eCatNews Direct to your MailBox

Enter your email address to follow the ecat story ahead of the crowd

I loathe spam. You can unsubscribe at any time. I will not pass your details to a third party

The Smith LENR Prize

February 25, 2012

It is well known within LENR circles that Australian Entrepreneur, Dick Smith, is scathing of Andrea Rossi’s eCat claims. After Rossi refused his offer of a $1m (US) challenge, he extended that offer to Greek company Defkalion GT who are making similar claims. Mr Smith’s offer was an attempt to expose the fraud he is certain these people are perpetrating.

After 30 years looking at one incredible claim after another in the hope that they were real, all he found were scams and delusions robbing incautious investors of their money. His concern is for the so-called Mom & Pop investors who can ill afford the loss and the lives that are ruined by these ruthless fraudsters. An active member of The Australian Skeptics’ Society, he has a keen eye for the behaviour pattern these money siphons exhibit and recognises these patterns in Rossi and Defkalion.

While eCatNews does not share his certainty, there is no doubt that his concern is sincere and that his case is built on a solid foundation of experience. Until either player proves their case, we must all be open to the possibility that the eCat is a money-sucking mirage. [To see the arguments either side read this post].

Convinced he is dealing with a criminal element, the deal was tied to all communications being open and he withdrew the offer when Defkalion insisted that he sign an NDA. Since the Greek company is now purported to be on the verge of proving their system to independent bodies, they may be interested to learn that the $1m offer has now been extended to anyone who can demonstrate a 1kW LENR device to a credible institution or group within the next 12 months. An informal challenge similar to an X-Prize, this means that if even one of the seven groups of Hyperion testers is credible and supports Defkalion’s claims as proven, they can simply step forward and stick their hand out.

After talking with DS about his views on this subject I know he will be delighted to hand over the money. The implications for the world are extensive and that is worth losing a bet over.

I fully understand where Dick is coming from. We differ in our interpretation of probabilities even though he may end up being correct. That is the nature of uncertainty. The eCat and Hyperion are conducting themselves in the market and unless Defkalion follows through on their promises, this thing will fall to pieces and I will join the hard sceptics in their condemnation.

The importance of this technology extends well beyond these two players, however. As a species, we are entering dangerous times. The availability of cheap, abundant, compact and clean energy is one factor in the mix that would help to save us from ourselves. It is early dawn in the CF world but proof is slowly emerging from a number of fronts and it is not beyond possible for a lone researcher or a well-financed group to make a breakthrough. The leap from mW to kW is not as improbable as the impossible advances that have already been made.

While the LENR prize is offered as a well-meaning negative bet, it has the potential to be more. That is up to the research community. Any group that can demonstrate a 1kW LENR device might view $1m as buttons but winning it will surely arm them for the fight and attract an avalanche of offers on the back of it.

The comment sparking The Smith LENR Prize is here.

I have been asked on this site to use the $1 million for something really useful.

I would be interested in extending the $1 m offer to any person who can come up with a practical device that has an output of at least 1KW  through LENRs

No. I would not be interested in being involved in any testing however I would accept a statement from any respected leading authority in this field.  I am sure with suggestions from people on this site we could come up with a list.

The offer would remain open for 12 months and would be genuine.  I have been able to assist charities, including science based institutions in the past with donations of over $20 m including single donations of up to $4m and I consider myself fortunate to be able to do this .

I will say this now- I believe there is almost no chance that the money will be paid out even though I will be delighted if it is.

Look forward to some sensible discussion on this .  Remember I am not prepared to spend any time being involved in testing or research. That’s because I reckon in ten years I would find that I had wasted much time without effective results

Daniel. Yes I know about NASA  and LENRs

They of course would be an acceptable institution to say that the  1 KW device worked as claimed.

The sole reason I mentioned that I had fulfilled my obligations by giving a dollar away was to minimize the rubbish posts claiming I have no intention of coming up with the money if the unit works.

I believe my offer will show that no 1 K W device exists .

I now ask Dick to formalise this so that small groups and large have a solid goal to work towards. The simplicity of the challenge is welcome but some more guidance is needed on what is deemed an ‘acceptable institution’ and the announcement should be posted on your own site as well as eCatNews.

The incredible achievements of the LENR research community will someday be recognised for the heroic effort it is. A number of cracks are appearing in the misunderstandings that surrounds you. This is a chance to turn a negative into a positive – something to shatter the craziest of them all: that Low Energy Nuclear Reactions – cold fusion – is just too good to be true.

Posted by on February 25, 2012. Filed under Drama,Media & Blogs. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

389 Responses to The Smith LENR Prize

  1. Stephen T.

    February 25, 2012 at 7:57 pm

    • RonB

      February 25, 2012 at 8:55 pm

      Could you give a brief summary of what they’re saying (since I only speak French, Japanese, Korean, a bit of Chinese, ASL and on occasion English.)

      • Methusela

        February 25, 2012 at 9:27 pm

        Check out the vortex link above.

  2. Jami

    February 25, 2012 at 8:34 pm

    Looks like Defkalion has plenty of time to write long winded BS.

    Pekka has put it more politely in his reply than I would have. A post containing stuff like this???

    “There is a strong possibility of a forthcoming “LENR theories war” between the members of the existing small community of LENR/CF researchers (possible conflicts closely related with government funding to be released in the area). Such “war” could turn out to be a new “War of Religion”, similar to the 1562- 1598 war between the catholics (the strong force fans in this case) and the protestants (the weak force fans), where all involved parties will claim their “one faith” slogan against all the others.”

    Cope ooon, DGT. Too much Uzo on a hard day’s night or what?

  3. NH

    February 25, 2012 at 8:57 pm

    There appears to be a fairly large energy resource on the Defkalion site, I see steam in outbursts at erratic intervals. Certainly more than unity! ;0)

    • CuriousChris

      February 25, 2012 at 11:06 pm

      You appear to be making this up. can you provide a link to what you claim?

      As far as I am aware defkalion have gone to ground. there is noting on their forums except a few people finally waking up to the scam

    • NH

      February 26, 2012 at 5:20 pm

      My attempt at humor while reading the strife and whining on the Defkalion blog. Sure are some very terse people over there….almost a “David Koresh style” kind of frenzy.

      • Iggy Dalrymple

        February 27, 2012 at 3:49 am

        Call in Janet Reno’s flame-throwing tank. That’ll teach those idiotic believers.

      • CuriousChris

        February 27, 2012 at 5:50 am

        lol you got me

  4. psi

    February 25, 2012 at 9:08 pm

    I hate to say this, but the Defkalion website seems to be down.

    • John Milstone

      February 25, 2012 at 9:16 pm

      Works for me.

      • psi

        February 25, 2012 at 9:19 pm

        Ok, good. Thanks for the check, John. Maybe just a weak signal on my end. I’ve tried a few times over the last five minutes and can barely bring up the google cache. So I’m glad to hear there’s no cause for concern.

        • Peter Roe

          February 25, 2012 at 10:44 pm

          There seem to be occasional DNS issues with the DGT site. Sometimes in this case, omitting ‘www.’ from the address resolves the problem, or adding it if the non-www version fails to load.

  5. Dale G. Basgall

    February 25, 2012 at 9:17 pm

    netconfusion just like when all our bank account information goes to the next glitch account.

  6. Defender

    February 25, 2012 at 9:42 pm

    While i dind’t find the previous offer from Mr. Smith useful or constructive, i can only applaude to this one.

    Btw, Mr. Rossi wrote today, next year, or (once again) even 18 months from now…
    This is getting a bad taste (again).

  7. Roger Nelson

    February 25, 2012 at 9:48 pm

    As I said in a previous post, I am building a Ni-H2 system from type 316 stainless steel high pressure components. It has a special water flow calorimetry system that avoids phase change, despite cell temperatures that may reach hundreds of degrees C. I am as qualified to do this work as anyone else in the field. No brag, just fact.

    Here is my proposal to Dick Smith: if I am successful, and you increase your “X-prize” to $3000000, I will give the whole thing away to the world by relinquishing all my rights and posting every detail on the Internet!

    The money would be put in an escrow account and not paid out until the device was unequivocally proved to work. What do you say?

    • dpmartin

      March 2, 2012 at 11:41 pm

      I have been gathering information on the eCat and am thinking seriously that the fastest way to get one is to make one from scratch. Why not Crowdsource this device?

  8. Dick Smith

    February 25, 2012 at 10:03 pm

    You state. “I’m still suspicious of Dick’s motivation”

    Could that be because you want to believe that the Rossi and Defkalion claims are true and you can’t see why I would want to give my hard earned money away when it’s so obvious.

    My motivation is simple. It’s the same motivation for all my giving.
    It’s about self satisfaction. In this case I want to have the satisfaction of exposing whether the 1KW  claims from LENRs are true or not.
    You would agree there is some doubt.
    If in 12 months time no reputable organization has announced that a 1KW device exists many more people will have similar doubts to mine and hopefully not be tempted to invest.

    If there is an announcement that a 1kw has been tested and proven that will be fantastic – there will be no doubts from all reasonable people in the scientific community-the opposite to the present situation.

    • Methusela

      February 25, 2012 at 10:10 pm

      I think you’ve got a lot of ‘making up’ to do because of your most recent antics.

      People find you hard to trust because of the way you handled the Defkalion issue.

    • Lu

      February 25, 2012 at 10:32 pm

      I would take this offer more seriously if

      a) You placed the funds into a escrow account. It can be interest bearing etc.

      b) You designated a respected member or members of the scientific, business, or academic community to have sole power of attorney for these funds and award and to be the sole arbiter of the decision as to whether a 1kW level LENR device has been demonstrated for purposes of this challenge.

      c) You increase the time from 12 months to 18 months.

      The reasons for these stipulations are:

      a) Shows me that you are serious and have the money.

      b) Removes the obvious bias you have in making the decision. Of course it is your money but if you want this offer to have credibility then I feel this is necessary. The people you pick will ultimately determine the credibility of your offer so you would need to choose carefully.

      c) It gives Rossi absolutely no excuses with his E-Cat. This stipulation is not as important as the other two and would not be required to make this a strong offer as 1 year is a good amount of time but 18 months would be better. The clock could start say January 1, 2012.

      This is just a suggestion but I would take your offer much more seriously if you did this.

      • Lu

        February 26, 2012 at 12:25 am

        Aussie Humor?

        From Wikipedia on Nikola Telsa:

        In 1885 Tesla claimed he could redesign Edison’s inefficient motor and generators, making an improvement in both service and economy. According to Tesla, Edison remarked “There’s fifty thousand dollars in it for you – if you can do it”. This has been noted as an odd statement from an Edison whose company was stingy with pay and did not have that sort of cash on hand. After months of work when Tesla finished the task and inquired about payment Edison claimed he was only joking replying, “Tesla, you don’t understand our American humor”

      • John Milstone

        February 26, 2012 at 10:53 am

        c) It gives Rossi absolutely no excuses with his E-Cat.

        I don’t understand this one. Rossi claimed to have (and appeared to demonstrate) a 10KW device several times last year.

        Why would he need any time at all, let along 18 months, to meet Smith’s requirement of only 1KW?

        • Lu

          February 26, 2012 at 5:04 pm

          Because Rossi’s not going to do it as he’s stated. We have to wait till the E-Cat is generally available (12-18 months from now), buy one, and demonstrate it. Or someone who bought a 1MW E-Cat will have to come forward and announce that it works for them. That would be a nice way to recoup most of their costs…

    • Ben

      February 25, 2012 at 10:39 pm

      “My motivation is simple. It’s the same motivation for all my giving. It’s about self-satisfaction.”
      What of the need of others and empathy Mr. Smith?
      Giving done PRIMARILY for one’s own self-satisfaction is selfish by definition. It is actually contrary to the spirit of giving!

      I have long suspected your involvement in this was for your self-aggrandizement. You really have done nothing to dispel that notion. Your latest comments only reinforce it. What little goodwill you may have created by your offer of 1M “X-Prize” is already ebbing away.

      • quax

        February 25, 2012 at 10:43 pm

        Maybe he is just refreshingly honest 🙂

      • Methusela

        February 25, 2012 at 11:41 pm

        Indeed, most people give because it makes them feel good about themselves.

        I had a quick google search of: giving self satisfaction, as I remember there was a scientifc study of it recently.

        But that didn’t quite return what I wanted.

        This is what I was after:

        However, announcing it to the world for self-aggrandisement is different to self-satisfaction.

        • Ben

          February 26, 2012 at 12:06 am

          Indeed, many wealthy give away vast sums of their wealth, especially later in life. Some see it as generosity, while others see it as a form of penance. Nonetheless, when giving is done primarily for the benefit of the giver, it is by definition selfish.

          Okay, I’ll stop being preachy now. I believe I have made my point.

      • Josh

        February 26, 2012 at 8:00 am

        Giving without self satisfaction generally means “giving” while being forced to.
        In other words, it means violence and slavery.

    • psi

      February 26, 2012 at 2:07 am

      I hate to break the news to you, Sir, but you are the only person who has used the word “suspicion” in any context on this page. When you learn how to quote me correctly, I’ll consider having a conversation with you. That’s pretty elementary, chap.

  9. Dick Smith

    February 25, 2012 at 10:54 pm

    Your proposed testing protocols seem pretty tough to me.
    In fact I do not need to be involved in approving the testing method as I have complete trust in the major world science institutions.

    They can sign a dozen NDAs are far as I am concerned. I will pay out on their public announcement .I do not require them to reveal any commercial secrets !

    And there is no need to apply.  If any of the approved organizations -( list to come after more suggestions) makes an announcement within the 12 month time period I will offer the $1 million . If they ( or the inventor) refuse to accept I will pay the money to The Salvation Army in Australia or another deserving charity that helps families in stress.

    If no approved organization makes the announcement no money will be paid out.
    The announcement required could be similar to the following

    ” the ##### organization today announces that following required testing that it is accepted that useful and practical power is available from LENRs from a unit designed by xxxxxx and producing a minimum of 1KW through LENRs . It is accepted that this major announcement will change the worlds energy problems as we know them today. Our organization is proud to have been involved in gaining the acceptable scientific proof that LENRs are not only proven to provide useful power in the KW levels but also can provide the useable energy at substantially lower cost.
                               Signed.   Zzzzzzzzz. Chief scientist.”

    And before some start abusing me about the wording giving me some kind of “out”  I point out again that this is just my first suggestion.

    • Methusela

      February 25, 2012 at 11:43 pm

      Could you please put this onto an official dsi website, when you’re happy with the wording?

    • Tom Baccei

      February 26, 2012 at 7:26 pm

      Works for me. I just had hoped to finally get rid of the endless ambiguity regarding LENR. “He said, She said…” tests with flaws skeptics pounce on. I would TOTALLY want you to avoid being taken by any sort of scam regarding the milestone you have set. And please believe me when I say that this prize and your willingness to evolve as you have learned is very impressive. I happen to think that LENR phenomenon is real and offers a vast hope for humanity while at the same time threatens established hierarchies of wealth and power. Thus getting it accepted as real and trying to NOT let a welter of directed skepticism ravage its chances. I frankly think the entire LENR fan club would be best of completely ignoring Rossi and DGT, if they have the goods time will tell, but in the meantime it sucks to be dancing like a skeleton on a string over their every questionable claims. This prize offers perhaps the best way to get past the smoke and mirrors stage, and if no one comes forth with a claim on it, then I think you have proved the major portion of your doubts.

      Good luck with all this, and I will stand by to help you in any way I can to insure a genuine and credible evolution of the LENR SMITH PRIZE!
      Tom Baccei

  10. Tom Baccei

    February 25, 2012 at 11:06 pm

    This site has become infested with a mob of pathoskep harpies. They take over every page with their endless, insulting, cock sure assaults on Rossi, DGT, LENR in general and other posters. I KNOW that they do not believe in the reality of current LENR hopes. Power to them, but, admin, I am so tired of reading their endless jabs, whines and inanities couched as serious debate. NO ONE CAN PROVE THE MERITS OF LENR, and NO ONE CAN PROVE IT IS A SCAM. If they were genuine skeptics, that would be the tone, but nooo.. I suppose having a wide readership helps revenues, but this assault is sooo boring, useless and offensive. Just get them to shut up, if they can’t add anything constructive. Snarky, mocking, idiotic, infantile ……

    • Peter Roe

      February 26, 2012 at 2:37 pm

      Not so much a mob as milstone mary making up in quantity what he lacks in quality. This particularly tedious ‘pathoskep’ brings an entirely new meaning to the concept of ‘multiple redundancy’.

  11. Dick Smith

    February 25, 2012 at 11:19 pm

    Ben. Pretty nasty stuff you say. You imply that you are different to me. That I should not admit to giving for the satisfaction I gain. ie. It makes me feel good for doing the right thing.

    People like you obviously give money away for other reasons , it’s not for the satisfaction you may receive for doing the right thing. So what is the reason you give? Love to know.

    Also what can my motivation have to do with the the issue at hand- has anyone yet designed a unit that can generate very substantial amounts of power through LENRs

    It’s almost as if you are angry that I doubt what so many on this site believe.

    And I will say again. The chance of me paying out in the next 12 months is close to zero. That’s why I will not waste my time in being involved in developing test protocols or taking part in the tests.
    But I will be delighted to pay for such an important annoucement if it is made. The satisfaction in being involved in such an important discovery would be well worth the cost.

    • CuriousChris

      February 25, 2012 at 11:26 pm

      you said that you want to let the testers decide on whether its LENR rather than setting an arbitrary COP.

      But then you set an arbitrary power output. Why not be consistent?

      If I can be so bold as to make a further suggestion. How about you say you will pay out to the person or team that produces the highest power output over a 24 hour period.

      The competition can run for 12 months. this way it will be a fight to the top.

      You may just turn up something amazing

      P.S. Forget Ben he is an untrustworthy character from my experience. Makes unverifiable claims and censors those who ask plain questions.

      • Al Potenza

        February 26, 2012 at 2:06 am

        “If I can be so bold as to make a further suggestion. How about you say you will pay out to the person or team that produces the highest power output over a 24 hour period.”

        The problem with that is that the apparent power could come from something other than LENR or from a measurement error. Sticking to a 1 kW power level and requiring a long run time would prevent both of those problems.

        • CuriousChris

          February 26, 2012 at 3:24 am

          Of course it would need to be verified. Dick Smith has already stated he does not like long test times. in fact 24 hours may be much too long for him.

          But I agree, for me proper flow calorimetry and a test that exhaust the possibility of it being chemical in nature. depending on the size and output of the device that may be just 30 minutes.

    • Ben

      February 26, 2012 at 12:39 am

      Nasty is going around the Internet and proclaiming something most definitely a fraud on evidence so thin as to be nonexistent. If you had said, “based on my experience I find these claims to be highly questionable and don’t invest a dime until you have more proof” I would have found that very reasonable. You have go far beyond that and entered not only nasty-land but perhaps libel-land as well.

      Keep talking Dick. Every time you open your proverbial mouth your credibility slips just a little further. But you don’t care, you’re just here for the attention anyway. Touche’.

    • Quax

      February 26, 2012 at 1:13 am

      The chance of me paying out in the next 12 months is close to zero.

      For 1KW device that is probably true unless Defkalion/Rossi surprise on the upside.

      All the LENR devices from published and public sources are single wattage at best.

      That’s why comparing this to the X-price is a bit misleading. Not that I want to belittle the offer. Putting any money on the line is obviously generous.

      If we discount ecat/Defkalion for a second an X-price like competition should probably be a bit more gradual.

      As I mentioned earlier in the thread. If I had a million dollar on hand I’d split it up in

      (A) $200,000 for an over-unity device in the single wattage category.
      (B) $300,000 for single wattage self-sustained over 6 hours.
      (C) $500,000 for the real McCoy i.e. a 1KW device.

      Just my two cents … (obviously a poor substitute for a million dollars).

      • Al Potenza

        February 26, 2012 at 2:35 am

        It’s possible to do a watt seemingly from nowhere and sustain it without having LENR. On the other hand, a kilowatt is a good level to pick because no known mechanism except LENR can sustain such a power output from a small device for any length of time.

        So, in my opinion, a kilowatt is a good choice for a test. The terms of the test should include an appropriate and very adequate duration, a useful form for the output power (steam is fine, hot liquid easier to measure), and inspection of all but the smallest possible core of the device for any evidence of error or faking.

        • Al Potenza

          February 26, 2012 at 2:36 am

          PS: (sorry, no editing function!) Also, a kilowatt is at least 10x less than claimed by Rossi and Defkalion in their almost ready for market products.

          • Quax

            February 26, 2012 at 4:21 am

            In large parts my motivation for such an X-price is as a life-support, fall-back for the LENR field if Defkalion/Rossi won’t deliver.

            I am quite certain there is real LENR effect but Rossi et. al. may nervetheless be fraudulent. If the latter is the case the LENR field again would be hurt immensely. In that case having a plan B to keep the research alive and mitigate the fall-out would be nice.

            Depending on where you sit on the believe spectrum this may or may not make sense to you.

    • Dale G. Basgall

      February 26, 2012 at 5:02 am

      Mr. Smith are you just letting any group contact you, for the 1m prize you have offered.

      Is there any leagal way we can make sure you are legit in your offer? Could you contact our attorney and make the offer a binding agreement of performance.

      We provide the reactor and the fuel, make claims if the results are what is desired and anticipated and if not provide all the data that took us to the point of not so anticipated results.

      Anticipated is the input of .5kw electrical energy and an output of 1kw electrical energy. No electrical to thermal, electric to electric.

      It’s a big risk but if you could provide the binding paperwork stating simply if this happens no matter who does it, then it’s worth the challenge, were doing it anyway right now.

      We would benefit by knowing there is cash at the end and be motivated to disclose true and accurate information just because of the mil setting there waiting to be transfered to our attorneys bank account.

  12. Tom Baccei

    February 26, 2012 at 12:03 am

    You’re losing it here!

  13. Loop

    February 26, 2012 at 1:12 am

    “Rossi: Siemens AG Helping with Leonardo Corp. With Efficient Electricity Generation
    February 25, 2012

    I spent an hour this afternoon speaking with Andrea Rossi on the telephone. I had intended in publishing my interview as an audio file, but unfortunately, and embarrassingly for me, my phone recording program failed. I did, however take written notes, so in place of the recording I will report here the key points that Rossi made during the interview on various topics we discussed. My apologies to E-Cat World Readers in failing to provide the full contents of the interview.

    The Investor’s Trust

    Rossi explained that the investors in the trust did not wish to have their identities made public. He did acknowledge that as CEO of Leonardo Corporation while he is still in a position to make decisions, he is accountable now to a new entity, and that every day he has to prove his merit as a CEO.

    Leonardo now has the funds to meet current needs. The design and testing of the E-Cat are complete and now the focus is on building the production line for the factory. They are currently building only one factory in the United States– location is unnamed. I asked if there were plans to build factories in other countries, but he said that they are planning for US manufacturing plants only.

    1 MW E-Cat Plant

    Rossi is very pleased with the plant now. He said they have solved all the problems they needed to take care of and they are about two weeks away from shipping it. He also said that the E-Cat module used in the plant has been redesigned. I asked where the product would be shipped to, but he would not say — the military entity is secret, and if he named the destination it would give a clue about who the customer is. Once the first plant is delivered, work will start on the next eleven plants.

    The cost for the 1 MW plant is $1.5 million USD, and they are currently taking orders. There will be a four month wait from the time of order to the time of delivery. Plants can be shipped all over the world.

    Electrical Production

    Rossi reported on what he considered a significant breakthrough in the area of electrical production. He said that just a few days ago Siemens AG (German engineering firm) were with him in his Bologna factory and they demonstrated a turbine that could produce electricity at 30 per cent efficiency from a steam temperature of 251 C. This is much lower than the 550 C steam temperatures that are required in conventional electrical generation. Rossi said that the E-Cat becomes unstable when working at high temperatures. He said that because of this breakthrough he feels like electrical production from the 1 MW plants could take place sooner than expected. Electricity production from the small E-Cats will still take some time according to Rossi.

    Siemens is one of the largest engineering companies in the world, and Rossi mentioned that Leonardo corporation is getting more attention from people in the industrial sector.

    National Instruments

    Rossi said that he had been very pleased with the work that National Instruments had done with him, and was very impressed with the people he had worked with, but because the first 1 MW customer was already working with another company, and because there were some timing issues, they decide to go with the other customer. Rossi is confident that they will work with NI in the future.

    Domestic E-Cats

    Design and testing of the domestic E-Cat is now complete, and the focus is now on the robotized production line in the US factory. So far, Rossi said they have not come up against any obstacles, and work is on schedule. Rossi hopes to start selling products this winter (when it is cold in the Northern Hemisphere), but allows that it is possible that delays could push that back to 16-18 months from now.

    Rossi was pleased to be able to say that they have finalized the design and testing of the 10 kW E-cat units. He said that he didn’t want to just produce a metal box — being Italian, he wanted it to have some style. He is pleased with the final desing. I asked if any pictures were available, the answer was not yet. Rossi said the plan was to release the pictures in the Autumn of this year when they begin taking orders.

    Rossi also said that he expects in the Autumn to publish is theory on the operation of the E-Cat reaction.

    I asked whether there would be a marketing campaign involved at this time. Rossi said that there would be — but the extent of it would depend on how much money was available since advertising was very expensive. He did say that E-Cats would be on display in various cities when the marketing campaign starts.

    The final size of these units will be 12 x 12 x 4 inches, and the weight will be 20 lb. A special synthetic insulating material surrounds each reactor to ensure maximum efficiency. There will not be any pictures of the unit released until the fall when he starts accepting orders.

    Rossi emphasized that the 10 kW units are designed to be added on to existing heating systems, not to replace them. It will be an appendage that can be used to provide heat to whatever system already exists in homes, allowing users to save on their current sources of fuel. The heat output of these units will be between 40 and 80 degrees C. They will be able to provide home heat and hot water. These units will have fully automatic controls — the customer is not able to modify its operations; Rossi said a COP of 6 is guaranteed.

    The units will cost between $600 and $900 per unit, a price that he feels will discourage anyone from going into competition with similar units that are based on reverse engineering of his products. Production is not planned outside the US because the small size of these units makes it fairly efficient to ship all over the world. Customs and shipping costs could make these units up to 20 percent more expensive outside the US.


    I asked Rossi whether he thought any competitors were infringing on his intellectual property. While Rossi continued his policy of not commenting on his competitors he did say that his attorneys are aware of what competitors are doing and would take any actions they feel are necessary.


    Safety certification is has been going on with Underwriters Laboratories for three months, and Rossi expects it to go on for some more months. Both UL and Leonardo are under NDA so Rossi wouldn’t comment further about the process.


    Rossi expects that it will take upwards of five years for the patent to be finally granted. He said his patent attorneys are in dialogue with the US patent office and information is passing back and forth between Leonardo and the USPO.

    Rossi’s Health

    Rossi said that he has been blessed by God with good health and a strong constitution which allows him to keep up a vigorous work schedule. He typically works 16 hours per day, including some night work, and gets by on 4-5 hours of sleep per day.

    These are the main points that were made in our conversation according to my notes and memory.

    Frank Acland”

    • Ben

      February 26, 2012 at 1:39 am

      Excellent report Frank.

      This whole thing with the investors trust is quite interesting. I wonder how long they will let him stay in as CEO? On the one hand it is encouraging to know he is not trying to do this all by himself because, quite frankly, he is not capable. On the other hand, since these people are unknown…well, that leaves a lot of room for a lot of unknowns.

      I also wonder if it was Siemens who replaced NI.

    • Al Potenza

      February 26, 2012 at 2:04 am

      The interesting thing about that entire report is that not one detail, no matter how tiny, can be verified from a source other than Rossi. Who’s the control system supplier? Who’s the contact at UL? We don’t know where the new robotic plant is, who is funding it, who the board members of Rossi’s trust are, where their trust documents were filed? Nothing is known and nothing is checkable.

      “Both UL and Leonardo are under NDA so Rossi wouldn’t comment further about the process.”

      Does UL work under NDA? I suppose it’s possible but why? Traditionally, all they do is certify safety of retail items before they’re sold. I don’t think UL does anything in secret but I could be wrong. Does anyone who’s actually worked with UL know for sure?

      In any case, anything Rossi says about getting UL certification wouldn’t speak to whether the ecat works or not.

      • JNewman

        February 26, 2012 at 3:03 am

        Al, Rossi reports are intended primarily for people who require no evidence for what he claims since none is ever available. For that audience, it is all good news. Let them enjoy it.

        • Peter Roe

          February 26, 2012 at 11:36 am

          That remark indicates a very supercilious attitude towards other posters that has nothing whatsoever to do with the reasonable skepticism about Rossi/DGT that you profess. I doubt very much that a single regular poster accepts what Rossi said in the interview without reservation.

          • JNewman

            February 26, 2012 at 3:04 pm

            Peter, actually my post was a supercilious remark aimed at my fellow skeptics. The point was that with the exception of the bit about Siemens, this was all the same stuff we have been batting around for months and I was frankly hoping to discourage going down the same well-trodden paths in pointing out the incongruities. I mean seriously. There is nothing here to make anybody change their view about any of this, so why spend a few hundred more poists squabbling about it. But maybe I was just feeling tired, so let’s do argue about it some more.

          • Peter Roe

            February 26, 2012 at 6:01 pm

            Yes, lets not bother!

          • superbowlpatriot

            March 8, 2012 at 4:30 pm

            It’s good to hear that he still expects order forms to go out in the fall, as I’m currently waiting for one. J assumes a lot for someone who calls himself a “skeptic.”

      • John Milstone

        February 26, 2012 at 11:13 am

        “Both UL and Leonardo are under NDA so Rossi wouldn’t comment further about the process.”

        By default, U.L. (or any other business) would not release any information about their current work on behalf of a customer. That’s just reasonable business practices. If they certified the E-Cat, that information would be made public.

        However, there is no reason they couldn’t release a statement about their current work if Rossi asked them to do so. U.L. would never require an NDA. They won’t blab as a matter of course, and the customer is free to say whatever they want.

        So, if Rossi is claiming an “NDA” it’s his excuse to not produce any independent confirmation that he has a relationship with U.L.

      • John Milstone

        February 26, 2012 at 11:48 am

        More thoughts on U.L.:

        Their standard behavior would be to maintain the “secrecy” of the customer’s information, not just from the public, but also from their other customers. That way, you shouldn’t have to worry about your competitor gaining proprietary information about your product through U.L.

        But they would not put any limits on what the customer could say, and I doubt they would have any objection to releasing any information the customer asked them to release.

        (FYI, I never worked for/with U.L., but my father was an engineer who specialized in getting U.L. listings for his clients.)

    • John Milstone

      February 26, 2012 at 11:06 am

      Since Rossi has been caught lying about his business relationships before, what possible reason would we have to believe him now?

      If Siemens AG releases a statement that they are actively working with Rossi, that would be news.

    • Defender

      February 26, 2012 at 11:02 pm

      Thanks a lot, Frank! Great report.

  14. Dick Smith

    February 26, 2012 at 1:24 am

    Thanks for your suggestion re a formal offer.
    I am now working on a separate website to be set up with all
    the details of the offer.
    This will take a little while.
    Already there have been suggestions that the money should not go to an individual but to the organisation that does the testing and makes the first announcement.  They can then make the decision as to where the money is allocated. Hopefully to further research in the LENR field. I would support this idea.

    Exciting times!

    • Tomas Douting

      February 26, 2012 at 2:40 am

      Perhaps surprisingly, it may be an unpleasantly complex maneuver to arrange for funding to go through some of the testing organizations that might qualify. Universities are built to accept money but rarely are very good at allowing it to move in the other direction without consuming large fractions, but certain other organizations may have convoluted administrative paths to follow because they are not arranged to take money in at all from any source other than their designated sources. Your attorneys may suggest a directed trust or some other mechanism which does not move money to the testing organization but allows them to redirect it appropriately (or to siphon off whatever they feel appropriate).

    • Dennis C

      February 28, 2012 at 2:39 am

      Mr. Smith :I would like to be notified with specifics when your challenge is finalized. I have found two different challenges from a Mr. Smith one of 1 kW at $1M and one of a $200K to go to charity. What level of excess, COP, referee, and length of operation would it take to get the $200K to go to a charity of my selection? (Perhaps a few hundred W’s at COP >1.5, ….???) Please contact me at when specifics are developed.
      For the smaller challenge, I would choose $200,000 to go to New Mexico Christian Children’s Home in Portales NM. Gift would be in your name for any buildings, etc purchased with the funds. Would that be acceptable? The difficulty would be to get the device to some approved organization or get someone to actually do the measurements.

  15. spacegoat

    February 26, 2012 at 2:21 am

    Re Quax reply to georgehants link

    “Sargoytchev…reintroduces the ether, denies the reality of the Heisenberg Uncertainty relation, pretty much does away with Quantum Mechanics”

    Znidarsic does all the above, explains classical atomic structure, and explains outstanding phenomena that current physics is unable to explain. Znidarsic’s theory was inspired by LANR observations.

    If you believe “Sargoytchev very much lives in his own parallel physics universe.” then I’d be interested in your critique of Znidarsic’s paper “The Control of Natural Forces” below:

    Whatever the criticism of Dicks offer, I agree with JNewman “The Smith Prize sounds like a nice idea to give a little incentive to researchers to demonstrate something impressive using LENR.”
    It is great that Dick has understood this site is skeptical about AR/DGT but that the majority believe in the crucial importance of researching LENR. Hopefully, due to his celebrity status, some positive fallout will arise, but some detail needs better specification. Example LENR means different things to different people. Perhaps LENR should be substituted with “any reaction proven to be of greater energy density than chemical energy, except for heavy element nuclear fission”

    • Quax

      February 26, 2012 at 4:44 am

      This is an unscientific observation, but I just can’t help myself.

      I just started looking at the paper but I am really struck by the fact that this guy names a constant after himself that is then supposed to take the place of the most fundamental Planck constant.

      I mean think about that for a moment! What a display of modesty!

    • Quax

      February 26, 2012 at 4:56 am

      He also cites Podkletnov gravity anomaly to support his theory. If there’s any experiment that has even less of a record when it comes to reproducibility it’s that one. But contrary to his claim there are actually several papers that’ll attempt an explanation of this phenomenon within the confines of accepted physics:

      And this threat contains a bunch of them

      Of course all this is rather pointless if the effect is not real.

      • Quax

        February 26, 2012 at 5:04 am

        Won’t read past this sentence:

        Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity states that a force can induce a gravitational field

        This is entirely backwards. GR is a completely geometrical theory. Unlike Newton’s mechanics is doesn’t require forces and does away with them. They are replaced by the curvature in space-time. The latter is induced by mass.

        There is no such thing as force in GR rendering this sentence meaningless.

        • Terry J. Deveau

          February 26, 2012 at 6:44 am

          “The latter is induced by mass.”

          Actually, not “mass”, but the stress-energy tensor, of which mass/energy is just one component. The other components (stresses) are indeed closely related to “force”.

          • Quax

            February 26, 2012 at 6:42 pm

            It is indeed the “stress-energy tensor” but since tensor is a pretty technical term and mass is equivalent to energy I just sticked to mass.

            Don’t see how stress can be spun into force to a degree that’ll justify this sentence.

        • spacegoat

          February 26, 2012 at 8:15 am

          Let’s not start Physics 101 here, but I think the above statement may be a reference to the Principle of Equivalence : … a uniformly accelerating reference frame with acceleration are indistinguishable from .. a non-accelerating reference frame which is situated in a gravitational field.
          So the effect of force producing acceleration is identical to a gravitational field.

          Please read the whole of the paper.

          • Quax

            February 26, 2012 at 6:45 pm

            Force is just a mathematical concept to relate acceleration to mass. Once you fully incorporate the equivalence principle into a theory as GR does you eliminate the need for that concept as far as gravity is concerned.

          • Quax

            February 26, 2012 at 6:57 pm

            The paper than happily moves on mixing up a GR equation with the Newtonian gravity potential. Invents kind of Hook law for electrostatic forces and then somehow mixes this up to argue that a classic electron in a bound atomic state won’t have to obey the Maxwell equations.

            So, I’ve read it. Will you now give me the 15 minutes of my live back that I wasted on this?

    • Al Potenza

      February 26, 2012 at 7:18 am

      “It is great that Dick has understood this site is skeptical about AR/DGT but that the majority believe in the crucial importance of researching LENR. ”

      I agree that most of the people on this site are now skeptical of Rossi’s anonymous cast of characters and constantly changing and some would say grandiose plans. Many are also now skeptical of Defkalion due to their tardiness and lack of good communications. Is this a newly found religion?

      If I recall correctly, skeptics like Mary Yugo, Thicket, Popeye and others were regularly roasted on this site as recently as a few weeks or months ago for expressing much the same lack of confidence in Rossi and Defkalion. Most of the participants in the discussion appeared to consider most Rossi and Defkalion claims to be facts. At least they wrote that way.

      Very recently, Dick Smith, before his current million dollar offer, was being skewered as well.

      Are you now saying the skepticism from those people has merit?

      I don’t recall any of the skeptics saying LENR should not be researched. I thought they said the opposite.

      • spacegoat

        February 26, 2012 at 8:28 am

        Sorry Al, I am too lazy to go back over the often tedious threads to check if people got roasted if they objected to AR/DGT claims being treated as facts. From memory, I would say that never happened. The 95% majority on this site always professed skepticism. The roasting was over “pathoskepticism” the self harming frame of mind that is prejudiced in advance of the evidence. The opposite camp are the true believers, buts since in the survey nobody as far as I can remember rated the claims as solid, it seems there were no true believers.

        The pathoskeptic/true believer schism seems to have been left behind by this thread. Lets not open it up again.

        Skepticism is a foundation of science, so of course it has merit.

      • Methusela

        February 26, 2012 at 8:50 am

        They were roasted for their negativity, repetition, know-it-all arrogance, and more importantly, for “winding up” georgehants (

        Not that I would ever fall into any of those categories 😉

        They were not roasted for sceptism.

        This is why people use the “pathological skeptic” moniker for them.

        They are either taking an opposing position just for the fun of it, or are in a unshakeable position that will never be changed.

        • charles sistovaris

          February 26, 2012 at 1:31 pm

          Someone like Maryugo often came with good & legitimate arguments, but the overzealous repetition of her posts literally inundating the comments here, making it look like a full time job, completely overshadowed the good & legitimate opposite arguments. Quantity over quality, brainwashing over debate, FUD over healthy skepticism, that’s what I believe brought paul (admin) to finally roast her. Not the fact she disagreed with the optimistic.

        • Al Potenza

          February 26, 2012 at 8:25 pm

          “They were roasted for their negativity, repetition, know-it-all arrogance, and more importantly, for “winding up” georgehants ”

          Maybe but people who think Rossi is real do that too. Substitute overoptimism for negativity and the above is equally valid for Rossi (and Defkalion) supporters.

          And almost anything critical about him will “wind up” georgehants.

      • AB

        February 26, 2012 at 10:33 pm

        People are only being banned only for their behavior, not their position on this story.

  16. Dick Smith

    February 26, 2012 at 4:45 am

    A little while ago Defkalion claimed in relation to their tests.

    “Our protocol has been accepted by leading world authorities”

    Does anyone believe this?  Should I offer another $5k for names of these world authorities?
    Waste of time like my other $5k offers as the claim is a fantasy- I bet not one leading world authority has been involved with their protocol.

    • Stephen T.

      February 26, 2012 at 8:51 pm

      How ’bout paying out that first $5k for a picture of the reactor that heated the factory? Or did you miss that? You may pay to the charity of your choice as far as I am concerned. Not my call in any case.

    • Stephen T.

      February 26, 2012 at 9:09 pm

      At 2:09 of the video you will see the first version of said reactor. Later you will see more advanced prototypes any/all of which provided heat to such factory over said time. I was not the first to bring this to your attention. Do with this information what you will. I, for one, hope you will do good.

      • John Milstone

        February 26, 2012 at 11:19 pm

        A significant part of Focardi’s talk is about the supposed transmutation of Nickel into Copper.

        The only independent evidence related to the “ash” from the E-Cat that I’ve been able to find is a comment by Kullander, who stated that the isotope ratios were identical to naturally-occuring Nickel and Copper.

        This does not match what Focardi claims.

        Kullander claimed in November that there would be a “detailed isotopic analysis” of the “ash” before Christmas. It has yet to be released.

        I would be interested to hear your theory as to why the only independent test of the “ash” from Rossi’s E-Cat contradicts Focardi’s claims, why the “ash” shows no signs of any nuclear or LENR process occurring and why the report promised by Kullander is now 2 months late.

        Or is that an unacceptable question for this forum?

        • Stephen T.

          February 27, 2012 at 2:03 am

          It may have to do with the isotopic make up of the nickel in question (concentrated)or the majority of the copper may have come somehow from the plumbing used for the reactor (contamination for the majority leaving any real ash down in the noise: real ash in very small quantities of course.)

          • John Milstone

            February 27, 2012 at 3:23 am

            But that doesn’t fit, either.

            The amount of Copper in the “ash” matches what should have been there if it really had generated the amount of energy Rossi claimed (he claimed the sample had come from an E-Cat that had run for several months). If the Copper isn’t the “ash”, then there is nothing else that could be.

            The problem isn’t the amount of Copper. It’s the ratios of the Copper (and Nickel) isotopes found in the ash. Focardi’s theory predicts non-natural isotope ratios, but the public statements were that the “ash” sample contained only natural isotopes in natural ratios.

            Note that Miley got something like 3 dozen non-natural isotope ratios in his recent tests.

            There’s also Rossi’s claim that he is enriching specific isotopes of Nickel for pennies a gram (since he claims a fuel “charge” will be $10 – $20). Highly enriched Nickel isotopes cost something like $30,000 per gram, and no one appears to have a clue about how Rossi can do it essentially for free.

            The fact that faking realistic “ash” results would be so expensive that it’s doubtful Rossi could do so. So, non-natural isotope ratios would be strong evidence that LENR was happening.

            The fact that the early report shows no such thing is suspicious. And the fact that the detailed report is now several months overdue is even more suspicious.

        • Stephen T.

          February 27, 2012 at 2:05 am

          Also, you say the only evidence you know of and Focardi does not say it was only Kullander.
          As to the delay in reporting, I don’t know. Any updates?

        • Stephen T.

          February 27, 2012 at 4:52 am

          Again, it depends on the isotopes of nickel he started with and contamination can certainly have an impact. Rossi did not set out to do analytical chemistry but to build a reactor. As far as isotope enrichment, it has been suggested that it is possible “substantially enriched” but far from “pure” isotopes for far far less than the $30,000 per gram figure you state. Finally, and most importantly, we do not have the results of the test and as I said I have no knowledge as to why we do not have them. You would have to ask Kullander or Essen or whoever is doing the tests. I too would expect to find all manner of interesting things besides the iron and copper in gross amounts that were found. Interesting enough as it is. Also, we do not know the totality of the reactions involved in this particular reaction set especially with the “secret sauce” involved. Really, this will get circular if it is not already. We do not know what we do not know and we will just have to wait and see.

          • Quax

            February 27, 2012 at 5:04 am

            It really is a pity about Kullander not releasing anything, last I heard he claimed their Isoptope lab is refitted or some such thing.

            You are entirely right, as long as we don’t get any data on this there is really no certain conclusion to draw.

          • John Milstone

            February 27, 2012 at 11:06 am

            Even “substantially enriched” Nickel isotopes for pennies a gram is quite a leap from the current state of the art.

            That also raises an interesting question: If Rossi is starting out with ordinary Nickel, using some “secret” process to enrich it, then using it to create energy and ending up right back where he started with ordinary Nickel, where is the energy actually coming from?

            Not only can he enrich Nickel for 8 or 9 orders of magnitude less cost than anyone else, but he can apparently do so using less power than the “inverse” reaction produces. Which sounds an awful lot like perpetual motion to me.

            And, as far as I know, no one has a reasonable theory that shows how you can go from “ordinary” Nickel back to “ordinary” Nickel while producing a net energy gain.

    • Stephen T.

      February 26, 2012 at 9:38 pm

      Looks like another easy $5k. Would you like to define what you will accept as “world authority”.
      Accepting the protocol means what exactly?
      Clownerie here?
      No offense intended Dick but please… the video with your heart and your head. Focardi is no scammer and he is no fool. He is a highly educated and very experienced scientist with direct experience in this specific area of expertise. Just have a look mate.

  17. georgehants

    February 26, 2012 at 8:23 am

    From Cold Fusin Times.
    The Very BEST on Earth:
    ISCMNS Internet Library
    Updated by Bill Collis

  18. Methusela

    February 26, 2012 at 8:35 am

  19. georgehants

    February 26, 2012 at 9:13 am

    No comment, We wait.
    One observation —
    Quax seems to display all the hallmarks of a closed mind and following DOGMA.
    Quote —- “Won’t read past this sentence:” he also attacked a scientist for thinking outside of convention.
    Closed minds and following DOGMA have no place in science.

    • Pekka Janhunen

      February 26, 2012 at 12:04 pm

      I think Quax meant that the sentence he quoted from the article suggested that the author had misunderstood the basic idea of general relativity. Anyone is free to propose alternatives to general relativity and other theories, but if they criticise existing theories on false grounds and therefore draw false conclusions, that’s not a promising sign. I don’t think it’s closed-mindedness to stop reading such papers at some point.

      I haven’t read the paper, though, this is a general comment.

      • georgehants

        February 26, 2012 at 12:46 pm

        Morning Pekka, perhaps the author was moving beyond or reinterpreting GR, without reading and dismissing out of hand, as not agreeing to the DOGMA of GR, one would never know and rejecting becomes closed-minded.

        • Quax

          February 26, 2012 at 7:56 pm

          After spacegoat, who displays some basic good manners, asked me to go back and read the paper, I did just that.

          I am sorry to report that I can not follow the authors line of argument. He seems to compare apples to pears and generally dismisses the entire concept of modern Quantum Mechanics that I remember you seem to be fond off.

          • georgehants

            February 26, 2012 at 8:06 pm

            your not following his line of argument could be your failing.
            I am very fond of all science, QM is the window to the future of course.
            Do you like QM.

    • Quax

      February 26, 2012 at 7:50 pm

      So George what exactly are your scientific credentials?

      I get your praise when after re-examining the amassed body of work I admit to have changed my mind on LENR, but when I bring my scientific understanding to vet a paper then I am closed minded?

      What was that again about not going around insulting people on this site?

      I’ve got news for you buddy: I have a seven and four year old who like to play with their dad on a Sunday and our 8 month old just learned how to crawl.

      I also have a back-log of science book I love to work through.

      On top of that I am very busy in my professional life.

      If I don’t use my scientific judgment to filter out what I consider questionable work, I will never ever get anything done. Yet, apparently using any sort of threshold is dogma to you.

      I gave you my scientifically informed opinion.

      Take it or leave it but don’t insult me for it.

      • georgehants

        February 26, 2012 at 8:02 pm

        My scientific credentials are irrelevant to my commenting on your attack on a fellow scientist who’s paper you agree you have not even read.
        You will get praise when you are correct, not when you fail, that is life.
        Your family life has no bearing on your attacks on scientists with unfounded opinion.
        Please carry on reading your book.
        For you to filter out your reading for yourself is fair, to then go on and attack a paper you have not read is silly.
        You scientifically informed opinion was unscientific in that you had not even read the paper.
        If you consider I am insulting you by pointing out that you have made a decision on a fellow scientist without even reading his paper your logic is in error.
        I always take the Truth and leave the rest.

        • Quax

          February 26, 2012 at 8:12 pm

          If you bothered to check my earlier answer you’d know by know that I read the whole thing after spacegoat politely insisted I’d do though.

          Usually I stop as soon as I come across something that I find to be deeply flawed.

          If you pick up a book and you find that some pages in that it’s no good do you bother reading it to the end? Would you share an opinion of that book based on the portion that you’ve read?

          In my earlier posts I only criticized the author for what I have read up till that point. I find this absolutely fair and square.

          You sir, fail at making a concise argument, and the Truth in that is plain to see.

          • georgehants

            February 26, 2012 at 8:19 pm

            Your bending reality is not scientific, my original post was to you saying you have not read the paper, your later reply saying you had reluctantly read the paper was later, please be accurate.
            The rest of your comment is rhetoric.

        • Quax

          February 26, 2012 at 8:16 pm

          Frankly I think an apology is in order since giving up some time to render an opinion on a paper was a favor to spacegoat. And giving up time on a Sunday is a real

          And then I get nothing but abuse from you.

          On the other hand I realize that getting such an apology from you is about as likely as Dick Smith paying out his 1 million dollars any time soon.

          • georgehants

            February 26, 2012 at 8:23 pm

            Quax, your answer seems irrational and to have no connection to the facts being discussed.
            Your personal life has no bearing on the debate.

        • Quax

          February 26, 2012 at 8:25 pm

          So George, I have a simple question for you: Please answer with Yes or No.

          If you start reading a book and you find it is back so that you pout it down and not finish it, will you share your an opinion on this book?

          • Quax

            February 26, 2012 at 8:25 pm

            Of course this is meant to say:

            “… and you find it is bad …”

        • Quax

          February 26, 2012 at 8:32 pm

          George insulting somebody, who’s doing somebody else an favour in giving an opinion is irrational and very bad manners.

          Will you please just answer my simple question:

          If you start reading a book, and you find it is bad, so that you pout it down and not finish it, will you share your an opinion on this book?

          • JNewman

            February 26, 2012 at 8:48 pm

            Quax, it figures that the only thread that is keeping any chronological integrity today is your Groundhog Day reenactment with George. Some days the world is difficult to cope with. 😉

  20. georgehants

    February 26, 2012 at 10:39 am

    Is there any main-line science Website or Journal where this scientific information could be retrived.

    Defkalion GT
    Since the last 2 decades, several theories have been proposed to explain LENR phenomena and “Huizenga’s three questions:
    Question #1: of how the Coulomb barrier is penetrated
    Question #2: the lack of strong neutron emissions
    Question #3: the lack of strong emission of gamma or x-rays
    A short summary of most of them is presented in alphabetic order in … ndex.shtml. This incomplete presentation includes:
    Bazhutov-Vereshkov Theory
    Chubb (Scott) Theory
    Chubb ( Talbot) Theory
    Fisher Theory
    Gareev Theory
    Hagelstein Theory
    Hora-Miley Theory
    Kim-Zubarev Theory
    Kirkinskii-Novikov Theory
    Kozima Theory
    Li Theory
    Preparata Theory
    Sinha-Meulenberg Theory
    Storms Theory
    Szpak Theory
    Takahashi Theory
    Widom-Larsen Theory
    whilst several other proposed theories are omitted from this list such as (not included all):
    Frank Znidarsic theory,
    Stoyan Sarg Sargoytchev/ M. Kanarev theory,
    Yeong E. Kim theory,
    Wladimir Guglinski/ C. Stremmenos theory,
    Y.T. Didenko/K. S. Suslick theory

  21. RonB

    February 26, 2012 at 2:19 pm

    In one of the AR video’s of the ecat in action there was scope presenting a trace of a negative going pulse. Does anyone know what that trace was supposed to represent?

  22. Dale G. Basgall

    February 26, 2012 at 4:33 pm

    Mr. Dick Smith wrote; “Already there have been suggestions that the money should not go to an individual but to the organisation that does the testing and makes the first announcement. They can then make the decision as to where the money is allocated. Hopefully to further research in the LENR field. I would support this idea.” on February 26, 2012 at 1:24 am.

    Comment to Mr. Smith, the original concept of rewarding someone that can come up with a LENR device that works was a great gesture, now it seems complications and additions are pointing a direction whereas the inventor gets jilted again to the testors, wow that’s novel.

    Why can’t you just send a legal binding agreement to our attorney, we could use the extra million, I think Mr. Smith, you have no intentions of giving the money to anyone else but the people you chose and not someone or a group concerned with advancing this art form LENR.

    Seriously you want to give some money out “great” but the painted lures your throwing in the water don’t seem to flaot very well due to the lead pieces attached. When you make offers others are watching, you didn’t have to tell us on this site you were giving the million away but you did anyway, why?

    Like I say just contact the administrator and he will get ahold of us to let us now you are ready to make your offer a legal binding document.

    Otherwise your offers are getting a little old and like the little boy that cried wolf one to many times, I see that scenario here just as you see that Rossi and Defkalion are scam artists, get a grip and follow thru with your claims.

  23. un passante

    February 26, 2012 at 4:43 pm

    the MaryYugo’s look like territorial dogs they like to mark the ground and carefully control noone comment and no discussion starts on news coming from rossi anymore. because he’s a liar and it’s a scam. they know for sure.

    A news mentioning siemens and an interesting turbine with 30% efficiency at relatively low temperature and most of the messages are from pathoskeptics rushing to say “go on, nothing to see, nothing to comment”.

    they’re near to a total conquest of the blog thanks to their rich champion.

    Admin, I think the reason few people commented is because there’s a growing perception that this blog is becoming The MaryYugo’s blog and there’s no interest in reading “he’s a liar, it’s a scam” a hundred times a day.

    • John Milstone

      February 26, 2012 at 4:49 pm

      I’m not certain that Rossi is running a fraud, but it certainly looks like one.

      I am certain that Rossi is a liar, because he’s been caught in a number of lies.

      I understand that you would prefer to hide all the facts that don’t support your position, but that’s not how reasonable discussion works.

      If you feel that your position isn’t being fairly presented, do a better job of presenting it. Don’t just sit there and whine.

      • un passante

        February 26, 2012 at 5:11 pm

        I thank you for the quick reply and I applaud you for the constant watching! Boredom and tiredness won’t ever discourage you.

        yours “looks like a fraud and he’s a liar” message bring new elements to the discussion and it’s a real touch of freshness.

        • John Milstone

          February 26, 2012 at 5:32 pm

          I thank you for the quick reply and I applaud you for the constant watching! Boredom and tiredness won’t ever discourage you.

          Apparently, you don’t have anything better to do, either.

          As it happens, I’m busy remodeling my house these days, so when I hit a break point or take a rest, I do a quick view of the comments here, and respond as appropriate.

          What’s your excuse?

          • Methusela

            February 26, 2012 at 6:27 pm

            Is it a small house? 😉

          • John Milstone

            February 26, 2012 at 7:14 pm


            Sorry, it’s a big house, and I have lots of work planned. 😉

          • Peter Roe

            February 26, 2012 at 9:04 pm

            You’ll get a helluva lot more done if you stay away from this site for a while…

          • John Milstone

            February 26, 2012 at 9:14 pm

            Peter Roe: Yes, but I would miss your whining.

  24. JNewman

    February 26, 2012 at 5:01 pm

    Admin, please consider starting a new thread. This one is hopeless snarled up with from the effects of moderation.

    • Methusela

      February 26, 2012 at 7:43 pm

      Yes, I second this.

      I think it would be a good idea to keep the offending post in place, as deleting it causes chaos.

      Paul, I noticed this morning that there was an article entitled “1959 cold fusion” on the front page, very briefly.

      Was this a cloudflare problem?

      Also, the site has been very, very, slow for me, from the UK – up until now.

      • Methusela

        February 26, 2012 at 7:44 pm

        I mean, delete the content, but mark it deleted for being offensive.

        • Peter Roe

          February 26, 2012 at 9:06 pm

          That seems like a very good idea. The orphaned comments at the end make it very difficult to find anything new.

  25. Dale G. Basgall

    February 26, 2012 at 5:24 pm

    I can clearly see to the bones in this scenario we have been living the past year and a month of LENR claims, by Defkalion and Mr. Rossi.

    As I stated a year ago in my posts that Rossi did as much as he could with Focardi, and built a fasaud device so it could be viewed and made interesting claims regarding the production of energy, which was not electrical output but with electrical input for the heaters.

    Things disclosed were never clear by either R-or D. Just enough information was let out to make scientists and inventors open their eyes and start experimenting with their own mixes and devices just to prove a point. Does Rossis device really work? I am leaving Defkalion out of this due to muddy waters between Rossi and them.

    What about the general public who knew less than the scientists regarding what is taking place to cause the “excess heat”, bla bla woof woof.

    They started ordering and getting in line just as I have found working with these reactions that lines of investors gather. Most investors want to find hope in a product prior the proof yay or nay that it is a real reaction causing real heat in excess of the input electricity, frequencies, and vibrations.

    That’s what I call the wine and dine phase of inventions. When you create hope in a customer like Rossi did and exhibit something others do not understand you essentially hold a magic wand to many and the money flows. Lunches, dinners, toys like fast cars and new Harley Davidson motorcycles, Franklins in hand no check, women and dance it’s like royalty treatment, until.

    What was anticipated to come out of the efforts of creativity are disclosed to someone that doesn’t respect the hard work and time invested to get to that point, and then it’s gone and your out looking for another project. Also there are always things that don’t work just as anticipated that also create others to get involved that are not on the scientific page, just on making the device perform.

    So Rossi worked on the thing for years he said, and I hear that all the time from inventors. My comment is then, that proves you didn’t have a formula in the first step, just a trash pile to build your first reactor with, great, now why not build one that actually works.

    Everyone has read how many times Rossi has changed something and that’s cool, it’s just obvious he did not have what he claimed back in January 2011. A working e-cat to be sold and distributed, he had no more than fasaud’s built to illude the general public for pre market testing and getting enough signatures to go to the bank and form a stock company.

    What was done though is to create enough attention that others would fill in gaps that only the intranet can provide, like the new wave for inventions. Get them out before they are actually workable products and collect bank from many and claim you are not. What a guy, invested his own money on the copper pipes and tubing, quite an expence, right.

    So now whoever comes up with anything called LENR Rossi can say, It’s mine and my companies will sue you if you try to claim anything, I had it back in 2008. And anyone not technically educated on the process will believe it.

    It’s called mob mentality, create a lie big enough and many will form opinions and be happy to voice them to others just trying to figure out what’s really going on here.

    Through life it seems that observations like this Rossi saga have revealed, do not point to something good happening, just look at the problems internally they have already experienced by the Defkalion claims so close to the claims of Rossi, but the device Defkalion has is nothing like the Rossi one but it makes the thermal heat, and uses nickel and compressed hydrogen, wow that is quite different.

    All it would take is someone with deep pockets and an attitude of “let’s push forward with moneys from an account to either replicate the claims by Rossi or dismiss them as not possible to observe by just a regular inventor mechanic. The only people that can actually observe anything happening have hundreds of thousands of dollars in test equipment and that makes it impossible for just the average jo blow to advance the art of LENR.

    That’s Mr. Smiths real ace in the hole, it’s not that he doesn’t believe LENR could be developed but the odds are highly stacked against actually coming up with a workable product in any reasonable amount of time.

    It’s not to late to change your offer Mr. Smith, since your taking suggestions, make the effort to just say yes to promote interest in developing LENR, like teaching the technology to our younger generation for learning and in just a few years our youth will have it figured out so everyone can benefit. Just say yes! you can afford it and then sleep well knowing all that money went to helping many others.

    • CuriousChris

      February 27, 2012 at 6:54 am

      I find your article interesting and no small portion of truth within it.

      But Dicks offer is also just the sort of thing that could(!) produce results. There are many researchers in this field. Most are self funded and do the work outside of their normal hours. While they are often aligned to institutions like MIT or NASA. they aren’t funded for it, McKubre at SRI is possibly the exception, maybe others I am not aware of.

      What a carrot like Dick Smiths offer does is provide them the incentive to go further and try harder. It also gets the ears of others. One thing Rossi has done is raise awareness, Like me, most had written CF off as rubbish science. But the fever surrounding Rossi got me curious again. Then along came Defkalion (I hadn’t at that time heard the specifics) So I started doing the research and to my surprise there was more meat on this bone than I expected. So while I do believe Rossi has seriously overstated his claims and Defkalion are simply crooked, At least for me I am more aware now than I ever was. Not that it matters what I think. But Dick Smith has made his offer. And of course
      Sidney Kimmel’s Donation all based on Rossi’s outrageous claims.

      So its not all bad. Although I feel for the investors who lose money. In the end its their responsibility to do due diligence (A fool and his money..).

      Back to Defkalion and another reason I think they are crooks.

      27 Scientists! That’s what they claim. Did they find them on a dole queue? Put an ad in the Saturday paper, “Wanted 27 LENR Scientists”. While they must have had at least one engineer to create the value adds for Rossi’s E-cat. How does that jump to 27 scientists.

      Who in Defkalion even knew what questions to ask of a prospective scientist looking for employment.

      “Dear Mr Scientist, What is your field?”. “Biology”. “Ok you’ll do!”

      In my mind its all designed to dupe people.

      Wow if there are 27 scientists they must know what they are doing. Closer to the truth is at the pointy end of research, it takes only one or two scientists to do the research, McKubre, Pianteli, Focardi, Hagelstein etc.

      Another point to ponder. How many support staff are required for 27 scientists? I can’t say as I am no expert, but I can guess. Outside of pure research you are going to need an assistant and at least one engineer to translate your designs and thoughts into a device.

      They must have extraordinarily deep pockets this Defkalion mob and fantastic contacts around the world to be able to draw in this incredible expertise.

      • CuriousChris

        February 27, 2012 at 7:31 am

        I should say where the 27 scientists quote comes from others will accuse me of making it up (I would).


  26. un passante

    February 26, 2012 at 7:41 pm

    Living in the MaryYugo occupied territories:
    Dear Diary, Now I have a mental map with lots of “MaryYugo” tags assigned to certain nicknames, those messages I don’t even bother reading anymore. I already know what they say. from time to time I check to see if the MaryYugo’s have changed their message. no way. those borgs are a motivated bunch albeit a repetitive one.

    I encountered another “it’s a scam”, they are legion, but I managed to pass through without being noticed. “he’s a liar” were flying low over my head. Thank God, I can smell a MaryYugo from a mile away. and The Smith MaryYugo Prize Party won’t prevent me from wandering in this devastated land in search for news and interesting comments.

    • Methusela

      February 26, 2012 at 7:48 pm

      She appears to be back commenting of gibbs’ article, or someone is posting under that name.

    • Al Potenza

      February 26, 2012 at 8:18 pm

      “I encountered another “it’s a scam”, they are legion, but I managed to pass through without being noticed”

      So then, you believe that Rossi and Defkalion are telling the truth? Or something else?

    • Peter Roe

      February 26, 2012 at 9:20 pm

      “Living in the MaryYugo occupied territories:”

      I think Ben’s site ( and Vortex are now about the only territories not currently infected by Dr Hody, aka mary yugo, john milstone etc. Ban him and he just comes back in another guise, as here.

      I wonder if it would be possible to install a bot that auto-deletes any post containing the words ‘fraud’, ‘liar’ or ‘scam’ and synonyms and derivatives thereof? Our friend would be reduced to virtual silence.

      • AB

        February 26, 2012 at 10:10 pm

        I think Ben’s site ( and Vortex are now about the only territories not currently infected by Dr Hody, aka mary yugo, john milstone etc.

        It is seriously getting annoying. Discussions are constantly dragged down by “it’s a scam” and “you believe this?” drivel. We need purge like on vortex.

        • JNewman

          February 26, 2012 at 10:21 pm

          Well, if we are going to clamp down properly, I think we will need a detailed list of which opinions are acceptable to be expressed here and how many times a topic can be mentioned before the offending poster is banned. Perhaps some of our foremost proponents of open-mindedness can work on the list.

          • RonB

            February 27, 2012 at 12:55 am


          • Ghost Dawg

            February 27, 2012 at 5:07 am

            Ha! Well said JNewman.

          • AB

            February 27, 2012 at 10:15 am

            A good example of a stupid post we could do without. You’re playing the “my opinion is not allowed card”.

            Nobody has ever been banned from this site for their opinion. The deciding factor is quality of the post and behavior.

          • Ivy Matt

            February 27, 2012 at 6:23 pm

            AB is right. You’re trying too hard to apply objective criteria to what is ultimately a very subjective decision.

      • Ben

        February 27, 2012 at 4:35 am

        Thanks for the plug Pete. You know I don’t always agree with you, nor you with me, but your thoughtful posts are always welcome. Actually, the same could be said for most people on here.

        But this site, Independent eCat News, is the most popular for a reason and Paul brings something to the table that attracts a large number of readers. I doubt that he will risk his hard earned and well-deserved reputation in the LENR community by continuing to tolerate this level of spam and propaganda.

        • Quax

          February 27, 2012 at 5:00 am

          Spam and propaganda are both employed by commercial and/or governmental entities.

          I doubt that any posts on here that you lump into this category actually originate there.

  27. georgehants

    February 26, 2012 at 8:11 pm

    Quax you seem to believe that your self belief in being an expert allows you to say anything you wish without evidence.
    I have displayed no bad manners unless pointing out your errors is bad manners.

  28. georgehants

    February 26, 2012 at 8:30 pm

    Quax Reply
    So George, I have a simple question for you: Please answer with Yes or No.

    If you start reading a book and you find it is back so that you pout it down and not finish it, will you share your an opinion on this book?

    Sorry Quax Do you mean, if I read the title of a book would I then then tell everybody it is rubbish.
    Answer NO. only a fool would do such a thing.

    • georgehants

      February 26, 2012 at 8:39 pm

      Quax Reply
      George insulting somebody, who’s doing somebody else an favour in giving an opinion is irrational and very bad manners.
      Will you please just answer my simple question:
      If you start reading a book, and you find it is bad, so that you pout it down and not finish it, will you share your an opinion on this book?

      Quax I have already answered you above , please reply.
      You are purposely or irrationally avoiding the fact, that this circular rubbish you are using to try and justify your positions comes from my criticism of your insulting a fellow scientist without even reading his paper.

      If you disagree and maintain your position fine.
      That will do for me.
      No wonder science is in the state it is.
      Thank you

      • Quax

        February 26, 2012 at 8:43 pm

        Please re-post, in this mess of a thread I cannot locate your answer.

        Do you answer Yes or No?

        • Methusela

          February 26, 2012 at 8:44 pm

          It’s at the bottom somewhere. Sorry to interrupt.

          • Methusela

            February 26, 2012 at 8:45 pm

            No it isn’t. Try the rss 2 feed.

    • Quax

      February 26, 2012 at 8:50 pm

      This is an elusive answer. Will you give your opinion Yes or No. The question is very simple.

      • georgehants

        February 26, 2012 at 8:53 pm

        Quax I have already answered you above.
        You are purposely or irrationally avoiding the fact, that this circular rubbish you are using to try and justify your positions comes from my criticism of your insulting a fellow scientist without even reading his paper.

        If you disagree and maintain your position fine.
        That will do for me.
        Please assume you have won the argument if that makes you feel better.
        No wonder science is in the state it is.
        Thank you.

      • Quax

        February 26, 2012 at 9:06 pm

        Contrary to you I have not insulted anybody. I pointed out that I considered the premise of the paper flawed.

        I highly respect anybody who makes the effort to publish a scientific paper even if I think it is erroneous.

        And I think the Truth is clear to see that you avoid answering my very simple question with Yes or No.

        Let me give you an example for how to answer a simple question. You asked me earlier

        Do you like QM?

        My answer: Yes

        After you answered the question feel free to elaborate, but please only after you answered with “Yes” or “No”.

        In the example case an elaboration looks like this:

        There is no other field in physics that fascinates me as much as QM. If it wasn’t for QM I probably would have dropped out of the physics program

        Sp please just a simple straightforward, honest answer. Yes or No. Any elaboration after that will be considered a bonus.

        • dsm

          February 27, 2012 at 4:33 am

          Brer Quax,

          Did anyone ever tell you the story of Brer Rabbit and the tar baby.

          Moral was step back before one gets stuck 🙂


          Doug M

          (& thanks for the feed of good posts you normally nourish us with )

          • Quax

            February 27, 2012 at 4:55 am

            George has a bit of a reputation, doesn’t he? But two can play this game.

            I will continue to try to get him to answer my simple question.

            Surely in his live he must have put down more than one book before having finished it.

  29. SteveW

    February 26, 2012 at 8:34 pm

    The US government has had LENR technology for a long time- they just don’t want everybody else to have it. (just kidding ha, ha)

  30. Stephen T.

    February 26, 2012 at 11:17 pm

    Thanks for posting this. My only comment is that it is nearly(?) impossible to get 30% efficiency at 251C. Maybe combined heat and power but not thermal to electric with any heat engine (turbine) at 251 degrees unless it is “ideal, reversible” or nearly so. (How low can condenser temperature be?)

  31. Dick Smith

    February 26, 2012 at 11:25 pm

    All fascinating. But what has happened re the Defkalion testing?

    Especially the names of the government representatives involved.

    What’s the bet they can delay this for another 6-12 weeks without actual names being released (because they have no intention of having official Government representatives involved in any way) while many who post on this site will accept all the reasons they give!
    In the meantime. More and more money raised!

    • RyanWLocke

      February 27, 2012 at 12:08 am

      Kind of shpaing up to be a big disappointment. If only you could have went to the testing. Did you even get a chance to look over the NDA?

    • Stephen T.

      February 27, 2012 at 12:52 am

      If it takes 6-12 weeks you will have ME on your side.

      • CuriousChris

        February 27, 2012 at 7:04 am

        read my post above about 27 scientists maybe that will shorten your time frame. Its just another unbelievable claim.

        Of course many will say its believable.

    • dsm

      February 27, 2012 at 6:29 am

      The part about the delays that is amazing to me – is those who keep making apologies for them or hinting that Defkalion will explain it all.

      That aspect of this current situation is like the people at Jonestown going back to the Rev Jones & asking for a 2nd serving of his kool-aid.

      The evidence of Defkalion’s problems go back to mid 2011 when they were demading the Rossi hand over a plug-in ecat power unit & Rossi wouldn’t.

      At that point it is a matter of who to believe as to why Rossi would not hand even 1 eCat module over. Defkalion had designed their part of the hyperion right down to the agreed specs for how the two would fit together, all it needed was the plug-in eCat.

      For Defkalion to then claim that they had miraculously beaten all labs around the world, in just 3 months by coming up with their own reactor from scratch – no theories, no well known LENR researcher leading their team (unless it was the angel gabriel who knows everything), no published papers other than what they could ‘borrow’ off the net, defies any element of common sense. But as with all miracles I guess the blind & lame & simple minded felt it so good it had to be true.

      Doug M

      (hey Rev Jim, please keep your paper cup, the stuff in it is so sugary I’d be sick)

  32. Dick Smith

    February 27, 2012 at 12:00 am

    Re Focardi

    In the past when I have investigated fraudulent claims I have found the fraudster is quite often surrounded with true believers who are taken in like everyone else.
    Most scientists have been surrounded in there entire life with genuine researchers like they are, they have zero experience in the ways of a scammer.

    That could possibly be the explanation here.

    • Stephen T.

      February 27, 2012 at 12:48 am

      You refer to the possibility of “wishful thinking” on the part of observers who should be impartial.
      In the case of a large effect where simple observation is all that is needed (see the video, think about the amounts of heat observed) it is impossible for me to believe a mistake was made. That leaves only fraud. Fraud must then include Focardi and Levi and many others. This I cannot believe.

      • Quax

        February 27, 2012 at 2:23 am

        I think if this turns out to be a fraud than not because there is not an actual LENR effect going on but because Rossi can’t or does not intend to turn it into a usable device – finding it easier to keep the dream alive while making a living of off it.

        This pretty much all hinges on Rossi’s character. Would be great if it turns out that he is just quirky but generally honest.

        • John Milstone

          February 27, 2012 at 3:28 am

          Would be great if it turns out that he is just quirky but generally honest.

          You are aware of Rossi’s several convictions and prison sentences for criminal fraud, aren’t you? (These are in addition to the “toxic waste” charges which were later overturned.)

          • Quax

            February 27, 2012 at 3:41 am

            Yep, didn’t say it was likely 🙂

            But if there is one thing I trust less than Rossi it’s the Italian justice system.

          • Stephen T.

            February 27, 2012 at 4:20 am

            Rossi was imprisoned and was later acquitted of the charges for which he was imprisoned.

          • John Milstone

            February 27, 2012 at 10:48 am

            Steven T.: I spent quite a bit of time reviewing the newspaper stories from that period, and yes, Rossi’s convictions related to the operation of Dragon Petrol were later overturned.

            Rossi implies that these were his only criminal convictions, but that’s not true.

            HERE is an article about his 2000 conviction for bankruptcy fraud, for which he received a sentence of 8 years.

            HERE is a 2004 article which mentions that Rossi’s Dragon Petrol convictions had been overturned, but that did not include the 8-year sentence from 2000.

            I did an exhaustive search of the newspaper archives, and I did not find anything about this conviction being overturned. If you have any actual evidence (as opposed to Rossi’s say-so) I would love to see it.

        • Stephen T.

          February 27, 2012 at 4:15 am

          Much depends on character and I think Mr. Rossi might agree that he sure is a character.
          We shall celebrate or we shall grieve. It will be intense in any case.
          I will think positive thoughts and beam them broadly and intently into the aether.

    • Bob D

      February 27, 2012 at 10:34 pm

      Like a good magic trick, all you have to do is get the audience (Focardi in this case) to look at your diversion. Foocardi was too busy monitoring steam output and quality to notice if electricity input to the ecat was somehow bypassing the monitoring equipment. Focardi was too busy measuring steam output to notice how much electricity was really going in. I’ve known many a PHD that didn’t know a darn thing when it comes to electricity.

  33. Dick Smith

    February 27, 2012 at 12:14 am

    Why doesn’t someone with the expertise update the Wikipedia entry on ECat

    There is no mention of the huge us factory nor any mention of the rejection of the $1 m offer and the claims of clownary.

    • Stephen T.

      February 27, 2012 at 12:44 am

      It will be a long time before wiki comes up to speed on this story. It is because of their policies.

    • Methusela

      February 27, 2012 at 7:15 am

      Wiki only (generally, unless you happen to be Andy the grump, or IRWolfie- who decided a blog by a couple of Astrophysicists was acceptable) allows secondary reliable sources.

      Wiki’s is not interested in “the truth” (whatever that is) but primarily in the mainstream view. Apart from WP:FRINGE, which is supposed to allow for unconventional theories.

    • AB

      February 27, 2012 at 10:21 am

      Wikipedia is a good source of information to understand the general view on established subjects.

      It’s not a good source when there is controversy because minority opinions are not given the chance to make their point.

  34. Dick Smith

    February 27, 2012 at 12:40 am

    No I did not see the alleged NDA.
    I made it very clear that I would not be part of the secrecy that has allowed this scheme to go on for so long.

    If such a N DA exists why doesn’t anyone dare point out that if genuine it would be published on the Defkalion site considering the amount of doubt it has created.

    Remember my offer was not dependent on being told any information on how the ecat worked. I wanted a repeat of the simple March 2011 Rossi demo. Or something as simple from Defkalion. The Swedes did not sign NDAs so why should I have to especially when I made it clear I believed secrecy went against exposing the truth.

    I am waiting for the next excuse from Defkalion -re why they need to do tests which are not totally open with prompt reporting of the results.

    • RonB

      February 27, 2012 at 12:58 am

      That sounds completely rational to me.

      • Justin

        February 27, 2012 at 5:03 am

        Not to me…

        The rational approach, if ones objective is to flush out and expose scammers, would have been to request and publish the NDA.

        What we got instead was a ludicrous nonsense, evidence deprived, faith based assumption that the merest hint of an NDA was near-proof of fraud.

        What bollocks.

        And then we get this, valid, but AFTER THE FACT spiel about it not being on the Defkalion site.

        It’s like DS baited the hook, threw it into the water, felt something nibbling on the bait, so hauled in his line and announces to the world the presence of a fraud fish.

        I don’t feel the need to apologise for pointing out that a rational fisherman might have jiggled the line for a bit and CAUGHT the damn fish, if it truly exists.

        Ahh well. This new ‘prize’ is better in some ways, but lacks the up-front, proactive challenge of the prior offer that — just maybe — would have served up tasty smoked fresh fish for everyone by dinnertime.

        • dsm

          February 27, 2012 at 7:10 am

          Justin & others

          In marketing there are fundamental rules that are near universal when it comes to selling agency rights.

          What I am alluding to here is what both Rossi and Defkalion announced. They both committed a cardinal (nay mortal) sin of marketing that has to be so self evident that one wonders why no one has pointed it out, except it is typically the 1st thing an insincere reseller does.

          Both Rossi and Defkalion announced rights by country and set the fee based on the name of the country, not the size of the market – “hello, anyone home ???”

          Rights to the US market (311 million people cost (eCat $200,000) & (Hyperion &40m Euros), rights for the same device in the Danish market (5.4 million people, same price.

          That is as glaring an act of stupidity as Defkalion claiming they produced the world’s best LENR reactor inside 3 months with no help, no science, but fervent prayer and a miracle.

          Having worked for at one time, the worlds largest computer company and had the job of signing up partner deals, I am flabbergasted that so many people don’t see the glaring inequality let alone why such inequality was woven into the agency plans.

          I suggest to anyone who has a relative in marketing, ask them what they think of a deal where US rights to an agency that represents the greatest money making opportunity in the world is priced the same as for New Zealand (4.4 million people) as it is for the US (311 million people).

          Doug M

          • Quax

            February 27, 2012 at 7:22 am

            Good point. Is this the officially confirmed pricing? If so it is indeed nonsensical.

          • Dsm

            February 27, 2012 at 9:26 am

            I at 1st didn ‘t believe the country rights prices that people were reporting here. I figured the posters had it wrong then I went to the sites plus got info from people who paid up (or tried to 🙂 ) yup $200,000 for eCat rights and 40 M euros for Hyperion.

            Doug M

          • Veblin

            February 27, 2012 at 11:15 am

            What is your actual proof for any of what you are claiming? Do you have contracts or any other actual proof?

            Rossi says he has licensed distributors.
            For Rossi’s E-Cats you have Sol Millin asking Dick Smith for $200,000.
            You have Sol Millin giving an invoice that may or may not be real from Leonardo Corp. asking for $100,000.

            Defkalion GT says they have approved contracts with 60+ companies.
            DGT says those contracts are not activated until Hyperions are tested, certified and ready to be manufactured.
            DGT says of those 60+ contracts, 18 are for OEM producers of Hyperions and the rest are for Hyperion servicers or producers of approved equipment like heat exchangers, heat pumps. turbines, etc.
            DGT says the 40.5 million Euro OEM contract includes 300,000 units.
            DGT says they will be the first manufacturer and will supply the Greek market themselves.

            What actual proof or information do you have other than this?

          • dsm

            February 27, 2012 at 8:23 pm

            They are asking for money for a device they cannot demonstrate.

            What proof do you want ?

            I will agree that they officially haven’t commit fraud until they actually take money from someone.

            Can you prove they haven’t ?

            The reality with Rossi is that he has taken money & we have proof. The assumption with Defkalion is they ‘probably’ have but until someone steps forward and says they paid over money, we can’t be sure.

            Also, you dodged the point of the post. Do you have any information that says Defkalion
            are not asking 40m Euros per country ? – a link to that would be helpful and clsrify the matter.

            Doug M

    • Dale G. Basgall

      February 27, 2012 at 1:57 am

      Mr. Smith did you happen to get your new site working yet, I would like to see the 1mil prize formalized into a legit deal with details.

      Please let us know when this is up and running.

      • dsm

        February 27, 2012 at 4:30 am

        Be patient grasshopper – the mighty wind caries the tiny seed and when it comes to rest it may take root and grow.

        Doug M

    • Quax

      February 27, 2012 at 2:13 am

      Dick, actually I mentioned before that a NDA can nowhere be found on Defkalion’s site and that this absence does not enhance their credibility.

      There are plenty of folks here who are rather skeptical and want nothing more than a comprehensive test. In fact, apparently too many skeptics for the mental well-being of the pseudo-religious believers who have started calling for a “purge”.

    • RyanWLocke

      February 27, 2012 at 2:24 am

      Understood and understandable.

      • Methusela

        February 27, 2012 at 7:18 am

        Rubbish. Not accepting the NDA is unreasonable.

        You aren’t bound by law to follow the NDA in case of fraud.

        This was all about proving fraud or not wasn’t it?

  35. Quax

    February 27, 2012 at 12:44 am

    Resist the Purge.

    IMHO the overriding reason why this is the leading ecat/LENR news blog is the wide spectrum of opinions that are allowed with the occasional stretches of civilized debate between the fractions.

    I very much credit Paul S. for maintaining this delicate balance.

    What people who are calling for a Vortex like purge don’t seem to understand is that such a purge will destroy this unique LENR biotope. Rendering it into yet another ecat also-ran. Mary Yugo was a unique aberration in that he/she apparently made flooding ecat forums his full-time obsession. There is no other “patho-sceptic” even close to that level of comment carpet bombing.

    If you come here, expect you opinion challenged. I think that’s the way it should be and it makes this blog lively.

    Fortunately given Paul’s even-handedness I am not too concerned that a purge is in the cards.

    • Stephen T.

      February 27, 2012 at 12:56 am

      Here here.

    • dsm

      February 27, 2012 at 4:27 am

      Amen 🙂

      Doug M

    • Ghost Dawg

      February 27, 2012 at 5:22 am


    • Peter Roe

      February 27, 2012 at 9:13 am

      You talk of ‘mary yugo’ – George Hody’s main alter ego – as if in the past tense, but he is very much still in business “carpet bombing” any LENR blog he is not banned from. Even when he IS banned he simply returns under another guise, as he has done here.

      I agree that Paul has a very delicate job to do, but I think that there is widespread agreement (other than among the various breeds of ‘skeptics’ anyway) that discussion here improved immeasurably after the last time some restrictions were applied, which included the banning of the ‘mary yugo’ ID.

    • AB

      February 27, 2012 at 10:37 am

      Resist the Purge.

      IMHO the overriding reason why this is the leading ecat/LENR news blog is the wide spectrum of opinions that are allowed with the occasional stretches of civilized debate between the fractions.

      I very much credit Paul S. for maintaining this delicate balance.

      What people who are calling for a Vortex like purge don’t seem to understand is that such a purge will destroy this unique LENR biotope. Rendering it into yet another ecat also-ran.

      Our opinion on this matter is actually close but you misunderstand me.

      The proposed purge is to get rid of low-quality high-volume posters that resemble more a troll than a genuine skeptic. It has nothing to do with where people place themselves on the confidence spectrum.

      I do enjoy reading intelligent posts from both sides. Certain low-quality high-volume posters add nothing to this but instead tend to derail the discussions.

      • AB

        February 27, 2012 at 10:50 am

        For example a good critical contribution is your intervention on this

        kwhilborn, it would be nice to live in a world where “LENR is not in question to the scientific community.”

        Not sire where you get that idea.

        The scientific editor “Jan Marwan”, of the book you linked to, is yet another lone LENR pioneer who toils away in his own private lab without association to any university or major research institute.

        This I very much welcome.

        This comment by JNewman on the other hand is not welcome because the only thing it can do is polarize the discussion.

        Al, Rossi reports are intended primarily for people who require no evidence for what he claims since none is ever available. For that audience, it is all good news. Let them enjoy it.

        • Peter Roe

          February 27, 2012 at 1:05 pm

          ‘Skeptic’ patronisation and superciliousness are standard fare here, and some fairly barbed comments flow in the other direction too. To be fair, JNewman’s comment was just one sideswipe at that mythical creature, the ‘true believer’ and I’m not sure it qualifies him(/her?) as a ‘low-quality high-volume poster’.

          At the moment I think we have only one candidate for that accolade. I won’t even bother to specify further, as anyone who has visited this blog more than once will know who I am referring to.

        • Peter Roe

          February 27, 2012 at 1:11 pm

          Mind you, reading on a bit I think a certain aussie millionaire is heading steadily in that direction.

          • Peter Roe

            February 27, 2012 at 1:12 pm

            **purported** aussie millionaire.

  36. Pekka Janhunen

    February 27, 2012 at 6:08 am

    From JONP
    Joseph Fine: When the E-Cat can produce electricity and product demand soars, you will have to work an impossible 32 hours per day (or more) instead of “only” 16 hours per day. Since there are only 24 hours per day, you probably need some help. What should students and/or professionals study to prepare themselves for the Energy future?
    Andrea Rossi: I think that it is not important what a student studies, but how he studies. In anything you study there is the Infinite, and if you study very well one thing you get the capacity to learn and you can apply this capacity to everything. Once you have learnt to fish, you can fish what you want.

  37. Methusela

    February 27, 2012 at 7:22 am


    HEY, ADMIN!!


    HEY, PAUL!!


    And please moderate but don’t delete comments.

  38. Dick Smith

    February 27, 2012 at 8:15 am

    Justin. I simply do not agree. Don’t you understand that the wording of the NDA would have clearly stated that what was in the NDA could not be disclosed.

    Don’t you see they wanted to get me talking to them by phone on skype rather than by email which I could and would publish.
    Have you noticed that there is not one name published re anyone else involved in purchasing distributorships or purchasing 1MW units or indeed anything rellevant that can actually be checked . This applies to both Rossi and Defkalion.
    Have you noticed no one knows where the units are being manufactured?
    Don’t you see a pattern here?
    Very shortly Defkalion will come out with what seems a totally reasonable explanation for the delay in announcing the names of any individual involved in the testing.
    It’s all a consistent method of delay to the gullible as substantial more money is collected.

    • Methusela

      February 27, 2012 at 8:35 am

      You could have signed the NDA, and if fraud was underway, published anyway.

      You could have made the statement: “We did the testing. We found that the device doesn’t function. They’re taking money for nothing.”

      The NDA could not stop you from doing that.

      Instead, you’re making your statements from circumstantial evidence.

      You must get firmer facts before making outrageous claims of fraud and other business damaging statements!

      Nearly everybody here isn’t optimistic about Rossi or DFG – and nearly everybody here would have leapt at the chance to perform the tests.

      Anyway, how are you getting on with producing the text of your 1,000,000 AUD prize?

      Could you tell me the domain name where the text will be placed?

    • Ransompw

      February 27, 2012 at 12:19 pm

      So why didn’t you ask them to forward you the NDA they wanted to use and you could have published it. An NDA you sign and which binds you only says exactly what you want it to say. Your NDA excuse is really silly, you should come up with a better excuse if you want to seem in least bit credible.

    • Kevmo

      March 4, 2014 at 8:44 pm

      Mr. Smith:

      Do you think that LENR is a real phenomenon? Would you be willing to post that $1M for an X-Prize?

      Kevin O


      Sample correspondence from Vortex-L on this proposed X prize.

      Enclosed is my proposal sent to Singularity University honchos I met last
      week. I do not include any responses because I have not gotten permission
      to release the correspondence.


      My proposal is to set up an X Prize to reward & encourage Techshop (http:// teams who replicate the recent Cold Fusion experiment
      at Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project wherein Gamma Rays were detected
      after an excess heat event. The Gamma ray finding was replicated by Hans
      Biberian within 48 hours.
      MFMP Report Detection of Unusual Gamma Rays [Updated: Biberian Replicates]


      What is MFMP?
      In essence, they are a grassroots, open-source LENR replication effort.

      If one simply follows their latest recipe, a LENR device can be built and
      tested by anyone who has the means.


      Why Techshop? Because they have a relationship to which
      was started by Dr. Griffith. They can be trusted; they are the right
      people to encourage for a grass roots energy effort; and the interest in an
      X prize would help that worthy organization grow; if they can do it, almost
      anyone can do it and the generated excitement would turn the world upside


      What would success look like?

      An Open Source LENR device generates more heat than can be accounted for by
      chemical means. My suggestion is to set a threshold that the heat
      generated should have an energy density at least 10X that of any known
      chemical source for at least one hour so that measurement error is not a
      factor. An additional test would be the presence of Gamma Rays well above

      Measurements would be done by a team of X Prize’s choosing. The team
      should include at least one person trained to look for deception;
      basically, a magician.

      I would suggest that there should be multiple replications for this prize
      to be claimed. Perhaps 3 separate Techshop teams need to have their
      projects tested independently and the 3 teams would share the prize.


      Where would the money come from?

      I would expend my passion, as Dr. Diamantis so eloquently inspired
      yesterday, pursuing money for this prize.

      Recently, there was $5M donated to University of Missouri for LENR research
      by billionaire Sidney Kimmel.

      *Australian* Entrepreneur Dick Smith recently offered over* $1 million* for
      a convincing demo.

      Crowdsourcing. There is a pent up interest in this technology.

      Scientific Instruments. This multi$billion company offered to give free
      measuring hardware and software to anyone working in LENR. They may enjoy
      getting some publicity in exchange for a donation.


      In conclusion, I hope that you will see that the time has come to give this
      technology the nudge it deserves. Thank you for considering the
      proposal. My preference for communicating would be cell phone for the time

      best regards,

      Kevin O’Malley
      Electrical Engineer

      On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 12:39 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:

      > I am confused. I do not follow what James Bowery means about the X-prize.
      > Let me reset the conversation with a new title.
      > Bowery wrote:
      > “Sound criteria would include an experimental protocol is submitted to
      > Dick Smith that, when followed by independent scientists, reliably
      > generates excess energy.”
      > Okay, I gather this is what the X-prize would be given for. That seems
      > like a reasonable goal. That is better than, say, a prize for the first
      > commercial prototype device.
      > “Other details of the criteria need to be established but it seems
      > entirely reasonable that men like yourself and Ed are very qualified to
      > help set those criteria.”
      > I do not know anything about the X-prize, so I would not be the one to
      > establish other criteria. If they have any questions I would be happy to
      > answer them.
      > Years ago, someone from X-prize contacted me with some questions. I do not
      > recall what they were, but I dutifully answered. I never heard back.
      > If you have any influence with these people, by all means ask them to
      > establish a prize for cold fusion. As you say, the prize should be for a
      > reliable experimental protocol. Go for it! Bell that cat!
      > – Jed

  39. Dick Smith

    February 27, 2012 at 9:25 am

    I have more than adequate evidence for the claims I have made.
    Do you believe I would risk making such claims if they were not true.?

    Have you noticed I post under my own name?
    Don’t you understand that I would have had legal action taken against me if my claims were not true?
    I dont know what more evidence you could possible need.
    Just look at how no claims can be verified or confirmed however money is clearly being sought.
    It all follows a standard pattern and when someone writes a book on this when it is all exposed readers will wonder how anyone could have been fooled in the first place. I suggest you read the fantastic book on the Firepower International fraud- you will see great similarities.

    • Methusela

      February 27, 2012 at 9:47 am

      Could you please provide a list of all the evidence you have then?

      Perhaps we could all have a look and see if it’s more than circumstantial?

      As I keep repeating – and we all know that I never repeat myself much 😉 – most of us are suspicious. Most of were taught: “If it seems to good to be true, then it probably isn’t”.

      Please confirm our suspicions by giving a list of verifiable facts that we can get our teeth into.

      Not just rumour and supposition.

      I mean Dick, you yourself are following a standard pattern here!

      • dsm

        February 27, 2012 at 9:52 am

        Some folks’s suspicion seems to be that the person next to them is going to get a bigger serve of Jonestown kool-aid than they are offered for themselves.

        “Hey Rev Jones, Billy got more than me, what gives ?”

        Doug M

  40. Dick Smith

    February 27, 2012 at 9:32 am


    And to make the statement. “we did the testing” would have meant I would have had to be involved with the actual Defkalion testing.
    Don’t you see that’s what they wanted?
    Look again at how Firepower got reputable people involved whenever they could.
    No, sorry I wasn’t going to be manipulated into that one!

    • Methusela

      February 27, 2012 at 9:55 am

      This is unacceptable.

      Why make the offer at all, if you had no intention of testing the device?

      I do know the answer to that question, it’s the “Well, if they’re fake, they’ll refuse to let my team test”.

      Everybody (and the world) knows that you don’t accept any Rossi or DFG statements as true.

      And you shouldn’t without first-hand evidence – you were a founder of the Aussie sceptics after all!

      But your behaviour of approaching this with an already made-up mind implies that you, and by association, the Aussie Sceptics aren’t actually interested in the search for “the truth” about the matter.

      Sceptics believe neither one thing or another until the evidence shows them which is “true”.

      You sir, are not a sceptic by that definition!

      • Bob D

        February 27, 2012 at 9:30 pm


        “”Everybody (and the world) knows that you don’t accept any Rossi or DFG statements as true. “”

        I for one take exception to your blanket statement above. It is clearly false. Thus, your entire collection of statements are suspect.

        • Methusela

          February 27, 2012 at 9:33 pm

          Well, you obviously aren’t of this world, and don’t fall into the set of Everybody either.

          I suspected as much…

          • Bob D

            February 28, 2012 at 3:38 pm

            So did I. At least now I know.

  41. Dick Smith

    February 27, 2012 at 10:15 am

    The list would take me too long to prepare
    Virtually every statement made , every promise made, every action that has taken place leads to one conclusion- fraud.
    The fact that not one important fact can actually be checked for accuracy is a giveaway .
    No independent testing, no names of those who are supposed to be investors, no names of even one distributor ,even though all countries except two have claimed to have been sold,
    Not even a name of the one big customer!
    The fact that Rossi even rejected the chance of confirming the March 2011 demonstration all adds to the sad fact that it’s all a con.
    And if anyone actually believes there is a huge robotized factory being built in Florida
    they would believe anything!
    When will you say the benefit of the doubt has gone to far? Soon I hope.

    • Methusela

      February 27, 2012 at 10:31 am

      This is illogical.

      If your intent is to discourage “mom and pop” investors, then it is crucial that you create this list and post it – either here, or somewhere within your web domain.

      Declaring that you don’t have sufficient time, isn’t an excuse!

      If you think that there are people out there waving wads of money, begging to invest, then that would be the best way to protect them.

      Surely a man of your resources could find some help to compile this list?

  42. Dick Smith

    February 27, 2012 at 10:20 am

    And I did not approach with a made up mind.
    I originally thought a very small chance it could be true.
    But the rejection of the $1 m offer certainly confirmed it for me!
    Plus all the other info I have learnt since then.

  43. Dick Smith

    February 27, 2012 at 10:43 am

    The best may to protect investors is to get the facts in the major world media outlets
    I am working on that.

    • MK

      February 27, 2012 at 12:14 pm

      Interesting discussions. I must say that I like Mr. Smith approach to trying to find out the truth.

      Currently my viewpoint is that I want LENR to be commercially available. Yet I have not seen or heard that one is available. Both Rossi and Defkalion have made claims but there is no follow-thru.

      If I was offered a million dollars to show that I had a real working LENR device and the offer was based well within the parameters of what the LENR could output then I would say YES faster than a neutrino. 🙂

      A few weeks ago Defkalion started to sound like it had an actual device with the way it was posting on it’s own forums that independent testing would be taking place with live streaming etc… Then I was really excited when Mr.Smith had offer the prize to them if Defkalion could show that they had a working LENR device. Suddenly I started to hear reasons why they did not want to take Mr. Smith with the offer. So my optimism started to take a big hit.

      I am still on the fence but I am realistic in thinking that Defkalion and Rossi are not with a commercial available LENR device….

      • MK

        February 27, 2012 at 8:43 pm


        there seems to be a double use of the nick MK. As I do not post often I am not aware who was using this nickname first. Could you please check?

        • admin

          February 27, 2012 at 9:10 pm

          You were first, MK. The other just joined today.

          If you are reading this, MK2, would you please try another nic? Poor software that allows such a clash. I will look into it when I can.



          • MK

            February 27, 2012 at 9:39 pm

            Thanks Paul.
            @MK(2): very close to my opinion, just to be curious, where are you from?
            By the way:

            What says the Neutrino to the Photon?




  44. Neil Farbstein

    May 27, 2013 at 6:27 pm

    Deleted by Admin