Language: 
To browser these website, it's necessary to store cookies on your computer.
The cookies contain no personal information, they are required for program control.
  the storage of cookies while browsing this website, on Login and Register.

GDPR and DSGVO law

Storing Cookies (See : http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm ) help us to bring you our services at overunity.com . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
https://overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please LEAVE this website now. From the 25th of May 2018, every existing user has to accept the GDPR agreement at first login. If a user is unwilling to accept the GDPR, he should email us and request to erase his account. Many thanks for your understanding.
Amazon Warehouse Deals ! Now even more Deep Discounts ! Check out these great prices on slightly used or just opened once only items.I always buy my gadgets via these great Warehouse deals ! Highly recommended ! Many thanks for supporting OverUnity.com this way.

User Menu

Tesla Paper

Free Energy Book

Get paid

Donations

Please Donate for the Forum.
Many thanks.
Regards, Stefan.(Admin)

A-Ads

Powerbox

Smartbox

3D Solar

3D Solar Panels

DC2DC converter

Micro JouleThief

FireMatch

FireMatch

CCKnife

CCKnife

CCTool

CCTool

Magpi Magazine

Magpi Magazine Free Rasberry Pi Magazine

Battery Recondition

Battery Recondition

Arduino

Ultracaps

YT Subscribe

Gravity Machines

Tesla-Ebook

Magnet Secrets

Lindemann Video

Navigation

Products

Products

WaterMotor kit

Statistics


  • *Total Posts: 894412
  • *Total Topics: 15729
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 3
  • *Guests: 10
  • *Total: 13

Author Topic: The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory  (Read 1782989 times)

Offline Mr.Entropy

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 195
Re: The Conversation of Energy
« Reply #255 on: September 06, 2007, 03:40:35 AM »
Mr. Entropy, I put my reply here at the top of my outbox.
http://forum.go-here.nl/search.php?search_id=unanswered

Gaby, I think you've mistaken me for someone else, or, more probably, everyone else.

No matter...  The page you point to here is interesting.  I'll check for Gary's "neutral line", according to his instructions, some time this week or next.

Tell me: have you verified any of these things yourself?

Cheers,

Mr. Entropy

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: The Conversation of Energy
« Reply #255 on: September 06, 2007, 03:40:35 AM »

Offline Mr.Entropy

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 195
Re: The Conservation of Energy
« Reply #256 on: September 06, 2007, 04:08:17 AM »
Hi Lawrence,

Thank you for your opinion on The boat in calm water and good sunshine scenario.  You arrived at the same conclusion as the Professors and Research Students at Tsing Hua and Beijing University.

Before we discuss the second topic of the Pulsed Force on the Pendulum, I would like you to have access (at least in video form) of the WORKING prototypes.  The Professors at Tsing Hua University have seen and have access to these prototypes.  The videos and their pointers are on previous posts of this thread.

You make me wonder what I'm getting myself into, but OK, I've got the videos.

Cheers,

Mr. Entropy

Offline tinu

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 630
Re: The Conservation of Energy
« Reply #257 on: September 06, 2007, 09:33:12 AM »
Hi Lawrence,

Thank you for your opinion on The boat in calm water and good sunshine scenario.  You arrived at the same conclusion as the Professors and Research Students at Tsing Hua and Beijing University.

Before we discuss the second topic of the Pulsed Force on the Pendulum, I would like you to have access (at least in video form) of the WORKING prototypes.  The Professors at Tsing Hua University have seen and have access to these prototypes.  The videos and their pointers are on previous posts of this thread.

You make me wonder what I'm getting myself into, but OK, I've got the videos.

Cheers,

Mr. Entropy


Quote from http://www.energyfromair.com/Gravity.files/frame.htm

?The Theory (1)
The Pendulum works because of gravity.
The Pendulum can achieve resonance via a small horizontal force. At resonance, the required force to overcome friction can be very small.
One of the magnetic toys has a tiny magnet at the tip of the pendulum and uses a battery to attract or repel the pendulum using IC control.
A single AAA battery can keep the pendulum swinging for months.
Conclusion: A small force can keep the pendulum swinging.

The Theory (2)
A moving metallic object in a magnetic or electromagnet field can produce electric current.  (Basic theory of the Electricity Generator)
If the pendulum swings inside this magnetic field, it can produce electric current.
The electric current produced will depend on speed of motion, area of pendulum, strength of the magnetic field, the arrangement to reduce loss etc.
This electric current can be more than that required to drive the pendulum.
This is the basic theory behind extracting gravitational energy via magnetic means.?

The Theory (3)
One way of looking at this is ? we have effectively used gravity to do work.
We used a small horizontal force to move the pendulum.
Gravity will swing the pendulum back.
Electric Current is produced (which supplies energy for the small horizontal force)
Extra Energy is obtained to do other work.
The pendulum can be a semi-circle to provide larger area. ?


Now that?s a ?solid? theory!
Even a sixth grade child would dismiss it with ease.
Not to mention he/she can write a much better one in minutes?
I personally, however, miss the glorious song at the end.

Following the line, here are more conclusions:

Pendulum tends to ?swing!
Once stopped, pendulum no longer swings ?unless you start it again.
AAA battery is a marvelous engineering achievement.
IC control too.
Magnetic toys sell.
Their effect on various ?scientists? is profound.
Maybe magnetic toys should be banned for adults. Look at their consequences.
Friction can be very small because it simply can.
Friction can be also very large.
This behavior of friction is outrageous! Shame on it!
Mr. Friction and Ms. Resonance are not relatives.
Actually, when they meet, no one cares about the other.
Therefore, resonance is completely misunderstood, in the above ?theory?.
The statement that ?This electric current can be more than that required to drive the pendulum? is a wish in a dreamland universe. To be more then a wish, it requires maybe a very strong or a heavily disturbed psychic.
Psychic is therefore the key for the ?theory? to work. Not gravity.
Psychic is affected by medication. Gravity is not.
Gravity always works but unfortunately medication doesn?t.
Still, there is hope.

Tinu
?In the absence of light, dark prevails?

P.S.: Welcome again to the world of shadows, Mr. Entropy. And keep your lights on.  ;)

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: The Conservation of Energy
« Reply #257 on: September 06, 2007, 09:33:12 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline gaby de wilde

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 470
    • http://blog.360.yahoo.com/Factuurexpress
Re: The Conversation of Energy
« Reply #258 on: September 06, 2007, 11:20:29 AM »
Mr. Entropy, I put my reply here at the top of my outbox.
http://forum.go-here.nl/search.php?search_id=unanswered

Gaby, I think you've mistaken me for someone else, or, more probably, everyone else.

haha, yes the frustration is entirely my own. Please don't apply it to yourself. :D

Quote
No matter...  The page you point to here is interesting.  I'll check for Gary's "neutral line", according to his instructions, some time this week or next.

Just remember there is plenty of crazy magnet stuff out there.

Quote
Tell me: have you verified any of these things yourself?

I started with my own theory. Later I figured out Newman's work had much in common, then I figured out wesley gary's device worked by the same principal.

Here, I just wrote it down for you.

Quote
3 POINT INTERACTION
ABSTRACT
Unleash complimentary reactions utilizing the subtraction of contradicting actions.

http://magnetmotor.go-here.nl/text/3-point-interaction

I'm sorry it's so simple, it's just the way I am.(http://forum.go-here.nl/images/smiles/icon_mrgreen.gif)

Offline tinu

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 630
Re: The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory
« Reply #259 on: September 06, 2007, 12:25:19 PM »
@ gaby de wilde,

Your work is very interesting.
I hope you are open to discussions.
I will be open to experiments also.
In fact, I think I?ll conduct some experiments right during this weekend if I?ll find everything is needed.


Here is what I?d like to address:
Quote from: http://gabydewilde.googlepages.com/magnetmotor-it-cant-be
?conclusion
1) The pendulum doesn't swing -this means it can not have suffered drag. If the magnet you swinged-by had suffered drag - there would have been pendular motion. Drag absolutely demands a point to attach itself to. You may have the spin but you don't have that swing. It dont mean a thing if it aint got that swing!?


Well, apparently you are right.
However, your statement that Newton is ?so wrong? gave me some headache.
Not because Newton is Newton but because if he is not right, sky is the limit in free energy. Unfortunately it is not so.

Anyway, my challenge and the sad news to you is, imho, that you are wrong.

1. ?The pendulum doesn't swing -this means it can not have suffered drag.? False, in the general case.
The pendulum doesn?t swing ? this means the drag is along the wire ? My version.

2. ?If the magnet you swinged-by had suffered drag - there would have been pendular motion.? False in the general case also.
The magnet you swing by hand suffers drag. It may not be strong but it is there. What can be measured is the opposed drag suffered by the swinging magnet. Here is my thought experiment I?ll try to replicate during this weekend. Hopefully you?ll conduct it too.
Exp: Take exactly your setup and replace the wire with an elastic one. When you swing the magnet by hand, the elastic wire will get longer or shorter, depending on the drag orientation on the swinging magnet? If it?s not getting longer or shorter, obviously you are right. But if it does, you are wrong.
(Alternately, instead of using elastic chords, one can measure the weight of the setup, using a sensitive weighting device).

3. ?Drag absolutely demands a point to attach itself to.? You are perfectly right here.
The point drag attaches to is the upper point where the wire is fixed. The drag is there; it is just along the wire, affecting the tension within.

Opinions?

Respectfully,
Tinu

P.S. After debating the above issue, if you agree, of course, I?d also like to raise the next one about the three-point interaction. One at a time?

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory
« Reply #259 on: September 06, 2007, 12:25:19 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline ltseung888

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4363
Re: The Conservation of Energy
« Reply #260 on: September 06, 2007, 11:03:35 PM »
Hi Lawrence,

Thank you for your opinion on The boat in calm water and good sunshine scenario.  You arrived at the same conclusion as the Professors and Research Students at Tsing Hua and Beijing University.

Before we discuss the second topic of the Pulsed Force on the Pendulum, I would like you to have access (at least in video form) of the WORKING prototypes.  The Professors at Tsing Hua University have seen and have access to these prototypes.  The videos and their pointers are on previous posts of this thread.

You make me wonder what I'm getting myself into, but OK, I've got the videos.
Cheers,

Mr. Entropy


Dear Mr. Entropy,

Great, you have the videos.  Let us assume that these videos are not hoaxes.

(1)   In the Tsing Hua University Electricity Magnifier, the input power was magnified 30 times via a ?3 cylinder type device?.  The axle of rotation was horizontal.  When the axle were tilted, the magnification decreased.  Prototypes of this Electricity Magnifier exists today and at least one of them has been used in a factory environment  for over 11 years.  The Chas Campbell Device works in the same way and is being investigated by Ash and other members of this forum.  I am absolutely sure that the Chas Campbell Device works.  Chas Campbell is willing to disclose the details of his invention and I am confident that I can propose improvements. (Knowledge of a superior device helps.)

(2)   The Wang Shum Ho device.  This device is unusual, as it needs no starting motor and no input power.  It uses the coupling of two mechanisms.  One is a ferro-liquid rotation.  A ferro-liquid is caused to rotate via a rotating magnet in a magnetic field.  The ferro-liquid will form a vortex and hit the top of the container. Such motion will cause the ferro-liquid to ?remix?.  The video shows that such a mechanism by itself can rotate for a long time.  The other is the solid magnet rotation.  When these two mechanisms are coupled to enhance and complement each other, the resulting is a permanently rotating device that can generate electricity.  This device was demonstrated on January 15, 2007 in front of 5 Chinese Officials.  The result was that Wang became vice president of a RMB13 billion Company (General Magnetic 磁普).  This Company gathered a number of Cosmic Energy Machine Projects.  The plan was to go International IPO in 2008.  The Publicity and Product Introduction plans will come from the PR section of this Company.  My first confirm dealing with the Chinese Officials was October 2005 when we met the Senior Officials in the China Patent Office in Beijing.  Lee Chung Kin and I were able to convince them that our Cosmic Energy Inventions did not violate the Law of Conservation of Energy.

(3)   The Dr. Liang Xingren Car and later improvement by Chao Ching San.  The full Liang China Patent information was translated by Ms. Forever Yuen.  The China Patent disclosed that the Pulse Rotation was achieved via programmed Intelligent Chip and Integrated Circuits.  We are confident that it used Gravitational Energy because it had the problem of tilting similar to (1).  Chao improved it with banks of batteries.  The Chao Car has been certified by the Official Chinese Electric Car Authorities and is entering the mass production mode.  The same principle is being applied to small electricity power plants.  There are still some technical problems to overcome.  Lee Cheung Kin spent one week early 2007 working with Chao.

Now, imagine that you are one of the Tsing Hua University professors with access to the three above inventions.  (I believe they also have access or have visited the EBM machine in Hungary.)  How would you attempt to explain the source of energy of these devices?

(The answer and tone will set the stage for the detailed juicy discussions to follow.)

Regards,
Lawrence Tseung
Solid Experimental Prototypes Lead Out the juicy coming Meaningful theoretical discussions

Offline Mr.Entropy

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 195
Re: The Conservation of Energy
« Reply #261 on: September 07, 2007, 06:43:22 AM »
Now, imagine that you are one of the Tsing Hua University professors with access to the three above inventions.  (I believe they also have access or have visited the EBM machine in Hungary.)  How would you attempt to explain the source of energy of these devices?

Hi Lawrence,

That's a very entertaining question!  If I had access to working overunity prototypes, then "explaining" the source of energy for these devices would be the last thing on my mind for quite some time.  It would be the final step in a journey that would go something like this:

1) First, I would perform a lot of tests to ensure that the prototypes were actually overunity devices, so that I could be sure I wasn't wasting my time.  I would isolate them from the environment as well as I could, ensure that they can run on their own power, and extract enough work from them running on their own power to be sure that they weren't simply depleting some energy storage device like a battery.  The electricity magnifier would need a feedback circuit so that it could run on its own power.  If the car normally depletes its battery, then it would need a generator on the wheel and a feedback circuit to charge the battery or a capacitor to prevent that depletion.

If I couldn't extract sufficient energy at sufficient power levels from any of the devices, then I would put those devices aside.

Lets assume that they work.

2) If I was satisfied that I had in my possession a device that violated the laws of physics that I know about, i.e., that behaves contrary to the under-unity predictions of those laws, I would then attempt to isolate the anomalous effect.

The process I would follow is basically one of structural and temporal decomposition.

Structural decomposition would involve finding the specific parts of the device that are behaving counter to the predictions of physics.  It starts with the whole device, and proceeds recursively.  We know that maginfier is overunity, so either the motor part or the generator part must be over unity.  I'd test them independently, and continue this decomposition down to the smallest set of anomalous components I could find.

Temporal decomposition would consist of measuring the state of the device or a part of the device as completely as possible at frequent and precise intervals to isolate the specific moments when the measured evolution of the device deviates from the evolution predicted by current physics.   Oscilloscopes and high-speed photography are good tools for this.

Having found the specific anomolous event, then I'd create a simple, repeatable experiment that demonstrates the anomalous effect, i.e., the violation of the current laws of physics.  Note that this is not a set of instructions about how to build a perpetual motion machine.  It's a set of instructions about how to reproduce and measure the anomaly that makes perpetual motion possible.

3) Given the repeatable experiment, I would examine variations.  How does the effect change when I change various components or the relationships between them?  I would collect a lot of data, and document the procedures required to reproduce it.  By examining variations, I would determine which aspects of the repeatable experiment are important, and try to come up with a mathematical model that predicts the anomalous behaviour based on those variables.

4) Then it would be a good time to publish so that others could do it too, and to broadly patent classes of devices that rely on the anomalous effect.  I'd want to call it the "Entropy Effect", but that would probably just cause confusion :-)

5) Given a working mathematical model, I would use it to design practical devices, and start a company to manfacture and sell them, hire a company to do so, or license the patents with clauses that deny exclusivity to licensees that fail to bring products to market effectively.

6) Finally, when the press starts to call, and asks "so how does it work?", I'd have to think of a good answer that would paint a picture in the minds of laymen that wasn't entierly inconsistent with the mathematical model of the anomalous effect.  This is what most people would call the "explanation".

7) Eventually, some physicist would integrate the mathematical model, or an approximation of it, into the theoretical framework of modern physics, ensuring that there was still a Lagrangian form.  This would change the working definition of energy by introducing a new term that they would call the "whatever" potential, that could actually take on negative values and be reduced boundlessly.  They would then say that these overunity devices work by converting whatever potential energy into useful work, thereby "explaining the source of energy" for these devices.

I hope that answers your question.

Cheers,

Mr. Entropy


Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: The Conservation of Energy
« Reply #261 on: September 07, 2007, 06:43:22 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline shruggedatlas

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 549
Re: The Conservation of Energy
« Reply #262 on: September 07, 2007, 09:37:12 AM »

Dear shruggedatlas,

The Lee-Tseung theory demands a Pulse Force  to Lead Out gravitational or electron motion energy.  Your thought example does not provide the Pulse Force.

Lawrence Tseung
Pulse Force Leads Out Gravitational and/or Electron Motion Energy

And this is why the lead out theory is complete drivel.  According to the theory, a pulse force acting on a pendulum produces excess energy.  So one kid pushing another on a swing is an overunity device?  There is a pulse force and a pendulum, after all.  If this was true, it would be trivially simple to construct an overunity device.  Just have a pendulum and a hammer hitting it from one end.  Then use the excess force of the pendulum to retrigger the hammer, and presto!  And Mr. Tseung claims a 1.5 to 1 efficiency rating too boot, so this should be very easy to set up.  A 150% efficiency rating is so great, we do not even have to worry about friction much.

Come to think of it, we already have something like this in the form of desk toys.  I am referring to the set of 5 or 6 steel balls suspended on strings that hit each other.  According to the lead out theory, this device should produce infinite energy, and we know this is not true.  All this toy is really, is pendulums and pulsed forces.

Is a simple pendulum clock overunity?  I believe there are pulsed forces applied to the pendulum to keep it in motion.

Now, having debunked the lead out theory, is there really any merit to anything else?

Offline tinu

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 630
Re: The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory
« Reply #263 on: September 07, 2007, 10:16:37 AM »
Wait, shruggedatlas; maybe you?ve not heard about the ?boat in calm water and good sunshine scenario?!
Mr. Tseung will soon post about it, explaining it in great detail. ;D
Then about the OU devices and then about the 5 Chinese Officials and not to forget the Tsing Hua University and its famous professors. Did I mentioned the rumors about Nobel prize nomination? What about the philosophical discussions between student A, handsome B, scientist C and investor D? And that vice president of one company? And about the great investments opportunities. Not to forget the way ?lead-out theory? explains all the phenomena into this world, especially those that are not even proved to be real?
Lol!

Then Mr. Tseung will start over and over again. Endlessly, like a moebius coil.
This is not fun. It?s really sad. It?s like a broken machine, like an erroneous software endlessly looping.

Shruggedatlas, your post will remain unanswered, although you are perfectly right. Or, it will happen this way maybe exactly because you are right.
I?ve raised similar issues, much earlier into this thread. Check them if you want.
I?ve asked fair questions. I?ve shown elementary mistakes. Mistakes not just about physics and equations but about elementary logic. Then I?ve pointed toward the stupidity of the whole thing.

It?s pointless. Let him looping and dreaming on.
Speaking alone or just with himself is something that to Mr. Tseung will not be an impediment at all. He already has an extensive experience into this area as well as in creating various accounts just to post and to create a so-called ?dialogue?.

I post here now just for the record. There are plenty of innocents out-there reading this thread. They should find such post here before making their own minds. (Otherwise it would be so easy to mislead a lot of persons?)

Have a nice day,
Tinu

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory
« Reply #263 on: September 07, 2007, 10:16:37 AM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline ltseung888

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4363
Re: The Conservation of Energy
« Reply #264 on: September 08, 2007, 04:22:37 AM »

Dear shruggedatlas,

The Lee-Tseung theory demands a Pulse Force  to Lead Out gravitational or electron motion energy.  Your thought example does not provide the Pulse Force.

Lawrence Tseung
Pulse Force Leads Out Gravitational and/or Electron Motion Energy

And this is why the lead out theory is complete drivel.  According to the theory, a pulse force acting on a pendulum produces excess energy.  So one kid pushing another on a swing is an overunity device?  There is a pulse force and a pendulum, after all.  If this was true, it would be trivially simple to construct an overunity device.  Just have a pendulum and a hammer hitting it from one end.  Then use the excess force of the pendulum to retrigger the hammer, and presto!  And Mr. Tseung claims a 1.5 to 1 efficiency rating  too boot, so this should be very easy to set up.  A 150% efficiency rating is so great, we do not even have to worry about friction much.
.....

Now, having debunked the lead out theory, is there really any merit to anything else?

Dear shruggedatlas,

There are a few point you and many others might have overlooked.

(1) "According to the theory, a pulse force acting on a pendulum produces excess energy."  When you use the word "produce", most people will think that we "create" energy.  That is a direct violation of the Law of Conservation of energy.  I have used the term "Lead Out" again, again, again and again.  Lead Out uses the existing gravitational energy that is already there.  Thus there  is NO violation of CoE.

*** one tiny misunderstand or misuse of the word "produce" distorts the entire theory.

(2) "A 150% efficiency rating is so great, we do not even have to worry about friction much." You should also quote the qualifying sentence.  Gravitational Energy is Lead Out only during the application of the Pulse Force.  In the case of a mother pushing a child on the swing, the time during which the pushing is applied (Tpush) is short compared with the total time of one swing or oscillation (Toscillation).

*** (Tpush) << (Toscillation)  That is the reason for multiple pulse points on a wheel (e.g. Liang Xingren IC motor and the 225 Pulse Motor.)

I can appreciate the difference in actually presenting the information in a Lecture Room with interactive questions  compared with passive reading of information on the Internet.  Very slight misconceptions not immediately  clarified could lead to total misunderstanding and misrepresentation.

However, I do appreciate the posts from shruggedatlas.  They help to pinpoint some of the misconceptions.  Thank You.

Lawrence Tseung
Slight misconception Leads Out major misunderstanding.

Offline NerzhDishual

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 588
    • FreeNRG.info
Re: The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory
« Reply #265 on: September 08, 2007, 04:37:40 AM »

Hi ltseung888

Sorry for disturbing. But? My English is not so good.
What the heck does the verb to "Lead Out" exactly/precisely mean?
Sounds like you can use it at every opportunity.

My English Synonym dictionnary (http://dico.isc.cnrs.fr/dico/en/search) has no entry for 'Lead out' and my Harraps's English-French is not so informative. It just talk about wires  and 'groove disc'.
Of course if you drop the 'out' it is more simple and understandable.

With 'Lead' I got the following Component Selection:
Quote
administer, administrate, captain, cause, chair, clue, command, conduce, conduct, confidential information, contribute, control, cue, determine, direct, escort, excel, extend, first, go, govern, guide, guide round, head, hint, indication,
induce, influence, inkling, intimation, leading, leash, leave, manage, moderate,
outstrip, pass, persuade, pilot, pointer, precede, preside, primary, principal,
result, rule, run, shepherd, show, show around, show round, star, steer, suggestion, surpass, take, tether, tip, track, trail, usher, vanguard, wind
So, is this irritating 'out' relevant?
What the heck is this 'out' used for?

Best


Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory
« Reply #265 on: September 08, 2007, 04:37:40 AM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline ltseung888

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4363
Re: The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory
« Reply #266 on: September 08, 2007, 05:29:32 AM »

Hi ltseung888

Sorry for disturbing. But? My English is not so good.
What the heck does the verb to "Lead Out" exactly/precisely mean?
Sounds like you can use it at every opportunity.

My English Synonym dictionnary (http://dico.isc.cnrs.fr/dico/en/search) has no entry for 'Lead out' and my Harraps's English-French is not so informative. It just talk about wires  and 'groove disc'.
Of course if you drop the 'out' it is more simple and understandable.

Best


Dear NerzhDishual,

You might not have read the posts in the Steorn.com/forum  related to the Lee-Tseung Patent and the dozens of posts on Lead Out.

We use the term "Lead Out" in our patent in a specific way.  We said in our Patent Application that Gravitational Energy can be Lead Out via Pulsed oscillation, rotation or vibration.   In the boat in calm water and good sunshine example, we talk about that we are already immersed in gravitational field.  Newton's General Gravitational Law states that any two masses attract each other.  The Sun attracts the Earth.  Even you and I attract each other.  If you move, this attraction force will do work and we effectively have energy interchange.

This gravitational energy can be used.  We do not create or destroy energy.  Thus we do not violate the CoE.  Scientist already know how to use gravitational energy in a non-circular fashion (e.g. water from a dam to power turbines.  In this case, we wait for the sun to evaporate the water to become rain to fill the dam again to repeat the cycle.)

Our patent describes that we can use such gravitational energy continuously.  We apply a small horizontal force (thus supply energy) to push the swing or pendulum.  This will increase the tension of the string of the pendulum.  This increased tension lifts up the pendulum slightly.  The vertical component of this tension produces an increase in height (displacement).  In other words, work is done or energy has been supplied.

In our patent and in our theory, we pointed out that this work done or energy is NOT supplied by the horizontal force.  It is the LEAD OUT energy provided by the increased tension of the string.

In our full patent discussion with the Patent Examiner, we also showed the cases of non-horizontal force acting on the pendulum.  The case that helped to convince the patent examiner was:

(1) The String of the Pendulum (Sforce) and the string supplying the Pulse Force  (Pforce) were equal and opposite.  The Pendulum Weight was thus half way in between.

(2) In this starting position,
     the vertical component of Sforce = the vertical component of Pforce
                                                             = 1/2 the weight of the Pendulum
     the horizontal component of Sforce = - that of Pforce

(3) A slight pull of the Pulse Force string will do work.  However, it could not do ALL the work.  Some contribution must come from the tension of the String.  Or Gravitational Energy is Lead Out via the tension of the String.

Lawrence Tseung
Hope the meaning of Lead Out is clear now.

Offline ltseung888

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4363
Re: The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory
« Reply #267 on: September 08, 2007, 06:02:43 AM »
Dear Entrophy and Tinu,

Just finished a telephone conversation with Lee Cheung Kin.

Lee: "There will be a meeting with a group of Chinese Officials next week.  They want to have a report on the Cosmic Energy Machine development outside China.  I shall handle the Japan situation.  Can you handle the other cases."

Tseung: "Have they seen the cases within China, in particular, the following prototypes:
(1) Tsing Hua Electricity Magnifier
(2) Liang Xingren Car
(3) Chao Ching San Car
(4) Wang SHum Ho Electricity Generator
(5) The 225 HP Pulse Engine
(6) The EBM machine from Hungary?"

Lee: "Some of them are very knowledgeable on the above.  I want you to tell them the Inventions outside China."

Tseung: " I shall prepare the following:
(1) The Chas Campbell Gravity Wheel and Electricity Magnifier.  I just downloaded the Gravity Wheel.  I shall use the Lee-Tseung theory to explain it.
(2) The Joseph Newman Machine.  I have email communication with them for some time.  It appears that they are ready to do a closed system  demonstration soon."
(3) The TPU device from Steven Mark.  Many members of the Overunity forum are working on this device.
(4) The Milkovic Pendulum.  It is almost a direct confirmation of our Lead Out Theory.
(5) The many magnet motors that use rotation of magnets in magnetic field.  I shall talk about this in the Lee-Tseung Lead Out theory context.  An example is the Bedini motor."

Lee: "We shall ask them about the promotion plans for the Chinese Products.  You can publish them on the Internet if you get their permission."

Tseung: "When China has actual products coming down the pipe, I do not care about personal attacks.  My goal is to benefit the World.  I can simply treat the insults as deliberate attempts by the paid debunkers similar to the CIA or the Like who tricked us."

Lee: "I also want to see who can beat our theory!"

Offline shruggedatlas

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 549
Re: The Conservation of Energy
« Reply #268 on: September 08, 2007, 06:14:27 AM »
Thank you for your patience, Mr. Tseung.


There are a few point you and many others might have overlooked.

(1) "According to the theory, a pulse force acting on a pendulum produces excess energy."  When you use the word "produce", most people will think that we "create" energy.  That is a direct violation of the Law of Conservation of energy.  I have used the term "Lead Out" again, again, again and again.  Lead Out uses the existing gravitational energy that is already there.  Thus there  is NO violation of CoE.

*** one tiny misunderstand or misuse of the word "produce" distorts the entire theory.

Please, let's not split hairs.  You know what I mean.  Frankly, I do not care about CoE at this point.  I just want to know if the lead out theory dictates whether a mother pushing a child, or the desk toy I mentioned, or the simple pendulum clock is overunity.  I do not care whether the extra energy is produced, lead out, or whatever other term of art you want to attach.  I just want to know if your theory would dictate that those devices are over unity, and if so, please reconcile the fact that the three devices I mentioned are known to be under unity, while your theory would dictate otherwise.

Quote
(2) "A 150% efficiency rating is so great, we do not even have to worry about friction much." You should also quote the qualifying sentence.  Gravitational Energy is Lead Out only during the application of the Pulse Force.  In the case of a mother pushing a child on the swing, the time during which the pushing is applied (Tpush) is short compared with the total time of one swing or oscillation (Toscillation).

*** (Tpush) << (Toscillation)  That is the reason for multiple pulse points on a wheel (e.g. Liang Xingren IC motor and the 225 Pulse Motor.)

I take exception to this logic.  You seem to imply that a single pulse does nothing, while multiple pulses would accomplish the trick.  This makes no sense.  Under the lead out theory, even a single pulse will result in free energy.  More pulses may create more energy, but a single pulse should be enough.

Finally, I want to touch on what you tell NerzhDishual.  You say that the tension of the string is what causes extra energy to be lead out. We still do not know what lead out means in this case, but I think you are running afoul of a pretty elementary concept in physics.  I am a lawyer by trade, not a physicist, so correct me if I am wrong, but tension does not by itself create energy.  For example, if I am trying to lift a weight in the gym, a weight much too heavy for me, and I struggle and pull and tug with all my might, but fail to get the weight off the ground, I am exerting great tension on my arms, but there is no way to extract any energy from this.  I would actually have to move the weight in order to accomplish any work.  So your explanation is a little nonsensical.

Offline NerzhDishual

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 588
    • FreeNRG.info
Re: The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory
« Reply #269 on: September 08, 2007, 06:18:39 AM »
Hi ltseung888

I was not criticizing or questionning the "Lead Out" theory. I (sometimes) see what you mean especially when you are talking about boat, water, sunshine and 'calmness'.

I undestand that you are not talking about COE violation. I also 'beleive' that a Bessler-like device is possible. I need not to be convinced. I'm far from a skeptic. Actually I'm a skeptic fighter. I fight with my native language that is why my posts here are short (I whish I could be more fluent in English).

My question was not a "scientific" one but a mere "gramatical" and "semantical" one. I just wanted to get a synonym for "Lead out".

Best

 

OneLink