Mark Gibbs of Forbes Wants to Hear From Believers in the E-Cat

Mark Gibbs has posted a number of times about the E-Cat on the Forbes web site. He comes across as an open-minded skeptic — not yet accepting the E-Cat as valid technology, but open to the possibility of it being the real deal. He keeps revisiting the topic, recognizing that there is the chance that Andrea Rossi’s technology has the potential to change everything if it turns out to be what Rossi says it is.

His latest article shows that a poll of Forbes readers is split roughly evenly between believers and non-believers in the E-Cat. (44 per cent believing, 42 per cent disbelieving, and 14 per cent saying, don’t know). Gibbs says he understands why people don’t believe, — but he seems genuinely surprised that there are so many people who categorically believe in the E-Cat:

But how do we account for those who so firmly believe the E-Cat is real? Is the basis of their belief that they just want the E-Cat to be real? Is it that they believe that the E-Cat works on unknown physics?

So, tell me: If you voted “yes”, what is the basis of your belief?

Since he asks, maybe some of our readers who do believe could respond to Gibbs’ request.

  • will

    I believe (which is not the same as I KNOW) that Rossi’s work is valid and not a scam for the following reasons:

    1) Focardi, a professor emeritus at one of the world’s most prestigious universities has no incentive to participate in a scam that would earn him no money and disgrace his name forever.

    2) I do not see the upside for anyone if this is a scam. It would just being lawsuits, disgrace and infamy to all involved. If E-cats are sold and do not work as advertised, the seller will be sued. Simple as that.

    3) Physics, as all science is structured so that observations (data) are explained by theory, not so that current theory can be bolstered by data. The fact that LENR contradicts current nuclear theory is totally irrelevant to the discussion. The same can be said for all “anomalous” observations that ultimately lead to the advancement of science.

    Having read the book “EXCESS HEAT” the book about cold fusion by CG Beaudette, I am convinced that heat producing LENR’s have been replicated in hundreds of labs.

    4) The fact that Nobel prize winning physicists have endorsed the notion that LENR exists tells me that if Rossi doesn’t have it exactly right, yet someone else will soon.

    5) Reading the articles by Eugene Mallove, former head science reporter for MIT, convinces me that there is a coordinated effort to suppress LENR research. If it didn’t work, this campaign of disinformation and suppression would not be worth the effort.

  • Pingback: Mark Gibbs of Forbes Wants to Hear From Believers in the E-Cat | ColdFusionBlog.net()

  • hsn

    It is sad that we have to talk about belief in Science. Rossi succeeded in thinning down the difference between religion and science! Science with no proof!

    • will

      Every scientific breakthrough has “believers” and “non believers”.

      eg: evolution, relativity, gene theory…..

      “All new ideas go through three phases…They’re first ridiculed or ignored. Then they meet outrage. Then they are said to have been obvious all along.” – Schopenhauer

      Rossi didn’t invent that .

      • will

        The actual quote (in English)

        “All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.”

  • Alan DeAngelis

    It’s a Catch-22. You can’t expect Rossi to get a seal of approval from the people he’s upstaging.

  • Uranox

    I met Prof Focardi at the university, he taught me physics . He’s the most honest person I know. Focardi’s scam ? IMPOSSIBLE !!!

  • James Rovnak

    Search Web for “I Believe in the Ecat” video. See sketch and actual device with boiler scale that has worked. Song is very instructive. Followed this for 2011 year and I think a workable fusion home heater is finally hear. I looked at both experiments and theory being developed and am impressed. Retired Nuclear/Mechanical Engineer I think we are in for a CHANGE!

  • Al S

    Call it intuition, call it 2012, but I feel after all the dumping of real free energy technologies of this past piss-poor century, desperation economically is forcing change. Rossi’s e-cat, is a starter, it’s coming out and will not be suppressed. Here and now is opening a grand new free energy matrix of living, and the old controls are becoming mute. Be happy and get in line, put you money on the line. Rossi’s e-cat is where it’s at!

  • Sparks

    It’s looking more and more likely that Rossi has devised something that cannot be sustained. It appears to work for a “burst” of time, then peter out — in essence, an energy “flywheel” that ultimately has a net energy loss. This would explain Rossi’s complex behavior. Initially he may have thought he had found the real thing. This made him manic (as it would many scientists), and now he’s trying like the devil to find that little tweak that makes it continue generating power beyond the net energy input. This interpretation makes the man understandable, not really a fraudster, but rather one who feels he is right on the verge of the wonderful.

    • Robert Mockan

      Evidence to support your statements and conclusion?

      • Sparks

        Evidence and data supporting conclusions not a part of the culture on this website. I’m going out on a limb here, predicting that Rossi is at a dead end, attempting feverishly to overcome fundamental limits and bounds that simply cannot be overcome. The fervor this man is showing is most consistent with a naive scientist (rather than a frauster) who is at the moment being fooled by a fundamental oversight that he has committed in his thinking. As a scientist, I have had that experience a few times (as well as successes a few times). The letdown can be excruciating when you finally see your error. I suspect that letdown is in Rossi’s future.

        • MJS

          What the hell are you talking about? Let down how? It works but not as stable as would be required?

          • Sparks

            This quote from Rossi, “Andrea Rossi has said that for safe and stable operations it is necessary that the external heat source be cycled on and off.” In the above quote, “stable” could easily mean “keep the flywheel effect going.”
            Since nobody has been allowed to measure the energy input, nor the energy output, this seems a very plausible explanation for what Rossi is doing. And even he my be fooling himself, and not realizing that all he has going is merely a very sophisticated energy “flywheel.” We need to know the Energy Returned on Energy Investment (EREI), a very simple and common statistic in the energy industry.

          • RichyRoo

            Even if it were a ‘flywheel’ type thing, its clearly a novel reaction and further seems to have potential as a battery if not a generator. Thats if you are entirely correct.
            Personally, i am looking forward to buying one and seeing if it works as advertised (need to wait for the home unit … d’oh!).

  • Sojourner Soo

    I post links to your page everywhere Frank, including this morning in the Globe and Mail under an opinion piece written by Canada’s energy minister, in which he attacks environmentalists opposed to the Northern Gateway pipeline from Alberta to the beautiful British Columbia west coast, where they plan to ship Alberta raw bitumen to China and Asia. This idea has taken particular force, since Obama put the Keystone XL pipeline on hold until after the American elections.

    I hope Globe readers visit and learn about LENR and the Rossi E-Cat, here and elsewhere.

    The other day, this same energy minister appointed Alykhan Velshi’s mother (Velshi, the son, is head of ethicaloil.org, a pro-tarsands propaganda organization, supported by our country’s Prime Minister) Rumina Velshi, to the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission yesterday. I strongly suspect the Harper government intends to stop the E-Cat certification process in Canada, because it will adversely affect the tarsands development.

    There is no doubt that Canadians are in for a real struggle over this new LENR technology, since our government will likely seek to prevent its introduction, since it poses such a threat to the tarsands. I genuinely hope I’m mistaken, but I don’t believe I am. As we are now the United States number one supplier of crude oil, I worry about our future, which is already having serious “Dutch Disease” effects on the rest of our country’s economic sectors, especially the manufacturing sector in Ontario.

    In any case, keep up the good work Frank, and folks like me will continue to talk about LENR at home. It is so important to spread the message to every nook and cranny of the world.

    And, yes, LENR and the E-Cat are real, Mr. Gibbs. Why else would my government take steps to prevent it from being certified, as I suspect it is doing with this recent appointment?

  • morse

    I am a believer (naive or not)
    To quote Stanton Friedman:
    Technological progress comes from doing things differently in an unpredictable way. The future is not an extrapolation of the past. There is need for change.

  • http://www.bestthinking.com/article/display/1639 Simon Berkovich

    Rossi’s E-Cat works on new physics:

    http://www.bestthinking.com/article/display/1639

    Presumably, the excess heat effect has nothing to do with nuclear transmutations. The Big Picture of Nature portrayed by modern physics is not correct. Physical world is organized not as a “biliard-ball” system but rather as an “Internet of Things”. Such a construction simultaneously provides material objects with information control and energy actuation.

    • Kim

      Sounds like a living organism

      Kim

  • Robert Mockan

    Gibbs is asking the wrong question. Over the past 20 years there has been a progression of predictive value of the hypothesis explaining the phenomena of heat generation in metal hydrogen systems, derived from experimentation on those systems. Although the precise hypothesis to apply to the Rossi E-Cat performance has not yet been elucidated, the application of existing hypothesis to development of the E-Cat product is consistent with the ongoing progression. Belief has nothing to do with the objective reality. That does not mean the reality is proven beyond doubt, only that it is probable.

  • http://www.centaurix.com Mattias Andersson

    Being a Swedish citizen, I’ve been able to follow this story from day one through the excellent journalistic work done by Mats Lewan in Swedish scientific newspaper NyTeknik. So far not one single piece of evidence has been presented that would conclude that this is a scam — rather the opposite — Rossi has time after time demonstrated his ability to fulfill his committments. There is not a doubt in my mind that this technology is real and that it will be for the greater good of mankind.

  • Gunnar

    Normally, a reasonable person should say that if a phenomenon exists then we should believe in it or at least we should investigate more deeply. Skeptics, instead, say that because that phenomenon does not exists then we must not belive in it and we must not invetigate in any case.
    Skeptical science starts from the conclusions and infers that the premiss are wrongs.
    Imagine Galileo that starts thinking the moon was made by cheese and than deduced that astronomy is a waste of time.
    This is not a matter of skeptics vs. believers, this is a pragmatic question, id est, we need new energy source because oil, carbon and nuclear energy are pulluting and cause wars to control sources. So if it is an alternative, why we don’t try to investigate that path?
    My question is why 42% of people don’t believe in e-cat, or better saying, why they don’t want to believe a priori? Suppose that e-cat does not work, so what? We will continue to use oli, carbon and uranium, but if instead it works?
    Why e-cat skeptic people took it personally as it was a matter of life and death?

    • Alexvs

      The question is not if one believes in LENR or not. The question is if Rossi’s E-Cat is true, a hoax or an error. LENR is a reality acknowledged since 1933, no matter how you name it (CF, LENR or simply manmade NR).

      • Gunnar

        “The question is if Rossi’s E-Cat is true, a hoax or an error.”

        This is not the question, as is not a question if for example is better Linux or other OS, or Hulk is stronger than Superman, or Democrats are better than Repubblicans. These are matter of religious feud between party supporters.

        I believe that e-cat is real, because I think that proofs are tangibles.
        Someone can believe that instead the proofs are to weak.
        But many peoples believe e-cat is a fake because its existence clash with their scientific prejudices. Darwin was attacked by the mainstream scientic community because its theory demolished the untouchble dogmas of the official science at those times. Instead of demonstrating with real proofs that evolutionism was wrong, skeptics they mocked him and jeer.
        With e-cat is the same, no one produces any proof that e-cat is a fake. So if some thinks that proofs are too weak for support the reality of e-cat, he/she must even thinks that there are no evidences against e-cat reality.
        Sorry for my english, is not my mother language.

        • Alexvs

          Excuse me. I meant the thread question.

  • Ivan Mohorovicic

    By the way, lately Francesco Celani has written a series of emails to 22passi blog explaining what he will talk about during WSEC 2012 at Geneva in the next few days and answering related questions that people made on that blog. This was the important bit of the full abstract available there:

    In these weeks our group, working with long and thin wires having the surface coated with micro-nano-particles, get re-confirmation of a phenomenon, by us, seldom observed in some previous experiments: the specific alloy used (Cu-Ni), that usually has Positive Temperature Coefficient (PTC) of the resistance, if absorbs large amount of Hydrogen, changes to Negative TC. Such phenomenon is correlated to anomalous heat production and increases as the anomalous heat increases. If such key phenomenon will be kept under full control, because its behaviour can be observed with simple instrumentation, it can be open the door to systematic work, worldwide, to find the “optimal” material and operating point.

    1: Original post about the World Sustainable Energy Conference 2012 (partially in English)

    2: Post containing an important excerpt from Celani’s abstract to his talk (partially in English)

    3: Post regarding the WSEC conference (downloadable press conference in English)

    4: Celani answers some questions and clarifies a few things (I) (in Italian)

    5: Celani answers some questions and clarifies a few things (II) (in Italian)

    There’s also been a short discussion about this on Vortex-l mailing list.

  • wolfgang gaerber

    On one hand – science has reached a level of diversification and complexity – that it´s quite difficult and time-consuming to keep somewhat oriented.
    On the other hand – people still trust in obsolete theories learned in school.

    Traditional fusion/fission with those expensive monster machines is perceived as valid technology, while LENR can´t be because it´s magic.

    I´m sure – if Rossi would develop a very complex and expensive machine – there would be no “magic”.

  • http://www.neotreksoftware.com Allan Shura

    There is not much doubt there is a cold fusion
    for anyone who is serious about looking at the
    available information.

    For the Rossi its simply the balance of probabilites until we have the hard facts from
    a known customer who has put the device into service.

  • Alexvs

    Moreover someone could have changed his vote. Myself changed from:
    Rossi has nothing and is perpetrating a hoax/scam
    to:
    Rossi honestly thinks he has achieved cold fusion but is mistaken

    The reason for change is that if it were scam he would not behave the way he does.

  • Brad Arnold

    I think what Gibbs writes and what he thinks are two different things. Remember, his articles have to pass the “Editor filter.” I’ve grown up reading sci-fi, but many people have a much more rigid mindstate, and as such a world shaking technology like LENR can hurt them (cognative dissidence).

    For instance, many people have to seek psychological help when they experience an earth quake (the earth moving under their feet is contrary to their bedrock belief that it is stable). The moral is that the best method is to introduce people to LENR gradually (and expect a significant number of people to engage in magical think to deny LENR).

    • Brad Arnold

      Let me add, that even me, who I believe has maximum mental flexibility to paradigm changes, was walking around for WEEKS in a daze after finding out about LENR. Frankly, while on the one side there are people who deny LENR when it is clearly valid (This phenomenon has been confirmed in hundreds of published scientific papers: http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/RothwellJtallyofcol.pdf), there are a very large group of people who believing, don’t fully understand the jaw dropping implications:

      “Total replacement of fossil fuels for everything but synthetic organic chemistry.” –Dr. Joseph M. Zawodny, NASA

      Also, that this means we can get off this rock economically (i.e. cosmopolitan space travel within our lifetimes).

      • George

        LOL, well I’m glad you are have the maximum mental flexibility. BS, most people don’t have a clue what is going on because it hasn’t been on Entertainment Tonight. They will believe it when they can walk into Home Depot and buy a device.
        The question for me is not is LENR true. There is enough evidence out there to prove that. The question is, is it repeatable and controllable. Rossi may be the first to have come up with a way to do that. If he has great, I’m thrilled, he will go down in history as one of the greatest inventors of all time. However, we can’t be sure yet because Rossi chooses to not want us to be sure. For reasons that he says are due to his desire to protect his trade secrets.

        For me this raises several concerns. 1. Why doesn’t he just patent his device, this would give him exclusive rights for 17 years to the technology. 2. Does he really thing once it is out on the market that someone will not just open the reactor and discover his catalyst? 3. Why does he insist on his demonstrations leaving considerable holes for his critics to poke at?
        Sorry, but something is not right here and I am not sure what it is but time will tell. I sincerely hope I am wrong.

        • gerard

          Part II
          From practice to theory
          (Automatic translation by software, excuse me, it’s not perfect)

          Will we finally understand that Andrea Rossi’s strategy of fait accompli was always a step ahead of what he says, and his cultivation of mystery protects the wrath of interests contrary to his “life project”. Opponents or skeptics have nothing to criticize or “kill” if not a mystery. For an investor, having at first recognition of official, political and media is not essential, for the time he was convinced of the concept of cold fusion and prepares its industrial fait accompli.
          We leave very often cast doubt on the integrity of the honesty of Andrea Rossi, and all other scientists who have been working for decades on cold fusion. Comments and critics suggest or say explicitly that this man is a pathological liar and an impostor.
          The conditional is required for fear of ridicule and losing credibility. Some even adorned the dress of intellectual rigor.
          Listening to your heart, do you really think that so long as many bright people in all corners of the world were victims of a mirage in front of their test tubes and in front of their calculations?
          The deception is not credible cold fusion, and the strategy of Rossi & Focardi if it annoys the media and commentators, and it is only my point of view to succeed, not to be crucified a second time the Cross of obscurantism energy.
          We need to let our fans and commentators of this major innovation convinced of the reality of cold fusion.
          If you are among the progressive forces do not be bland or ambiguous, do not leave any doubt about your convictions, be patient “Everything comes to those who wait.”
          Mr Rossi and those who help have learned of the terrible injustice done to Pons and Fleischmann, history is witness to that.
          Let us ask, if Mr. Andrea Rossi had started trying to explain his concept Nickel / Hydrogen cold fusion officials and “fathers” and sil had remained on a prototype … Surely it would have suffered the wrath the classical theorists and we would not be here.
          Today the theory is on track to catch up with industry practice and provide pedigree deserves the E-cat and the generator of 1 MW. Credible and renowned theorists are involved to explain this phenomenon which is inconsistent with the known laws of physics and applied. They ask questions and issue of new theories. A new exploration fields in physics opens the world.
          The fundamental theory has killed traditional cold fusion there are more than 20 years, it could rehabilitate today. It’s good practice and the reality of cold fusion that lead theorists to provide an explanation for a phenomenon hitherto unknown, where does the energy that should not exist according to classical knowledge.
          Once cold fusion theorized by the “fathers”, the recognition by governments and leading political figures will be very fast because the politicians are hungry for credibility, and they have a morbid fear of losing it, the media will follow. .. This recognition will be even easier than the industrial process is well advanced and will allow an understanding and educational communication.

          As for energy lobbies he will have to restructure or disappear, they will not have the necessary credibility with politicians, who will arbitrate in favor of the global emergency and cold fusion.

        • Knighthawk

          Could not have put it better.

  • Alexvs

    At the right side of this page there is a quest for opinions. It would be worth to know the evolution of votes after Rossi’s demos/declarations. I mean votes for each option as a function of time. Perhaps Mr. Admin could draw a graphic ad-hoc.

  • http://www.ConservativeBedtimeStories.com Forrest

    Here is the thing… Hope is good. The Theory is possible. Others have claimed to have done ‘it’. Is it REAL… well the funny thing is that he is moving ahead as though it were real.

    If I were in Rossi’s shoes and I could not get a ‘patent’ for my invention then this would be the best secondary alternative. Be first to market and make sure everyone knew it was my idea and try to do it with as low a margin as possible to dissuade others from even thinking about getting in the market for a couple of years.

    Here is the thing. At the pace he is going we will know one way or the other in about eight months. We will not even know the election of the next President of the United States in that time and the funny thing is that this may be of greater import to the United States then the election will be IF IT IS TRUE.

    The ability to create heat from a cost effective source is literally worth its weight in gold.

  • Ron

    I am more in the I don’t know category, for in fact I don’t. And, yes, there is not any hard core scientific validation of e-cat.. at least not yet. But there is a boat load of circumstantial evidence that looks promising and pretty convincing as well. Also A. Rossi seems like a person that who, even if maybe doesn’t always play all his cards face up all the time, outright fraud or as some one who is completely delusional. So even if I am not quite a believer as yet, at the same time all this mounting circumstanial evidence has kindled hope that perhaps this might in fact real… and could help make our world a better place.

  • Tom

    People believe in god without any actual knowledge of it’s existence. To believe in the E-cat is simply putting faith into it. I won’t eat my words if it turns out to be a scam but so long as I know it’s a possibility, I’ll believe in it.

  • Kim

    This Idea of obtaining energy from mass should
    be well know to all who have seen the energy release
    of the Hydrogen Bomb.

    Why is it so hard to understand that we are just
    now unlocking the secret of Incrementally releasing
    this same energy.

    Low Energy Nuclear Reaction.

    Lets stop quivering in the corner of the dark
    cave, and be fearless in our new found “Fire”

    Andrea Rossi needs our Support, not our
    chastisement.
    Lets move forward, our children
    will thank us.

    Respect
    Kim

    Respect

    Respect
    Kim

    • daniel maris

      Yes, it seems inherently implausible to me that the only way to access nuclear energy is via fission or hot fusion. Clearly there is this interface and it seems highly likely that there are ways of crossing the divide, because we can bring to bear interfaces that don’t occur in nature in the general course of events.

    • Kiran

      I really respect your view Kim. A majority of comments are in agreement that LENR or so-called CF (cold fusion) is real. When highly regarded sources such as Dr Eugene Mallove (ex-MIT) and BARC’s Dr M Srinivasan (amongst many others) claim it is real, there is very little doubt that the phenomenon exists. The issues have been of consistency and control. Rossi has been able to reproduce the excess heat consistently. He has employed NI for the control. NI are being coy about their involvement presumably because they have a non-disclosure clause in their agreement with Rossi that prevents them from making some type of public statements.

  • daniel maris

    I see both sides of the argument, but I do think “reasons to believe” outweigh the negatives. Chief among those:

    1. The peer reviewed papers describing LENR energy gain. There’s no reason to think LENR doesn’t exist.

    2. The positive comments of NASA and SPAWAR officials on LENR and to a certain extent Rossi.

    3. The fact that Rossi did conduct demonstrations, which a lot of people witnessed close up.

    4. The involvement of Focardi in development of working prototypes.

    5. The absence of any real evidence of fraud. If this was a fraudulent scheme,I think I might have expected someone close to the Rossi operation to have come out and denounced him by now – that sort of thing often happens.

    6. The fact that there are now a number of “players” in this new technology – which is just what you would expect if it was genuine.

    • Bob

      Mark,

      Become a customer. Forbes could afford to purchase one of the 1MW systems and prove to world that it is either ‘fact-or-fiction’.

      I for one am saying a quick prayer daily that the E-cat is real and will eventually save us from ourselves.

      When it arrives, I will be purchase approximately 10 of the residential systems. One for my home, one for my garage/workshop, one for my greenhouse, two for each of my two sons (for their homes)and three to give-away as gifts – this could be the greatest invention I may ever see in my lifetime.

      I am a layperson when it comes to LENR, but I have the faith that this has gone to far and to long for it to be a fraud… and if nothing else, it has created a huge buzz with huge possibilities. The E-cat story has itself become a catalyst as it has everybody thinking of the possibilities.

      My money is on Rossi and the E-cat.

      Regards,

      Bob

    • Wolf

      Exactly what I am thinking. And here is yet another argument:
      http://digital.ni.com/worldwide/bwcontent.nsf/web/all/2C6B449A3F0F8F3A862579480060A07F
      Why would such a huge and respected company put out a press release like that, where they put Rossi (Leonardo Corporation) on the same level with CERN / LHC, if they wouldn’t have insider knowledge about the existence of the device?