Author Topic: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system ! (Read 2224231 times)

noonespecial · « **Reply #2550 on:** January 31, 2015, 05:07:59 AM »

Quote from: ltseung888 on January 31, 2015, 01:16:13 AM

Are any of you in a position to do the Tsinghua University Energy Multiplier with Unbalanced Cylinders in reply 2546? The story was that an eighty year old inventor put one of these devices in a factory and saved 90% electricity bills. The local electricity company accused him of stealing electricity. He found Tsinghua University to be the "judge". Tsinghua found him innocent.

The technology became an "unexplained state secret" until Lee and Tseung proposed the lead-out energy theory.

The lead-out energy theory predicts that the Milkovic 2SO, Chan Wheel, William Skinner Device, Bessler Wheel, Peru and Chas Campbell Devices are all theoretically sound. The Unbalanced Cylinder is likely to be superior as it is many unbalanced wheels bundled together.

Who will reproduce this "unexplained Chinese State Secret" and benefit the World?

If leading-out gravitational energy is possible, how about magnetic and electromagnetic???

I like the design. Do you know if the individual cylinders are linked to each other with some type of timing? You show a belt but I'm wondering if a chain was actually employed. Do you know?

Thanks.

ARMCORTEX · « **Reply #2551 on:** January 31, 2015, 06:44:11 AM »

How is this concept more proven than Chas Campbell and flywheel systems.

Wich were widely demonstrated in a multitude of videos

Lets us reconsider and ponder on thhese.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hr67j71NSsQ&list=PLvAzms-COt4ZkheBJZ24-p2O8rPef1DHK

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rm1UK-5-AD4

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=UCUZA+ENERJ%C4%B0

ltseung888 · « **Reply #2552 on:** January 31, 2015, 07:55:29 AM »

Quote from: noonespecial on January 31, 2015, 05:07:59 AM

I like the design. Do you know if the individual cylinders are linked to each other with some type of timing? You show a belt but I'm wondering if a chain was actually employed. Do you know?

Thanks.

At that time (2006), we were told the story. We then saw a video with massive cylinders. I believe there were 3 cylinders but I was not sure how they were linked to each other.

Once we explained the possible workings using the Lee-Tseung lead-out theory, we were interrupted. (The US team who developed the 225 HP Pulse Motor were there.)

At that time, I did not know whether the cylinders were balanced or unbalanced. But the top brains at Tsinghua University could easily figure that out. They had access to the device and was able to replicate it...

Am I disclosing "Chinese State Secrets"? I am lucky to be in Hong Kong.

This reminds me that I forgot to mention Mr. Wang Shen He. He was with us at Tsinghua University and he had an "all magnetic motor coupled with shielding and fluid rotation". He was made a millionaire. The joke in Hong Kong was - US poisoned their scientists. China made them millionaires and kept them quiet.

ltseung888 · « **Reply #2553 on:** January 31, 2015, 08:22:29 AM »

Quote from: ARMCORTEX on January 31, 2015, 06:44:11 AM

How is this concept more proven than Chas Campbell and flywheel systems.

Wich were widely demonstrated in a multitude of videos

Lets us reconsider and ponder on thhese.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hr67j71NSsQ&list=PLvAzms-COt4ZkheBJZ24-p2O8rPef1DHK

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rm1UK-5-AD4

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=UCUZA+ENERJ%C4%B0

I am specifically interested in the second video from the first link.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pwv_hos3qyI&index=2&list=PLvAzms-COt4ZkheBJZ24-p2O8rPef1DHK

MOTOR-GENERATOR «YMNEE»

This may be a simple alternative to WITTS.

Good job. Now, how do we get more information? Are they willing to "give" this technology to the World???

Do we have enough technical knowledge to "build" it?

The unbalanced cylinder is essentially a super-set of flywheels and pendulums. It can store energy as well as lead-out gravitational energy. It should be more efficient than the Peru or Chas Campbell devices. (The Chan Wheel is superior to the Milkovic 2SO.)

The Chas Campbell devices did not get the proper scientific recognition because of the "road block of violating the Law of Conservation of Energy". Hopefully, the road block is now removed.

@ARMCORTEX, I shall read more of your posts and videos. Thank you for the good work you have produced.

norman6538 · « **Reply #2554 on:** January 31, 2015, 03:35:58 PM »

Here is the Chan wheel clincher test...

I propose the following simple chan wheel test.
See the attached photo which has the following
1. a wheel on the right with a washer weight at the top
2. a string attached to that wheel than can input power
to pull the wheel off of the noon position where it will rotate
3. 3 washers on that string down on the right with a cardboard
stop underneath so that we only power the wheel from noon
to 2 oclock and the washers stop pulling but the wheel continues to rotate
4. a pivot in the middle
5. enough weight on the left to balance the wheel on the right - see the large washers
6. a little extra weight on the left to be lifted by the chan wheel "yank down" force.

the input work calculation from 3 above = weight x distance
and the output work calculation is from 6 above = weight x distance.

I suggest that the work in be enough to get the wheel to rotate once fully
back up to noon and then you will get two chan wheel "yank down" forces
to measure.

If the chan wheel can pass this simple OU test by numerous testers then we have a
winner. If not then the keyboarders win.

My test results had very poor results. I don't think my washer has enough mass to
get it rotating fast enough. I will do more tests before I post them.

Norman

ltseung888 · « **Reply #2555 on:** January 31, 2015, 10:46:52 PM »

Quote from: norman6538 on January 31, 2015, 03:35:58 PM

Here is the Chan wheel clincher test...

I propose the following simple chan wheel test.
See the attached photo which has the following
1. a wheel on the right with a washer weight at the top
2. a string attached to that wheel than can input power
to pull the wheel off of the noon position where it will rotate
3. 3 washers on that string down on the right with a cardboard
stop underneath so that we only power the wheel from noon
to 2 oclock and the washers stop pulling but the wheel continues to rotate
4. a pivot in the middle
5. enough weight on the left to balance the wheel on the right - see the large washers
6. a little extra weight on the left to be lifted by the chan wheel "yank down" force.

the input work calculation from 3 above = weight x distance
and the output work calculation is from 6 above = weight x distance.

I suggest that the work in be enough to get the wheel to rotate once fully
back up to noon and then you will get two chan wheel "yank down" forces
to measure.

If the chan wheel can pass this simple OU test by numerous testers then we have a
winner. If not then the keyboarders win.

My test results had very poor results. I don't think my washer has enough mass to
get it rotating fast enough. I will do more tests before I post them.

Norman

Dear norman6538,

Your experiment missed the application of the lead-out energy and the exact time when gravitational energy is brought into the system.

1. Let us assume that the weight on the LHS is so heavy that the Chan Wheel cannot lift it. The Chan Wheel can still rotate. If the unbalanced washer is put at noon position, the wheel will rotate back to less than the noon position and stop. This is the simple potential energy converting to kinetic energy situation.

2. If the weight on the LHS is reduced so that the Chan wheel can lift it. The question then becomes - will the rotational speed (or swing amplitude) decrease on lifting the weight? If the amplitude decreases significantly, energy is probably transferred from the rotating wheel to lifting the weight.

3. In the Raymond Head video with massive construction, the finger movement can lift the weight with no significant decrease in swing amplitude. That indicates the bringing-in of gravitational energy.

4. In the pulled pendulum case, mathematics proved that the energy is brought-in at the pulling stage - not the swing stage. In the Milkovic 2SO case, the energy is brought-in at the lever movement stage.

5. If you compare the finger swing energy and the wieght lifting energy, you will find that the weight lifting energy is much higher than the swing energy. However, that is not the true comparison of Input verse Output energy. Much of the weight lifting energy is used to bring the system back to its original position. However, some will be brought-in to do the lever motion.

Thus your experiment in itself would not be conclusive. One can always argue that the frictional force is so high that it invalidates any result. When the Chan Wheel rotates at signicant speeds, the ratio of friction loss to energy brought-in is greatly reduced. One can then see the effect.

The more conclusive experiment is the Skinner device where much more gravitational energy is brought-in to do useful work. Other experiments include using the Unbalanced Wheel in the Peru, Chas Campbell, Tong and Ting Wheels or the Tsinghua University Energy Multiplier etc.

Morality Point:

1. Let Milkovic and team improve their results with the Unbalanced Wheel or Unbalanced Cylinder.

2. Let the Peru and Chas Campbell teams improve their results with the Unbalanced Cylinder.

3. Let the Skinner teams reproduce a working model.

4. Let the Tsinghua University team improve the Energy Multiplier (may still be State Secret).

5. We shall continue to work on the Yuen Wheel to see if we can do the Bessler Wheel effect. We already have the set up.

6. Encourage other researchers to examine the lead-out energy theory and use that to lead-out magnetic or electromagnetic energies. Tell them the road block has been removed.

7. Have the QEG teams put on Unbalanced Wheels or Cylnders to get new resonance. The extra gravitational energy may help them to achieve OU and self loop.

Do not try to do all the work ourselves... The Divine Wine is for all to share.

I am happy to go to my grave with the Lead-out Energy Theory and have an Unbalanced Cylinder as my coffin.

ltseung888 · « **Reply #2556 on:** February 01, 2015, 11:16:43 PM »

Why would a Government keep lead-out energy devices such as the 225HP Pulse Motor a state secret?

Military Applications.

If a Nation has planes, tanks, submarines that require no fuel???
If their Laser Guns can fire forever???

The Military will try to keep the "secret" as long as possible.

But can they keep the secret forever with the Internet allowing any individual to announce his findings???

How can they prevent someone put a lead weight on a bicycle wheel and produce an Unbalanced Wheel? How can they prevent someone put that unbalanced wheel on the shaft of an electric motor and get the Peru or Chas Campbell effects? How can they prevent someone use unbalanced cylinders and save thousands in their electricity bills in their factories?

The oil rich nations must have seen or even possess working lead-out energy devices. Is that why they are willing to sell their oil at low prices before the lead-out energy devices make it to the market???

ltseung888 · « **Reply #2557 on:** February 02, 2015, 12:17:58 AM »

http://free-energy-info.co.uk/LTseung.pdf

Patrick Kelly put much of my information in the above file in 2007.

A picture of the Tsinghua University Energy Multiplier was shown. The setup is for the whole factory - not just one machine.

Thanks to the Internet and the diligent work from people like Patrick Kelly. The information will not die with the passing away of a few inventors...

ltseung888 · « **Reply #2558 on:** February 03, 2015, 12:35:49 AM »

Is there a minimum size and weight before an Unbalanced Wheel Experiment becomes practical?

The "jumping" effect of the Unbalance Wheel depends on the Centrifugal force which is given by the formula
F = (M x V x V)/R

where F = Centrifugal Force, M = Mass, V = Velocity and R = Radius

The better way is to use the other form of this force:
F = M x R x w x w Where w is the angular velocity

(This force is also sometimes written in terms of the angular velocity ω of the object about the center of the circle: (http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/a/c/8/ac8cadb8a51a0e53c5b1db26147639a4.png))

Thus a larger mass will increase the Force.
If we can increase the angular velocity (or the rotational speed), the force will increase even faster (related to the square of the angular velocity. If angular velocity doubles, force increases 4 times).
We can also increase the radius.

This is why the Bessler Wheels got bigger and bigger with successive versions.

For a given Unbalanced Wheel to bring-in gravitational energy, the most practical way is to increase its velocity or rotational speed. Thus the Chas Campbell arrangement should use Motor A to drive an Unbalanced Wheel at a reasonably high speed. The Unbalanced Wheel itself can act as a flywheel to store mechanical energy. A much greater torque is provided by the Unbalanced Weight.

The stored energy plus the greater torque will drive the shaft of a more powerful Generator B. Additional gravitational energy is brought-in via the “jumping” action. The Tsinghua University Energy Multiplier with Unbalanced Cylinders shoulod be seriously considered.

Thus for practical experiments, a large wheel with large Unbalanced Mass and a reasonably high rotational speed is needed. The minimum size I recommend is a bicycle wheel with a lead weight such as the Chan Wheel.

ltseung888 · « **Reply #2559 on:** February 03, 2015, 12:57:29 AM »

One more thing to know about the Unbapenlanced Wheel.

Where does the brought-in gravitational energy go?

A pendulum will increase its amplitude. An unbalanced wheel will increase its rotational speed.

This is why a Motor driving an unbalanced wheel needs less Input power to maintain the same rotational speed.

Are any of you in a position to put an unblanced bicycle wheel on the shaft of your small motor? What kind of measurements can you do?

Morality Point:

If the amount of gravitational energy brought-in is rotational speed dependent, then a small Motor A can drive an Unbalanced Cylinder at sufficient rotational speed to bring-in enough energy to drive another more powerful Generator B. If that rotational speed is maintained, the Generator B will be able to use the brought-in gravitational energy to supply energy back to Motor A. Self loop + additional electrical energy to supply other appliances is entirely possible.

The Peru and Chas Campbell and Tong and Ting Wheels etc have sound theoretical backing. Tinkering got them results doubted by the traditional scientists. If they now put on Unbalanced Cylinders and present their vastly improved and reproducible results together with the Lee-Tseung Lead-out Energy theory...

Adding an unbalanced cylinder will make the QEG self loop...

ltseung888 · « **Reply #2560 on:** February 03, 2015, 04:21:41 AM »

The Dr. Liang Car cylinders.

He used ICs to provide repulsion. Exactly what does that mean?

The Cylinders can be very close together. The magnetic repulsion is much stronger when the distance is closer (1/(r x r)).

ARMCORTEX · « **Reply #2561 on:** February 03, 2015, 04:28:22 AM »

The best Would be for you gentleman to kindly donate $ to me and noonespecial (purelyprimitives) and we will investigate pulse arrangements.

LawrenceTseung.

Plz arrange for donation of money to me and purelyprimitives.

We will further research things in efficient ways.

There is many ideas I wish to try now.

We will investigate techniques of pulse of mass theories by innovative means, trust me this will be good.

ltseung888 · « **Reply #2562 on:** February 03, 2015, 11:46:13 AM »

Quote from: ARMCORTEX on February 03, 2015, 04:28:22 AM

The best Would be for you gentleman to kindly donate $ to me and noonespecial (purelyprimitives) and we will investigate pulse arrangements.

LawrenceTseung.

Plz arrange for donation of money to me and purelyprimitives.

We will further research things in efficient ways.

There is many ideas I wish to try now.

We will investigate techniques of pulse of mass theories by innovative means, trust me this will be good.

If you really want to something, you will find a way.

If you really want to avoid doing something, you will always find an excuse.

noonespecial · « **Reply #2563 on:** February 03, 2015, 02:00:30 PM »

ARMCORTEX speaks for himself only.

I'm currently involved in a collaborative effort and wouldn't have the time anyway.

ARMCORTEX · « **Reply #2564 on:** February 03, 2015, 03:30:24 PM »

if I am payed for it, then there will be no excuse.

The day the lead-in theory gets better explained to me I will save aside some of my own investement for it.

I will build an universal test rig of high workmanship right here in my living room, all I need is about 1500$

I will also assist a retiree person to accomplish the courageous task of putting some of his money experimentation of the lead-out theories

News:

User Menu

Author Topic: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system ! (Read 2224231 times)

noonespecial

Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !

ARMCORTEX

Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !

ltseung888

Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !

ltseung888

Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !

norman6538

Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !

ltseung888

Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !

ltseung888

Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !

ltseung888

Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !

ltseung888

Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !

ltseung888

Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !

ltseung888

Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !

ARMCORTEX

Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !

ltseung888

Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !

noonespecial

Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !

ARMCORTEX

Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !