Rossi on Cold Fusion Criticism: ‘Victimism is Syndrome of Impotence’

There’s an interesting comment on the Journal of Nuclear Physics by Andrea Rossi in response to a post by a reader who draws Rossi’s attention to the book Excess Heat by Charles G. Beaudette which covers the cold fusion story since the time of Fleischmann and Pons and the negative and hostile reaction from the scientific community.

Here’s Rossi’s response:

My opinion is different. The scientific community underlined the fact that the experiment has not been repeated reliably. This is a fact. Victimism is the syndrome of impotence. If you make indipendent measurements and they give good results, you can fight successfully. Otherwise, you have to go back to work and make corrections. In this case, while working to get reliable results from indipendent measurements, the less you talk, the better.

Andrea Rossi has said that he himself tried to replicate the Pons and Fleischmann effect without success, and that maybe helps him understand the response of those in the scientific community who couldn’t replicate it either. His own efforts have taken a different approach to achieve an excess heat effect, and reading a little between the lines in his response here, Rossi may be expressing confidence that he is able to reliably and consistently replicate his effect, and in doing so will be able to engage the scientific community from a position of strength.

  • Alan DeAngelis

    From page 49 of Frank Close’s 1991 book Too Hot to Handle. http://www.amazon.com/Too-Hot-Handle-Race-Fusion/dp/0691085919
    “…Tritium is an essential fuel in thermonuclear weapons; it is also a product of dd fusion – the very process that the Utah chemists claimed to be able to make happen inexpensively in a test tube. The US military were already spending vast sums on making tritium for warheads and the reactors that were used for this process had been closed, pending repairs, in 1988 as a result of nervousness about reactor safety following the Chernobyl accident. The repair and building new reactors would cost billions of dollars, so when test-tube fusion entered the scene the military took note at once, recognizing
    the potential of test-tube fusion as a source of much-needed tritium. This sort of application of test-tube fusion also impressed Indian Government scientists who decided that western nations would soon classify test-tube fusion as a secret; thus India mounted an immediate test-tube fusion research effort so as to ‘get in on the ground floor’….”

  • georgehants

    It is very sad to see Mr. Rossi distorting the Truth to appease the scientific establishment in this way.
    I am sure he has his own personal reasons for deciding that this course of action is best for his personal advantage.
    Unfortunately once again the Truth is sacrificed for a presumed gain in other areas.
    Of course many of the individual scientists are genuine in all areas, but the overall establishments position followed by most scientists is undoubtedly wrong.
    So P&F and all great scientists who have been and are defiled by the scientific establishment are sacrificed again for “prudent” reasons.
    My respect for Mr. Rossi n this area has just reversed to a considerable degree.
    ———–
    Andrea Rossi
    March 4th, 2014 at 2:57 PM
    Curiosone ( Walter Gentili):
    I do not agree with your superficial comment for the following reasons:
    1- the scientists who have dedicated their life to the hot fusion
    endevour are extremely good, for sure among the best nuclear physicists
    around
    2- the ITER and the NIF have generated the development of technological
    applications in other fields, thanks to the research: paradigmatic
    example is the development in the field of the superconductors
    3- the money invested has not been wasted, because it is gone in work made by workers, which means wages
    4- the hot fusion is more difficult to obtain than the LENR.
    5- I know a very high level scientist who has worked hardly for the
    ITER, and still is strongly interested to the LENR and has worked in
    experiments with the E-Cat. I have learnt much from him. We have much
    to learn from the hot fusion and I have a great respect for all the
    great scientists working for it
    6- the hot fusion plants are also battlefields in which new generations
    of nuclear physics maintain their readiness for other applications; for
    example, NIF physicists are working on the decommissioning of nuclear
    weapons.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

    • Andreas Moraitis

      The mentioning of superconductors could be an important clue. I strongly suspect that some kind of ‘superconductivity’ plays a key role in Rossi’s E-Cat. A possible mechanism is well described in the patents of ECW reader “hunfgerh”. (Look at the thread “Lewis Larsen of Lattice Energy LLC on LENR and Transmutation“.) See also the following application (in German):

      http://www.patent-de.com/20100325/DE102008047334A1.html

  • Bernie777

    If I had an LENR reactor, I would be selling it to, or developing it for, those who needed it most, China and Japan.

  • Alan DeAngelis

    Fleischmann and Pons were the point men.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Take_point

  • Bertuswonkel

    Works fine here. If it keeps on not working, send me an email to lenrenergy at gmail.com.
    I can forward the PDF file to you if you like.

  • Alan DeAngelis

    From page 51 of Frank Close’s 1991 book Too Hot to Handle. http://www.amazon.com/Too-Hot-Handle-Race-Fusion/dp/0691085919
    “Hot fusion budgets on the line; tritium production for weapons; India believing that test-tube fusion would become a classified secret in the West. So test-tube fusion was more than just a media event with dollars on the line for the University of Utah, there were many private agendas riding along with it. As a result it was easy for protagonists to claim that opinions on test-tube fusion, particularly its validity or otherwise, weren’t always made on purely scientific grounds, but that self interests were the driving forces.”

  • deleo77

    Hmm, wonder where JT just got back from – Sweden? Italy? China?

    https://twitter.com/jt_vaughn

    • Mr. Moho

      Keep in mind that JT Vaughn is also involved with humanitarian aid and development work in Ethiopia.

  • BroKeeper

    When all this gets out – and it will – the world will question why/how it took so long between F&P’s discovery and to develop such a simple and easy device that relieves much suffering in the world. People will want to know the truth.

    Just as I write this the Greenpeace activists hung two 60-foot banners on Procter & Gamble’s Downtown offices where I work. http://news.cincinnati.com/

    • Gerard McEk

      Even Greenpeace is not interested in LENR. Isn’t that strange? They should be the first to push for LENR.
      They are either limited by their knowledge, or by their sponsors. I bet it is the last.

      Or is the force to make CF pseudo-science so effective that this is still hindering the emerge of LENR?

      • http://www.lenrnews.eu/lenr-summary-for-policy-makers/ AlainCo

        Beside evident ideological vested interest (Malthusians, anti nuke, anti business) there is such a problem.

        I have expected for long that greed and pride would fuel LENR revolution. it seems it is not enough except for some maverick actors…
        today what I see as the best motivation to support LENR revolution is…

        FEAR (of missing the train)…

        we are society not of GREED but of FEAR ! far worse!

      • BroKeeper

        Speaking of sponsors, there is a reason this incident didn’t make it through mass media. Who is the largest advertiser and has one of the largest PRs?

  • Ophelia Rump

    Why must every reference end with maybe hedge words. There is sufficient evidence of the stability of Rossi’s devices.
    There is sufficient documentation of the output, the input and the potential output. You can choose to believe or not.
    If you do not believe say “Rossi’s claims”. If you believe, then state it as accepted fact, because you do accept the facts presented thus far.

    • Obvious

      “If A is a success in life, then A equals x plus y plus z. Work is x; y is play; and z is keeping your mouth shut.”
      – Albert Einstein

  • Bertuswonkel

    I don’t agree with Rossi on this one. In the book Beaudette uses the example of sending 100 fisherman to a lake to determine if there is fish in the lake. Suppose only 5 of the 100 catch a fish, what do you conclude? Do you believe the 95% who did not catch a fish that there is no fish. Or do you listen to the 5% who did catch something and presume the others were unlucky/not using the right materials to catch something? 100% predictability/reproducibility is not always needed in science. In the book he uses the example of cloning sheep, were also a small number of experiments let to healthy sheep while many others failed. Yet, it was still accepted as a legitimate experiment and received world wide attention almost instantly.

    • GreenWin

      I agree. There is no excuse for the intentional doctoring and suppression of positive CF experiments as documented by MIT’s Dr. Eugene Mallove. A recent spate of reasoning to give these academic and corporate parasites a “pass” does not fly in my book. Not rounding up the corrupt, self-serving cabal responsible for LENR FUD would be the ultimate act of “impotence.” While Huizenga has avoided apprehension via the grin reaper, there are plenty of culprits still around – and they will have to take responsibility for their actions.

    • http://www.lenrnews.eu/lenr-summary-for-policy-makers/ AlainCo

      I agree too, but Rossi have the good position, not based on facts or justice,, but on practical result.

      It is not by moaning that it is unfair that you can be understood by monkey.
      You have to redesign the experiment, again and again…
      Under that awful pressure the first LENr scientists improved their protocols, checked and cross checked all.

      Fleischmann in 1992 answered to Lewis with detailed measurement of his cell showing it was homogeneous even very near the wall, at +/- 0.01C.
      Fleischmann anticipated Hansen critics and measured the recombination during the refilling, proving it was below 1%.

      Oriani designed an experiment not sensible to Lewis arguments, because of Seebeck calorimetry, and not sensible to Hansen arguments because of gas separation from cathode and anode.

      McKubre designed a cell that was insensible to Lewis and Hansen arguments because it was closed with recombination, isotherm using flow calorimetry and retroaction.

      There was NO WRITTEN ARGUMENT that was still alive against LENR experiments…
      given that science was closed, it was time for the engineers, the inventors.

      since science had failed without any hope, and have fallen in a cognitive trap, there was a need not to prove a scientific phenomenon that could not be accepted, but to find hope of MONEY, thus energy or transmutation.

      Until Rossi there was few of such hope, not because there was no results (Piantelli, Miley, Fralick had interesting results), but because the results were used in a scientific way (to understand, to prove), and not in an industrial vision…
      for example gas permeation experiments, even PdD like Fralick, could be much more usable than wet electrolysis (more comfortable but useless because of Carnot-cycle limitation at low temperature). NiH results were harder to obtain, but more interesting for the engineer…

      one mistake was to play the victim once there was no hope to change the fate, but it was also a mistake to play with the same rules as the torturer…
      Sure business is more open than academic world, because it is linked to the reality and not to the consensus…

      In a way, planes had the same problems…. for few decade there was no progress, because unlike the Wright Brothers there were not trying to design a well engineered devices, controllable… but just to show a phenomenon, to understand it. Contrary to the academic myth (that Nassim Nicholas Taleb denounce in Antifragile: lecturing birds how to fly) it is better to try to make it works first, to make it controllable, stable, then only to try to understand and predict it…
      If some theory is useful it is only a phenomenological theory, a model… not the upfront physics as we ask today before believing in anything new.

      anyway there is no doubt the behavior of physicist was awful, but you could do nothing against it.
      as some Asian say, if you can do something against some evil, DO IT and shut up.
      if you cannot do anything. SHUT UP.

      • psi

        Very astute exchange here. Thanks to both Bert and Alain.

      • Mark Coffman

        >…” In a way planes (aircraft) had the same problem”…

        Actually the situation between LENR and aircraft is highly similar. Orville and Wilber
        Wright started down the protectionist path against the severe recomendations of their
        academic advisor Octave Chanute , they did not want to show people the mechanical linkages
        etc. that embodied their flight control paradigmns. Which they knew, they knew. Over the next
        two years they generated lots of “excess heat” by flying their flyer crafts over a fixed course
        that anyone interested could watch if they wanted. Then Orville crashed a flyer killing the
        army observer in the first human death due to airflight and Orville then went into a
        depressional funk from which he never really recovered. Meanwhile Wilber then got fed up
        with it all and took a flyer to Europe where he primarily wanted to show those ingrate
        French aviators that the Wrights really did know how to fly. He did, and those inital French
        flight engineers recognized a superior product performance when they saw it. Of course after
        a time due to talents of other humans, things proceeded apace.

        Rossi went down the same protectionist path as the Wrights did initially, where he could have
        easily proved indirectly that what he said he had and that it worked. Some critics would have
        still been skeptical, but the majority of people would have dismissed the critics. In that instant
        Rossi defaulted on a scientific based proof he moved the proof into a profitable product based
        regime, one much harder and longer to achieve, and since I don’t have $1.8M lying around to
        purchase a low temperature cat reactor; In my point of view Rossi still has not provided
        adaquate proof that he knows LENR and he won’t until he shows one in the new profitability
        paradigmn. Of course after a time due to talents of others humans, things proceed apace. I
        don’t consider my view to be unfair especially since I already knew much about the Wright
        Brothers situation.

        As I am saying I don’t believe in overarching great ideas as much as I believe that certain people
        move things along for their and civilization’s benefit. You can’t have it both ways and Rossi won’t
        be able to either.

        :S:MarkSCoffman

    • Alan DeAngelis

      I’ll just repeat what I said before.
      I think it was Edmund Storms who reminded us of the irreproducibility of the early transistor experiments. It took a billion dollars of research funding to find out that trace amount of sodium (a few parts per billion) in the silicon were enough to make the transistor fail.

  • Len R. Fusioneer

    Speaking of Beadette’s Excess Heat book, I have been trying to get the full text version from the ICCF-9 files in China for the last 2 weeks to no avail. Anyone know where else to get a copy?

  • Mr. Moho

    In my opinion in the end it all boils down to the greed of inventors and researchers who refused to cooperate with the scientific community in order to solve the LENR puzzle because of their fear of loss of control, wealth or scientific accolades. Yes, I do mean that. Too many NDAs, trade secrets, “proprietary information”, too much bee_es which has been delaying mainstream acceptance for 25 years (hopefully not much more than this) that has got to end for once and for all.

    Of course, there do have been hostile forces against them, often preventing actual research being performed (peer pressure…) and funds being distributed, but those who claimed success in this field very rarely actually helped the cause. It’s their fault too.

    • GreenWin

      I don’t see it this way entirely. The “scientific community” and its “consensus” to avoid LENR evidence – is well documented by Beaudette, Pam Boss, Peter Hagelstein, Gene Mallove, and dozens of CF researchers. Their testimony will be key to understanding the massive failure and…corrections. I agree that competitive egos at MIT and CalTech in particular set the whole ship off course. But one need only read the last, say five years of mainstream press to see the work of unconstitutional forces against LENR. The imminent investigations into these corruptions will follow the money. The money will lead to the biggest stake holders in terrestrial energy; and they will be lawfully
      held responsible.

      • NT

        Yea!