Author Topic: The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory (Read 2180654 times)

Pirate88179 · « **Reply #570 on:** October 26, 2007, 08:02:56 AM »

We need more photos of Forever. She has a beautiful mind.

Bill

ltseung888 · « **Reply #571 on:** October 27, 2007, 04:45:45 AM »

Thank you to Todd Hathaway of The Potomac Energy ProjectÃ¢â‚¬Â and others in proof reading the attached file.

This file will be frozen after additional review and correction.

Quote

Note: The major change to V3.0 is the realization that the ideal pulse force for a pendulum is the pull applied perpendicular to the arc of motion at the maximum displaced positions. This pull will lead out the maximum gravitational energy via the tension in the string. Similarly, the best pulse force for rotating systems is tangential to the radius (or in the direction of rotation). The rotating systems should rotate faster due to the pulse force and rotate slower due to external load (friction, work, etc.)

ltseung888 · « **Reply #572 on:** October 27, 2007, 05:48:59 AM »

Quote

From the forum.go-here.nl discussions:

The theoretical ideal pull for a pendulum is the pull when the pendulum bob swings to its highest position and perpendicular to the arc of motion. How can this be realized in practice?

The theoretical ideal pulse for a balanced wheel is tangential and in the direction of rotation. How can this be realized in practice?

Excellent questions. I do not have a ready answer. Let me open them for the Forum Members.

Freezer · « **Reply #573 on:** October 27, 2007, 06:55:49 AM »

Scroll the video to 1:39:00
He shows some pulse devices which might relate.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2858148671911962750&q=energy+from+the++vaccum&total=137&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=2

ltseung888 · « **Reply #574 on:** October 27, 2007, 09:22:27 AM »

Let me first comment on the simple pendulum. With the simple pendulum, there are two good positions to apply the pull ( A and C in the diagram).

I do not like the simple pendulum as I cannot increase the number of pulls per second easily. The pendulum may remain as a toy device rather than a practical electricity generating machine.

Forever Yuen and Lawrence Tseung
Discussion before posting Leads Out good ideas.

Forever · « **Reply #575 on:** October 27, 2007, 09:33:03 AM »

In the diagram, we use balanced rotation. Three pulse points are shown. The application of the pulse is tangential to the direction of rotation (clockwise in this case).

It is possible to always to apply one single pulse to the many points on the rotating cylinder. However, multiple pulse points effectively increases the pulse force amplitude.

Forever · « **Reply #576 on:** October 27, 2007, 09:55:39 AM »

We can apply electromagnetic repulsion to try to generate the ideal pulse force. For example, the permanent magnets are inside the rotating cylinder with the North Pole facing outwards. The coils on the outer cylinder are pulsed with the North Pole pointing inwards. The current to the pulse coil is in one single direction but may be on or off. Thus, the coil will show strong or no North Pole properties.

The pulsing frequency is timed as follow:
1. The permanent magnet is slightly on the RHS of the coil. The current to the coil is on.
2. After the repulsion pushes the permanent magnet and hence the rotating cylinder to a mid way position(with another permanent magnet), the current to the coil is turned off.
3. After the next permanent magnet is at position 1, the current to the coil is again turned on.
4. Effectively we are repeating 1 and 2. Thus, the frequency of the current must be correct. In addition, the pulsing will tend to accelerate the rotation. Therefore, a program is required to adjust the frequency or the pulsing current strength.
5. This is what we mean by adjusting the input according to the output load. Most of the overunity developers have not done this( Newman, Bedini, Adams etc.)

gaby de wilde · « **Reply #577 on:** October 27, 2007, 10:20:55 AM »

Quote from: Forever on October 27, 2007, 09:33:03 AM

In the diagram, we use balanced rotation. Three pulse points are shown. The application of the pulse is tangential to the direction of rotation (clockwise in this case).

It is possible to always to apply one single pulse to the many points on the rotating cylinder. However, multiple pulse points effectively increases the pulse force amplitude.

Using multiple pulses takes a lot of stress off the bearings. I'm trying to make it spin suspended in the air, the wheel first tends to float in all directions. Above a not-given(haha) number of rpm's it can stand on a pin. Beyond that there is even a point where the wheel doesn't stand on anything anymore. It's just levitating between the coils. This is not a useful machine jet but it already shows that (mindless?) acceleration and deceleration leads out a lot of bearing friction.

I will let you in on a little secret. The direction of the pulse should be almost straight towards the axle. It should also have some spring like storage. The pulse can then oppose the centrifugal forces and lead out it's power over a range of degrees rather then over a small angle of rotation.

Now for the flux:
Say the wheel has north poles facing outwards. The pulse coils have a ferromagnetic core.

Now we place an additional north pole BEHIND the coil.

The purpose of this magnet is to induct a bit of flux into the core.

The flux inducted into the core should not be enough to repel the rotor magnets by a very small bit.

The rotor magnet should also be able to induct it's field into the core.

We now have 2 opposing fields inducted into the core.

A slight pulse will be enough to generate FULL repulsion in this configuration.

But if you really want godly powers out of the machine then you make this happen by utilising back emf alone.

So the stator coil attracts the rotor magnet.

Then the flux collapses in the coil.

Now we get FULL repulsion at no cost of any kind.

Now I'm going back to my 100% permanent magnet designs. *hahaha*

Quote from: Forever on October 27, 2007, 09:55:39 AM

5. This is what we mean by adjusting the input according to the output load. Most of the overunity developers have not done this( Newman, Bedini, Adams etc.)

But the rotoverter researchers have addressed this topic.

http://www.google.com/search?q=rotoverter

ltseung888 · « **Reply #578 on:** October 27, 2007, 12:16:26 PM »

Quote from: gaby de wilde on October 27, 2007, 10:20:55 AM

Using multiple pulses takes a lot of stress off the bearings. ...

I will let you in on a little secret. The direction of the pulse should be almost straight towards the axle. It should also have some spring like storage. The pulse can then oppose the centrifugal forces and lead out it's power over a range of degrees rather then over a small angle of rotation.

Now for the flux:
Say the wheel has north poles facing outwards. The pulse coils have a ferromagnetic core.

Now we place an additional north pole BEHIND the coil.

The purpose of this magnet is to induct a bit of flux into the core.

The flux inducted into the core should not be enough to repel the rotor magnets by a very small bit.

The rotor magnet should also be able to induct it's field into the core.

We now have 2 opposing fields inducted into the core.

A slight pulse will be enough to generate FULL repulsion in this configuration.

But if you really want godly powers out of the machine then you make this happen by utilising back emf alone.

So the stator coil attracts the rotor magnet.

Then the flux collapses in the coil.

Now we get FULL repulsion at no cost of any kind.

Now I'm going back to my 100% permanent magnet designs. *hahaha*

Quote from: Forever on October 27, 2007, 09:55:39 AM
5. This is what we mean by adjusting the input according to the output load. Most of the overunity developers have not done this( Newman, Bedini, Adams etc.)
But the rotoverter researchers have addressed this topic.

http://www.google.com/search?q=rotoverter

Gaby,

This post is very high quality. The suggestions will be carefully considered.

Regards,

Lawrence

ltseung888 · « **Reply #579 on:** October 27, 2007, 10:49:02 PM »

Quote from: Freezer on October 27, 2007, 06:55:49 AM

Scroll the video to 1:39:00
He shows some pulse devices that might relate.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2858148671911962750&q=energy+from+the++vaccum&total=137&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=2

Dear Freezer,

Thank you for the tip in scrolling to 1:39. Bedini did have a device with coils and permanent magnets arranged in a way that could lead out gravitational and electron motion energy. Like Joseph Newman, he also discovered that "seemingly dead batteries" could be recharged with "back EMF". He was able to produce many prototypes that could demostrate over unity.

If he and Tom Bearden knew the Lee-Tseung Lead Out theory then, he could have:
(1) Overcome the objection or roadblock of CoE
(2) Added the program to adjust the Input Pulse with External Load
(3) Drawn electrical or mechanical energy out directly

In other words, he could have produced a slice of the 225 HP device. He might also have observed the Flying Saucer effect. (He has rotating magnets.) I have emailed the Lee-Tseung theory to him/his supporters. We may be able to produce a win-win scenario.

Lawrence Tseung
Good development work leads out email and theory support from the old Tseung

gaby de wilde · « **Reply #580 on:** October 28, 2007, 12:17:31 AM »

Quote from: ltseung888 on October 27, 2007, 12:16:26 PM

Quote from: gaby de wilde on October 27, 2007, 10:20:55 AM

Using multiple pulses takes a lot of stress off the bearings. ...

I will let you in on a little secret. The direction of the pulse should be almost straight towards the axle. It should also have some spring like storage. The pulse can then oppose the centrifugal forces and lead out it's power over a range of degrees rather then over a small angle of rotation.

Now for the flux:
Say the wheel has north poles facing outwards. The pulse coils have a ferromagnetic core.

Now we place an additional north pole BEHIND the coil.

The purpose of this magnet is to induct a bit of flux into the core.

The flux inducted into the core should not be enough to repel the rotor magnets by a very small bit.

The rotor magnet should also be able to induct it's field into the core.

We now have 2 opposing fields inducted into the core.

A slight pulse will be enough to generate FULL repulsion in this configuration.

But if you really want godly powers out of the machine then you make this happen by utilising back emf alone.

So the stator coil attracts the rotor magnet.

Then the flux collapses in the coil.

Now we get FULL repulsion at no cost of any kind.

Now I'm going back to my 100% permanent magnet designs. *hahaha*

Quote from: Forever on October 27, 2007, 09:55:39 AM
5. This is what we mean by adjusting the input according to the output load. Most of the overunity developers have not done this( Newman, Bedini, Adams etc.)
But the rotoverter researchers have addressed this topic.

http://www.google.com/search?q=rotoverter

Gaby,

This post is very high quality. The suggestions will be carefully considered.

Regards,

Lawrence

I call it flux surfing. ^__^

If you rotate the stator magnet by 90 degrees you should be able to run the thing without any coils.

You can make it so that the repulsive front side doesn't get repelled until the backside is inducting it's field into it.

The field inducted by the rear end of the rotor magnet compliments the field inducted by the magnet that sits behind the core. Together they will fully saturnise the core.

This will both push and pull the magnet forwards, the strength of the push is very clear the pulling force is not much bigger a loss as a gain. The push is free.

tinu · « **Reply #581 on:** October 28, 2007, 01:16:20 AM »

Quote from: gaby de wilde on October 28, 2007, 12:17:31 AM

Quote from: ltseung888 on October 27, 2007, 12:16:26 PM
Quote from: gaby de wilde on October 27, 2007, 10:20:55 AM

Using multiple pulses takes a lot of stress off the bearings. ...

I will let you in on a little secret. The direction of the pulse should be almost straight towards the axle. It should also have some spring like storage. The pulse can then oppose the centrifugal forces and lead out it's power over a range of degrees rather then over a small angle of rotation.

Now for the flux:
Say the wheel has north poles facing outwards. The pulse coils have a ferromagnetic core.

Now we place an additional north pole BEHIND the coil.

The purpose of this magnet is to induct a bit of flux into the core.

The flux inducted into the core should not be enough to repel the rotor magnets by a very small bit.

The rotor magnet should also be able to induct it's field into the core.

We now have 2 opposing fields inducted into the core.

A slight pulse will be enough to generate FULL repulsion in this configuration.

But if you really want godly powers out of the machine then you make this happen by utilising back emf alone.

So the stator coil attracts the rotor magnet.

Then the flux collapses in the coil.

Now we get FULL repulsion at no cost of any kind.

Now I'm going back to my 100% permanent magnet designs. *hahaha*

Quote from: Forever on October 27, 2007, 09:55:39 AM
5. This is what we mean by adjusting the input according to the output load. Most of the overunity developers have not done this( Newman, Bedini, Adams etc.)
But the rotoverter researchers have addressed this topic.

http://www.google.com/search?q=rotoverter

Gaby,

This post is very high quality. The suggestions will be carefully considered.

Regards,

Lawrence

I call it flux surfing. ^__^

If you rotate the stator magnet by 90 degrees you should be able to run the thing without any coils.

You can make it so that the repulsive front side doesn't get repelled until the backside is inducting it's field into it.

The field inducted by the rear end of the rotor magnet compliments the field inducted by the magnet that sits behind the core. Together they will fully saturnise the core.

This will both push and pull the magnet forwards, the strength of the push is very clear the pulling force is not much bigger a loss as a gain. The push is free.

Very interesting!
Can you post a movie?

Tx,
Tinu

gaby de wilde · « **Reply #582 on:** October 28, 2007, 05:22:53 AM »

Here is another idea,

Say we have just a rotor magnet and a stator magnet attracting another.

If we give the rotor a swing it goes fast enough to pass it. The interaction has an escape velocity.

While it's attracted the rotor first accelerates then (during escape) it's speed is reduced again.

The slower the rotor moves the more % speed it gains from the attraction. Escaping the attraction at low speed doesn't allow for a lot of attraction.

Now I'm going to preform a miracle. (haha)

I'm going to make it so that the rotor spins in one direction and the armature spins in the other.

Now one would think we have exactly the same situation going on but in fact we now have a resonant system.

The minimum approach speed to accomplish the escape velocity is cut in half.

*grin*

acerzw · « **Reply #583 on:** October 28, 2007, 07:51:17 PM »

ltseung888 · « **Reply #584 on:** October 28, 2007, 11:15:32 PM »

Let me put my understanding of Gaby's Improvement in pictorial form.

A = rotating inner cylinder in the clockwise direction
B = non-rotating ring of coils that can be switched on and off
C = non-rotating ring of permanent magnets suggested by Gaby.

With the magnetic poles as shown, if the coil in B has current off, the permanent magnet in C will induce a S pole (in coil at B) facing the rotating magnets in A. This effectively causes an attraction with the next coming permanent magnet in A (which is beneficial) causing further force to turn the cylinder A in the clockwise direction.

The permanent magnet in C does not draw any current. Gaby has improved the efficiency of the device!

This multiple ring concept is getting closer to the John Searl device. Let us have more of these brilliant ideas.

Lawrence Tseung
Gaby?s brilliant ideas Lead Out resonance from equally brilliant minds.

News:

User Menu

Author Topic: The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory (Read 2180654 times)

Pirate88179

Re: The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory

ltseung888

Re: The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory

ltseung888

Re: The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory

Freezer

Re: The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory

ltseung888

Re: The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory

Forever

Re: The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory

Forever

Re: The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory

gaby de wilde

Re: The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory

ltseung888

Re: The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory

ltseung888

Re: The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory

gaby de wilde

Re: The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory

tinu

Re: The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory

gaby de wilde

Re: The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory

acerzw

Re: The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory

ltseung888

Gaby's Improvement