E-CAT and oil price

[I of the Storm]

Well, it might after all be not so straightforward. I've read around a bit, and apparently Rossi isn't too forthcoming with granting access to the device or to his data. Reviewers may only work with data supplied (=preselected) by him, says one side, the other side says these swedish reviewers were completely neutral and could access any data.

Sounds fishy. I mean, if you've really just invented some high-yield, low-temperature nuclear reaction (is it really one? Allegedly there was not a trace of radiation), you'd ring all bells and blow the fanfares, right? Also, patents haven't been granted for unknown reason.

[Gilrandir]

Sounds fishy. I mean, if you've really just invented some high-yield, low-temperature nuclear reaction (is it really one? Allegedly there was not a trace of radiation), you'd ring all bells and blow the fanfares, right?

Not really. People who invented/discovered something which is likely to hinder oil companies' inflow of profit have a way of getting into harm.

[I of the Storm]

That may be so, but it's not all there is to it.

Withholding data (nb: data, not specs) after an experiment isn't exactly proper scientific conduct and thus perceived rather poorly.

[Papewaio]

Without independent measurements it could be several things:

1) A hoax as the energy is supplied by an external source to heat up the device... essentially a new light bulb.
2) An exothermic (heat creating) chemical reaction... even if not cold fusion it might be worthwhile depending on the cost (monetary and energy required) to create the device
3) Cold fusion... maybe. Although the oil companies might be against it (we still need plastics). The scientific community would love to see this.

Note that we have working fusion in labs. However the net amount of energy is negative... we can fuse atoms, just the energy we make is less then we put in. Fission (splitting atoms) could be much more widely available and would make an ideal base load provider whilst creating minimum waste. With the intermittent power supplies (wind, water, sunlight) we can solve a lot of these issues with better batteries and/or capacitors (not just electrical but mechanical ones ... like the London Bridge has).

[Beskar]

Note that we have working fusion in labs. However the net amount of energy is negative... we can fuse atoms, just the energy we make is less then we put in. Fission (splitting atoms) could be much more widely available and would make an ideal base load provider whilst creating minimum waste. With the intermittent power supplies (wind, water, sunlight) we can solve a lot of these issues with better batteries and/or capacitors (not just electrical but mechanical ones ... like the London Bridge has).

I thought the issue with ITER was the damage caused by the fusion/stray plasma streams, which caused problems which needed a technological workaround, not the fact it doesn't supply surplus power.

[Gilrandir]

Withholding data (nb: data, not specs) after an experiment isn't exactly proper scientific conduct and thus perceived rather poorly.

Unless it may disclose some important facts and thus prevent you from getting all the money and fame you are up to.