ECAT (Low Energy Nuclear Reactions) Test Report 2014 “Supports” Rossi Effect
1–10 of 18 posts
Re: ECAT (Low Energy Nuclear Reactions) Test Report 2014 “Supports” Rossi Effect
#2http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_Catalyzer
Somebody with the power should downvote this. Maybe it's worth talking 20 years ago, but after so many years of dubious results there should be a much high threshold for it to be worth noting.
Re: ECAT (Low Energy Nuclear Reactions) Test Report 2014 “Supports” Rossi Effect
#3http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_Catalyzer Somebody with the power should downvote this. Maybe it's worth talking 20 years ago, but after so many years of dubious results there should be a much high threshold for it to be worth noting.
Somebody with power should burn this chap at the state for witchcraft, because his views contradict church orthodoxy.
Yes, it might all be utter bullshit, but it may also not be. If you refuse to accept or even explore anything which contravenes your worldview - your world will never change.
Re: ECAT (Low Energy Nuclear Reactions) Test Report 2014 “Supports” Rossi Effect
#4If this were a real discovery, why wouldn't it be published in a peer reviewed journal of some kind?
Pretty pre-eminent organizations with their names on this though - Hanno Essén, (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanno_Ess%C3%A9n) Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden, which, according to Wikipedia, "KTH is one of the leading technical universities in Europe [and highly respected worldwide, especially in the domains of technology and natural sciences."
Re: ECAT (Low Energy Nuclear Reactions) Test Report 2014 “Supports” Rossi Effect
#5Is it possible that they measured the output incorrectly? Input was measured differently than output which was just radiation.
---
I took a look at the paper. Authors are the same people as the paper from the last year. ;)
Don't waste your time on this.
Re: ECAT (Low Energy Nuclear Reactions) Test Report 2014 “Supports” Rossi Effect
#6http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_Catalyzer Somebody with the power should downvote this. Maybe it's worth talking 20 years ago, but after so many years of dubious results there should be a much high threshold for it to be worth noting.
Somebody with power should burn this chap at the state for witchcraft, because his views contradict church orthodoxy. Yes, it might all be utter bullshit, but it may also not be. If you refuse to accept or even explore anything which contravenes your worldview - your world will never change.
It's not about contradicting my world view, or even the mainstream view. It's because this is one of the latest tricks played by a long time con artist and it's not good to be drawn to it time and time again. Given the track record I think the bar should be much higher for this.
Also, I don't know how you linked downvoting to witch hunting. I thought downvoting is a vital part of how HN works, I would downvote it myself if i can do it. Is it something that you can do but can never recommend others to do?
Re: ECAT (Low Energy Nuclear Reactions) Test Report 2014 “Supports” Rossi Effect
#7This paper is the third? which has supported the project and this paper takes special care to try to remove all doubt by having the experiment out in the open and monitored by different methods almost continuously. There are some pretty famous places putting their name against this 'thing'.
The ECAT is about as fringe as I'm willing to accept might actually be worth our investment. I'm reading the report and I can assume they'll try to get it published in a more mainstream physics journal soon for others to review.
Scientific progress is made of baby steps and I've been watching the ECAT crawl for the last few years. Let's see if this thing has legs.
Re: ECAT (Low Energy Nuclear Reactions) Test Report 2014 “Supports” Rossi Effect
#8http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_Catalyzer Somebody with the power should downvote this. Maybe it's worth talking 20 years ago, but after so many years of dubious results there should be a much high threshold for it to be worth noting.
Somebody with power should burn this chap at the state for witchcraft, because his views contradict church orthodoxy. Yes, it might all be utter bullshit, but it may also not be. If you refuse to accept or even explore anything which contravenes your worldview - your world will never change.
Reading that Wikipedia page, or the one about the guy who invented this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrea_Rossi_(entrepreneur)) seems like a great way to "explore" this issue.
Re: ECAT (Low Energy Nuclear Reactions) Test Report 2014 “Supports” Rossi Effect
#9Trying to read up on "Rossi Effect" I found an interesting article from a year back [0]. Simply looking at the economics in question, a working cold fusion device would be net-positive money maker. Quote from the article:
I am convinced that the E-cat simply doesn’t do what we’re told it does. Because if it did then Rossi would need no outside money as he’d already be making good money, and expanding fast, simply by selling this cheap power to people through the grid. But he’s not doing that therefore the product doesn’t work as advertised.
[0]: http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2013/11/29/why-im-ce...
Re: ECAT (Low Energy Nuclear Reactions) Test Report 2014 “Supports” Rossi Effect
#10This paper is the third? which has supported the project and this paper takes special care to try to remove all doubt by having the experiment out in the open and monitored by different methods almost continuously. There are some pretty famous places putting their name against this 'thing'. The ECAT is about as fringe as I'm willing to accept might actually be worth our investment. I'm reading the report and I can as…
I've been following it, too.
Changing goal posts, changing terminology, an inventor with a shady past, loudly seeking funding, disallowing most peer-review, invite only 'demonstrations', no technical side to the patent.
The only thing that has changed, for me at least, is that the discussion about Rossi being full of shit has moved from phys.org to news.ycombinator.com .