There are many better ways to prove this than the one actually used, the drone idea proposed here is a very good example. As is glaringly evident now, “il dottore” will never do a conclusive and exhaustive test. Isn’t it obvious why he does this kind of crappy, easily simulable tests? At what point the followers will admit they had been had?
This is a personal favorite, too, very straight forward math for energy input / output, no much place for shenanigans, that's why "il dottore" does not even considers such a beauty and elegant test.
I finally got around to tuning in with these two posts, and so don't know your (apparent) long history of learning to distrust Andrea Rossi, but here is how it sounds to someone like that: You just made a video coming up at length with how Rossi could have faked it, but without one word of evidence that he did. But the nuance in your voice and presentation here is "Rossi did it: he cheated! 'He's a Nuclear Liar' " (to quote Ryan McBeth, April 24 Substack--fat check that fat check!). It thus puts the onus on you, now, for those like myself just tuning in--pardon me--that is, and no longer on, the much more well-known, Rossi.
I am always positive towards claimants, that does not mean one should not ask obvious questions and do proper due diligence.
When I worked in the Pharmaceutical industry, they (back then in the 1990s) would spend at least 10 years doing proper trials to see if a drug was proven to work and they would share the raw data from their studies with stakeholders and list the determined adverse effects openly (by law) and a proper risk/benefit was assessed so that the public, the customers, could make an informed decision. Now not so much it would appear.
When I worked in the advertising industry, they would research deeply the effectiveness of their campaigns, logos and strap-lines, providing their clients with metrics that were verifiable over and above any change in sales.
In the banking industry, when making an investment or acquisition, intense work was done to assess the real prospect of a financial move. When it came to half yearly reports or investor meetings, months were spent on predicting the questions a stakeholder might ask and a full and detailed response with justified facts was prepared in a thick book so that the leadership of the bank could address any and all concerns immediately.
The image of the power output looks like the output from large numbers of EVOs / Charge Clusters blowing up, this should work IMHO, Correa and others have seen such effects. If a claimant had based such a system on disclosed Shoulders or similar patents, they may not want to the public know that, whilst working, the IP is not defendable, in which case, the claimant might want to ask for a big payday before delivering a single unit.
This for me is a logical approach and fits the available data.
I would celebrate Rossi delivering a working product, regardless of if it is protected IP.
Well, I was going to edit my comment, it being a bit too harsh for these being my first two fully viewed/read episodes of your Substack. A bit old-corporation paradigm, but good answer as to explaining your P.O.V.
As for me, I don't think he's faking the technology, as after all this time since the original Fleischmann-Pons experiment, why would he need to. He, and all the rest in the field, seem to be, rather, faking not being able to do a better golf-cart test (see, I am influenced by you as to the golf cart test being done badly)--paid off or threatened in various ways to never actually reach the end goal.
The project for which I have dedicated over 12 years of my prime life to as a volunteer was never meant to produce a working device, it was primarily set up to test the claims of others, see how it could work and then promote take up. You can see the original goals, which have not changed, here:
Oh, sorry, I hadn't realized, or forgot, you were so famous--involved in the Fleischmann Memorial Project. Besides these four, what do you think about the ones in Japan? (E.g.: Clean Planet Inc., Professor Mizuno, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Toyota's Aishin-owned Technova.) Or before I ask anymore questions, I should look at the webpage and read/watch more of your Substack, to be fair.
Rossi merely can run a much longer test. This would cost little if done on remote roads. This can go far, pun intended, to reduce negative criticism, and bolster positive reaction.
Bob - Why did you mute me on your YT live after this comment?
Your thought on the 9/11 "captain thermite" Steven E. Jones and his "science by vote" on LENR in 1989?
And why did you delete my previous comment on this "article"?
Did you forget about this?
Bob Greenyer - Iron Rich Microspheres due to intense magnetic vortexes and there is NO thermite, no little neutron bomb or jet fuel required.
Bob Greenyer from the Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project joins the show to discuss his ground-breaking work on exotic vacuum objects (EVOs), Low Energy Nuclear Reactions (LENR or "Cold Fusion), and the Hutchison Effect.
Bob - I cannot share screenshots here - I tried 3 separate YT accounts to answer another person with my answer pertaining to your work on 9/11 and the disinfo agent Steven E. Jones and all 3 were blocked..... I did not share any links....
But here is a nice article, you might find interesting....
9/11 Truth Suppression Timeline
"The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves." - Vladimir Lenin
You have to be aware that posting any link in comments in youtube gets the comment deleted automatically by Youtube itself. Anyway, you are preaching to the choir here, Bob has talked extensively about this topic and the role of S. Jones in the Cold Fusion suppression and also in the 9/11 cover up.
I did not post any links - I'm well aware of YT deleting links...
What happened is that once I made this statement: "Your thought on the 9/11 "captain thermite" Steven E. Jones and his "science by vote" on LENR in 1989?"
Then all of a sudden my ability to comment was switched off during the live feed...
Youtube algorithm has a lot of trigger words that cause this kind of response to avoid what they call "trolls". Not saying you are one, just that you got singled out as one by the algo.
This newest episode reminds me that your requirements of Rossi and helpful suggestions remain the same as from when my focus on the MFMP started some 6-7 years ago. What was clear then and obvious now, is while AR's pathway remains the same, your bounding across this landscape has not only brought your personal and very deep insights, but that you made them open to all, fully backed up by experiment and documentation. You continue to gain by a balanced approach, even while helping so many others. That's Wisdom, imho. Now Rossi needs to catch up. Does he even know what Chi is? Best wishes.
There are many better ways to prove this than the one actually used, the drone idea proposed here is a very good example. As is glaringly evident now, “il dottore” will never do a conclusive and exhaustive test. Isn’t it obvious why he does this kind of crappy, easily simulable tests? At what point the followers will admit they had been had?
my personal favourite and VERY Cheap, is raising a volume of water up an known height.
For his current configuration, all that would be needed is a 3kW immersion pump, and piping with a flow meter at the raised height, say 30m.
Let the water run down to the bottom reservoir under gravity into a fountain maybe for something dynamic.
A whole setup could be done for $2000. Totally safe and autonomous demonstration.
https://www.submersible-waterpumps.com/sale-12092402-30m-13m-head-submersible-sewage-water-pump-industrial-sewage-pumps-3kw.html
https://www.aliexpress.com/item/1005007317002902.html
This is a personal favorite, too, very straight forward math for energy input / output, no much place for shenanigans, that's why "il dottore" does not even considers such a beauty and elegant test.
I added it as an update and cross posted.
This could be so easy, so safe and so conclusive, no need for renting anything.
I finally got around to tuning in with these two posts, and so don't know your (apparent) long history of learning to distrust Andrea Rossi, but here is how it sounds to someone like that: You just made a video coming up at length with how Rossi could have faked it, but without one word of evidence that he did. But the nuance in your voice and presentation here is "Rossi did it: he cheated! 'He's a Nuclear Liar' " (to quote Ryan McBeth, April 24 Substack--fat check that fat check!). It thus puts the onus on you, now, for those like myself just tuning in--pardon me--that is, and no longer on, the much more well-known, Rossi.
I am always positive towards claimants, that does not mean one should not ask obvious questions and do proper due diligence.
When I worked in the Pharmaceutical industry, they (back then in the 1990s) would spend at least 10 years doing proper trials to see if a drug was proven to work and they would share the raw data from their studies with stakeholders and list the determined adverse effects openly (by law) and a proper risk/benefit was assessed so that the public, the customers, could make an informed decision. Now not so much it would appear.
When I worked in the advertising industry, they would research deeply the effectiveness of their campaigns, logos and strap-lines, providing their clients with metrics that were verifiable over and above any change in sales.
In the banking industry, when making an investment or acquisition, intense work was done to assess the real prospect of a financial move. When it came to half yearly reports or investor meetings, months were spent on predicting the questions a stakeholder might ask and a full and detailed response with justified facts was prepared in a thick book so that the leadership of the bank could address any and all concerns immediately.
The image of the power output looks like the output from large numbers of EVOs / Charge Clusters blowing up, this should work IMHO, Correa and others have seen such effects. If a claimant had based such a system on disclosed Shoulders or similar patents, they may not want to the public know that, whilst working, the IP is not defendable, in which case, the claimant might want to ask for a big payday before delivering a single unit.
This for me is a logical approach and fits the available data.
I would celebrate Rossi delivering a working product, regardless of if it is protected IP.
Well, I was going to edit my comment, it being a bit too harsh for these being my first two fully viewed/read episodes of your Substack. A bit old-corporation paradigm, but good answer as to explaining your P.O.V.
As for me, I don't think he's faking the technology, as after all this time since the original Fleischmann-Pons experiment, why would he need to. He, and all the rest in the field, seem to be, rather, faking not being able to do a better golf-cart test (see, I am influenced by you as to the golf cart test being done badly)--paid off or threatened in various ways to never actually reach the end goal.
The project for which I have dedicated over 12 years of my prime life to as a volunteer was never meant to produce a working device, it was primarily set up to test the claims of others, see how it could work and then promote take up. You can see the original goals, which have not changed, here:
http://www.quantumheat.org/index.php/en/home/replicate-2
We are on step 3.
Oh, sorry, I hadn't realized, or forgot, you were so famous--involved in the Fleischmann Memorial Project. Besides these four, what do you think about the ones in Japan? (E.g.: Clean Planet Inc., Professor Mizuno, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Toyota's Aishin-owned Technova.) Or before I ask anymore questions, I should look at the webpage and read/watch more of your Substack, to be fair.
Clean Planet Inc.
Rossi merely can run a much longer test. This would cost little if done on remote roads. This can go far, pun intended, to reduce negative criticism, and bolster positive reaction.
Yes - longer test needed.
Bob - Why did you mute me on your YT live after this comment?
Your thought on the 9/11 "captain thermite" Steven E. Jones and his "science by vote" on LENR in 1989?
And why did you delete my previous comment on this "article"?
Did you forget about this?
Bob Greenyer - Iron Rich Microspheres due to intense magnetic vortexes and there is NO thermite, no little neutron bomb or jet fuel required.
Bob Greenyer from the Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project joins the show to discuss his ground-breaking work on exotic vacuum objects (EVOs), Low Energy Nuclear Reactions (LENR or "Cold Fusion), and the Hutchison Effect.
Video: https://rumble.com/v53eodh-bob-greenyer-911-no-thermite-no-little-neutron-bomb-or-jet-fuel-required..html
I did not mute anyone - however, YT does not allow links.
Bob - I cannot share screenshots here - I tried 3 separate YT accounts to answer another person with my answer pertaining to your work on 9/11 and the disinfo agent Steven E. Jones and all 3 were blocked..... I did not share any links....
But here is a nice article, you might find interesting....
9/11 Truth Suppression Timeline
"The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves." - Vladimir Lenin
Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/911-truth-suppression-timeline
Thanks
You have to be aware that posting any link in comments in youtube gets the comment deleted automatically by Youtube itself. Anyway, you are preaching to the choir here, Bob has talked extensively about this topic and the role of S. Jones in the Cold Fusion suppression and also in the 9/11 cover up.
I did not post any links - I'm well aware of YT deleting links...
What happened is that once I made this statement: "Your thought on the 9/11 "captain thermite" Steven E. Jones and his "science by vote" on LENR in 1989?"
Then all of a sudden my ability to comment was switched off during the live feed...
Youtube algorithm has a lot of trigger words that cause this kind of response to avoid what they call "trolls". Not saying you are one, just that you got singled out as one by the algo.
Maybe the trigger term is "science by vote".
When safety event happened one year back, Dottore wrote it was not fire, not explosion.
A few weeks back this year Dottore wrote that mobile app needs countermass.
So 80 kg steel coffin purpose is just this needed countermass.
Need a better explanation than that.
This newest episode reminds me that your requirements of Rossi and helpful suggestions remain the same as from when my focus on the MFMP started some 6-7 years ago. What was clear then and obvious now, is while AR's pathway remains the same, your bounding across this landscape has not only brought your personal and very deep insights, but that you made them open to all, fully backed up by experiment and documentation. You continue to gain by a balanced approach, even while helping so many others. That's Wisdom, imho. Now Rossi needs to catch up. Does he even know what Chi is? Best wishes.