamwhomiam
 
Posts: 6572
Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2007 2:47 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Hoaxes or Creativity Suppressed?

Postby wintler2 » Mon Feb 13, 2012 1:45 am

Sounder wrote:
Good question. As someone named and defamed in 1st and subsequent posts, i think i know.

wintler2 there was no intent to defame you at all.

You're right, you haven't done so in this thread, for which i thank you.
I do tho think it is rude to name me in first line of first post and set me an impossible research challenge:
Sounder wrote:This thread is for wintler2, with a question. Do you (or anyone else) believe that these [dozens of briefly described & unsubstantiated] examples are all hoaxes?


But thats okay. I'm still quite willing to discuss any particular one you think is good, so long as we have something to discuss, namely how it is supposed to work, any evidence of success, published papers, videos of testing, etc.
"Wintler2, you are a disgusting example of a human being, the worst kind in existence on God's Earth. This is not just my personal judgement.." BenD

Research question: are all god botherers authoritarians?
User avatar
wintler2
 
Posts: 2884
Joined: Sun Nov 12, 2006 3:43 am
Location: Inland SE Aus.
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Hoaxes or Creativity Suppressed?

Postby Sounder » Mon Feb 13, 2012 7:12 am

I need to address searcher08’s question in regard to purpose for the thread. I am interested to know what RI folk think about the hazy intersection between what we know and what we have yet to learn. I note a clear predilection for sticking with what we think we know which is pretty much what was expected. However this may change at any time and a place to review emergent ideas or tech frauds might be a useful thing. Also and ironically the thread was started in response to a suggestion from wintler2.


Iamwhomiam, the denier bit was facetious and a comment on a dead thread and subject that seems to carry little interest for RI folk.

If I opine that carbon tax credits seem like a less effective way to look at reality that is no invite to discuss them here.

You know, Sounder, there's no embarrassment in not knowing something.


There is much I do not know Iamwhomiam, uncertainty in fact seems to be the biggest driver of this world at the moment. My problem is with the believers that seem quite sure that they know exactly what is up, and they have models that tell them so.

If you don't know what a Carbon Tax Credit is or what a Carbon Tax is, just say so.


I will comment on the global warming thread on this.

But sometimes you seem to me to be two different people.


I am two different people, I am exceedingly nice, respectful and engaging in nearly every encounter I have in meat space, except for those very rare occasions where a robust response is called for due to some unwarranted provocation. Tis true however those parameters for interaction are quite different when using bits and bites devices rather than face to face contact where people are more likely to know about your general reputation in life.

I love smart people but that does not change the fact that they are the ones that set the meaning content within our structures of understanding, they are the ones that determined it was necessary to split reality into two distinct parts. But perhaps a value judgment should not be placed on the efforts of the smart people, by saying they fucked up the world, still the plain fact is that the less gifted are along for the ride whereas the smart folk are the ones that set up this object oriented system, and frankly in my opinion it was done consciously by people that recognized that a quantification oriented system is easier to monetize and corrupt. We think people were to stupid to do this way back when, but trust me, the science of energy harvesting has quite a long pedigree.

Peace to all
Sounder
 
Posts: 4054
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 8:49 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Hoaxes or Creativity Suppressed?

Postby wintler2 » Thu Feb 16, 2012 4:27 pm

Sounder wrote:http://www.technewsworld.com/story/Cold-Fusion-It-May-Not-Be-Madness-71916.html?wlc=1302201175

Cold fusion -- the largely discredited science of making more energy from less -- may be making a comeback.

Controversial yet high-profile demonstrations in Italy last month purported to show a cold fusion device turning 400 watts of heat power into 12,400 watts. The eye-popping 31-fold increase -- also known as an "excess heat effect" -- illustrates why lay observers say cold fusion is the "holy grail of energy independence" and why many scientists doubt, some to the point of apoplexy.
...


E-Cat 'Cold Fusion' Machine: Claims of Fraud Heating Up

If Italian inventor Andrea Rossi's cold fusion machine, called the E-Cat, really works, then the world's energy problems are all but solved. Rossi claims that a small amount of input energy drives a fusion reaction between hydrogen and nickel atoms inside his machine, producing an outpouring of surplus heat that can be used to generate electricity. And instead of the nasty radioactive byproducts given off by nuclear fission reactors — think Fukushima or Chernobyl — the E-Cat spits out just a teaspoon of copper.

In the past year, at least 15 reputable scientists have watched live demonstrations of Rossi's E-Cat (short for Energy Catalyzer) and have declared it to be a success. Government documents reveal that NASA scientists have discussed the E-Cat extensively in meetings, and in December, Rossi even visited a senator in Massachusetts to explore the possibility of opening an energy plant in the state. The E-Cat is fast becoming an international star. But most scientists couldn't raise their eyebrows any higher, and now, an Australian engineer has provided an alternative explanation for where all the E-Cat's excess heat is coming from, and how Rossi is possibly scamming the world.

Cold fusion — the term for stable atoms fusing together at room temperature — is ruled out by the laws of physics. Those laws say it takes a huge amount of energy to push atoms close enough together for them to fuse, and so nuclear fusion can happen only in scorching hot places like the sun. But two decades ago, a pair of scientists, puzzled by the results of an experiment, thought they were observing nuclear fusion at room temperature. Ever since, fringe scientists have been trying to harness the physics-defying effect they called cold fusion. They've kept at it despite the fact that the original experiment turned out to be flawed. [Cold Fusion Does the Impossible… or Does It?]

The E-Cat has gone further into mainstream acceptance than any attempted cold fusion machine before it. Though Rossi doesn't let anyone look under the E-Cat's hood, claiming the technology isn't patent-protected, he invites scientists and investors to staged demonstrations. After a demo last April, for example, a pair of Swedish physicists vouched for Rossi's work, reporting that the E-Cat produced too much excess heat to have been originating from a chemical process, and that "the only alternative explanation is that there is some kind of a nuclear process that gives rise to the measured energy production." According to their report, 400 watts was put into the machine, and this appeared to catalyze a mysterious reaction, and in the process, generate 12,400 watts of energy that slowly poured out of the machine over the next two hours.

And therein lies the alleged scam.

Missed connections

In December, Rossi approached Dick Smith, an Australian entrepreneur, and asked him to invest $200,000 in the development of the E-Cat. Intrigued but skeptical, Smith asked Ian Bryce, an aeronautics engineer and member of the group Australian Skeptics (a group of which Smith is a patron) to help him investigate.

The scientists note that the mis-wiring could be inadvertent. "If one of the wires in the three-core power lead" — a lead with active, neutral and ground/earth wires, all of which flow to a different prong of a three-pin plug — "was accidentally misconnected, the actual measurements of current witnessed by two Swedish scientists would not be the total power going into the reactor, and there would be an apparent power gain. One of the scientists who observed an earlier test has now agreed this could be so," Smith said. He noted that such a misconnection would be easy to make. For example, the earth lead could be touching the active wire, either within the plug, behind the wall outlet, or in the jumble of wires inside the E-Cat machine. Misconnections involving the earth and neutral wire are also possible. [DIY: How to Split Atoms In Your Kitchen]According to a report issued by the Australian Skeptics, Bryce found that in all six published tests of the E-Cat up to July — every test in which excess power production was directly measured — the setup was such that a misconnected earth lead (the wire that is usually grounded in an electric circuit) could have been funneling up to 3 kilowatts of power into the machine's steam generator long after the other wires were turned off. Because there were no power meters measuring the flow of energy in the earth lead, all this energy would seem to be surplus, and would appear as if it were being generated by reactions within the E-Cat itself.

When these arguments were put to Rossi, he responded that all wires had been monitored in previous tests. "The cables (all of them) have been checked with attention, and the absence of any cable except the ones of which the [current] have been measured has been carefully checked. This guy is insulting the professionality of all the scientists who made the tests," Rossi wrote in an email.

However, according to Steven Krivit, a journalist who covers cold fusion claims and editor-in-chief of the Nuclear Energy Encyclopedia (Wiley, 2011), this isn't the first time questions have been raised about the wiring of Rossi's machine. Mats Lewan, a Scandinavian technology writer who watched a successful E-Cat demo last year, "said afterwards that he failed to check all three wires, and he admitted the possibility [of faulty wiring]," Krivit said.

If an independent test were conducted of the E-Cat and the current in all the wires (including the earth lead) were measured, “There is little doubt that this will show that it was a misconnection of the wires that resulted in the seemingly unbelievable power gain which Mr. Rossi attributes to cold fusion," Smith said. "Hopefully this finding will prevent millions of dollars being wasted by Mr. Rossi."

Scam artist?

Other scientists who have also been following the E-Cat story closely agree that the Australian Skeptics' argument is highly plausible — except for the part about it being an innocent mistake.

"It all makes sense to me, except the word 'inadvertent,'" said Peter Thieberger, senior physicist at Brookhaven National Laboratory.

Thieberger explained that the E-Cat's circuit diagrams show that for the earth lead to be live (carrying energy), "not only would the plug need to be 'accidentally' mis-wired, but an equally unlikely 'mistake' would need to have occurred inside of the E-Cat."

He noted that we can't possibly know what Rossi is doing because he won't let outside experts examine his machine. "Once there is a suspicion of fraud, one can imagine several different ways of delivering power. For example, there could be other hidden wires somewhere else, or there could be power transmitted through induction with a coil hidden under the table, etc. That is the reason I believe that there is no substitute for an independent, professional test conducted at a neutral site. I, for one, would never give any professional opinions based on witnessing one of these Rossi shows, no matter how spectacular," he told Life's Little Mysteries.

When the possibility of faulty wiring were put to Rossi, he responded that all wireseen measured in previous tests. "The cables (all of them) have been checked with attention, and the absence of any cable except the ones of which the [current] have been measured has been carefully checked. This guy is insulting the professionality of all the scientists who made the tests," Rossi wrote in an email.

He added that the E-Cat will be on the market soon, and "the skeptics will be free to buy them and make all the tests they want."

Aside from the wiring, another reason for suspicion, Thieberger noted, is the fact that the E-Cat's copper byproduct, which Rossi claims is fused nickel and hydrogen, has been analyzed by Sven Kullander, a professor at Sweden's Uppsala University and the chairman of the Swedish Academy of Science’s Energy Committee, and the copper appears to be in its naturally-occurring form, like what you would find in a copper mine. If the sample were actually the product of fusion, it would be composed of a very different ratio of copper isotopes (varieties).

But how has Rossi convinced so many? "It's a very important question," Krivit said. Some scientists attribute it to wishful thinking on the part of Rossi's audience. But it seems the inventor may also be a talented scam artist. In the 1990s, he served prison time after claiming that a company he started, called PetrolDragon, could convert toxic waste to oil, but instead the 70,000 tons of waste accumulated by the company was left to rot on-site. Ten years later, Rossi was acquitted by the Italian government. And he's back to making miracles.
http://www.livescience.com/18415-ecat-c ... fraud.html
[/quote]

The 'faulty earth wiring' explanation will have to wait for Mr Rossi to allow someone to examine his apparatus, which he says you can do once you buy one. But for the copper fusion-byproduct to have the same isotope ratios as occur naturally seems highly improbable if not impossible.

That Rossi has form for promising but not delivering magical energy transformations in a completely different field (organic chem), and was jailed then 'acqitted by the Italian govt', is icing on cake. I'll wager that Rossi will either not sell any e-cats or if he does, none will produce more energy than they consume.
"Wintler2, you are a disgusting example of a human being, the worst kind in existence on God's Earth. This is not just my personal judgement.." BenD

Research question: are all god botherers authoritarians?
User avatar
wintler2
 
Posts: 2884
Joined: Sun Nov 12, 2006 3:43 am
Location: Inland SE Aus.
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Hoaxes or Creativity Suppressed?

Postby slimmouse » Thu Feb 16, 2012 4:56 pm

wintler2 wrote:I'll wager that Rossi will either not sell any e-cats or if he does, none will produce more energy than they consume.


His expected energy outcome in your opinion sounds suspiciously like the AGW debate.

Well, at least there's some order in the chaos there. Meanwhile, in a thousand holes in the ground around the world, the blood of our planet continues to be drained at pace.

Meanwhile Countless thousands of anectodotal claims of silent huge UFOs hovering around the world, emerging from the oceans etc(what is powering these things ?) , would seem to suggest to some that all of these cases ( rather like the exotic technology arguments ) are simply countless thousands of delusional humans, be they Airline Pilots, Naval admirals or law enforcement officers, down to a pile of kids in a school from Zimbabwe.

One cant help wondering what drew some of our current crowd to this board in the first place.

But of course, imagination wont feed our starving folks. Nanotechnology cant help solve the problem. Theres no way out and unless we all involove ourselves in an unwinnable debate ,were all fucking doomed.

Mission accomplished Wintler2 ?
Last edited by slimmouse on Thu Feb 16, 2012 5:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.
slimmouse
 
Posts: 6129
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 7:41 am
Location: Just outside of you.
Blog: View Blog (3)

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 166 guests