Rossi on ‘Positive or Negative’

A number of people have commented on Andrea Rossi’s often-repeated statement about releasing testing information whether it be positive or negative, and for some it is worrisome. They feel that Rossi reiterating the chance that results could be negaitive possibly indicates that something is amiss in the development of the E-Cat.

A reader of the Journal of Nuclear Physics called attention to this concern, saying, ‘The word “negative” isn’t clear for me, because we all know that the “Rossi Effect” is real. So I think that the word “negative” must only to be applied to actual developments tending to increase the functionality of your apparatuses…Is it true?’

Andrea Rossi replied:

We are working very hard to merit the enthusiasm of persons like you. We are making a hard work of R&D and validation and we will publish the results after such work will have been completed, whatever the results, positive or negative, as I always said. Until then, my duty as a scientist is to say that no specific answer can be given to questions regarding if the results will be positive or negative. All I can say is that the work based upon the so called Rossi Effect is carried on with scientific rigor.

It seems to me like Rossi wants to emphasize that he is carrying out science in an impartial and unprejudiced manner, and does not want to tip his hand either way. It’s similar to the way he was speaking before last year’s third party tests were published where he said that the results were out of his control and they may or may not validate his work.

My sense is that Rossi is not trying to set up observers for disappointing results, but that as Chief Scientist for his company he wants to act the part appropriately. If he kept saying that the results were going to be good, before the testing was completed, it would sound more like a sales pitch, and to give status updates of the tests before they are completed would be decidedly unscientific, so I think he’s just trying to maintain credibility as a scientist here.

  • LCD

    That sure sounds like he’s no longer sure of himself 🙁

  • US_Citizen71

    Gee with a video camera pointed at the setup during the entire test I guess they would have to had developed an invisibility cloak in order to “modify the apparatus when they want”. So you’re telling me not only does Rossi have an ECat he has an invisibility cloak as well, since you are so positive this was done. If that was Rossi’s home his garage is bigger than my entire town house, what a life.

    • Omega Z

      I want the Invisibility Cloak.

      Not only would Energy costs no longer be of concern, Neither would any costs be of concern.

      Anyone up for a Tour of a Bank Vault. 🙂

  • GreenWin
    • artefact

      very very good find GW 🙂 Thanks

    • bachcole

      Thank you, GreenWin, for this find.

      I am going to need a bunch of diagrams to understand this one. If this is true, with those lovely patents, it may leave Rossi in the dust.

      It is sort of breathtaking. I don’t know what to say. I am happy for Blacklight. I am happy for the world. I am sad for Rossi, I think. But it is all still unproven. But given this kind of announcement, and given the name Perkin Elmer, a company that I know is no-nonsense and very serious people with many contacts with the Department of Defense, I think that this is true.

    • tombuktu

      this is bigger than I have expectet from rossi and defkalion and – if true- it comes around the corner in a few days

  • fritz194

    Its probably a part of his NDA that he isn´t allowed to comment on the status or progress.
    He basically communicates very vague deadlines – and somebody else will comment then.
    On the other hand – if there is some way to stop the e-cat – it leaves some room for negotiations.

  • Zeddicus Zul Zorander

    I’ll repeat my previous answer:
    “I think he has to distance himself in any way possible from the third party reports. So he keeps mentioning that any outcome is possible since he himself has no control at all over the third party test. It’s just politics because I also believe the only outcome is positive. I mean, the guy is working in the kilowatt to megawatt range. It really shouldn’t’ be difficult to test his devices for input / output energy gain.”

  • Gordon Docherty

    Makes total sense to say “positive or negative” – I believe it is just a way of saying that the outcome will be reported as fairly as possible…

  • Jonnyb

    The results would be published even if negative. I doubt that there is any chance of negative results, however for credibility we need assurances that the results will be published what ever the outcome, common sense, don’t worry about it, it will all be fine!!! probably.

  • Bruce Williams

    Frank, I totally agree with your analysis.