@Eddy Currentz: WHAT experiment? I mean, I haven't actually read any proper experiment being suggested by mr. Tseung at all! I see a lot of claims, a lot of talk about his spreadsheet, and even an "experiment" that proves that 2 people can push a chair and make it move... But none of that proves that mr. Tseung actually has something here. If he has a proper "theory", as he claims, and has a formal physics education, it should be easy to present a simple experiment that proves his hypothesis to be worthy of the name "theory".
So where is it? Where is this experiment? Well?

Talk is cheap, and as far as I can determine that's all mr. Tseung presents: a lot of talk, claims of "free energy", but nothing to substantiate it with except for a spreadsheet containing doubfull mixtures of classical physics formulae...

And what about these claims that some of this is actually patented in China? How can this be? Do they not require people to show an actual proof of concept to get a patent in China? Sounds to me like what happened with patents in the US before they introduced the requirement to actually show a working prototype or proof of concept... Tons of US patents from the late 1800s to the early 1900s show devices that simply do not work, no matter how great they look on paper. Yet they still got patents. Perhaps the same thing is going on in China now?

@amateur: You have a very good point there. It seems highly unlikely that an American visitor could go through all the material with mr Tseung and then make a new nick and post within that short period of time.
This leads to the inevitable conclusion that there seems to be something very fishy going on here... Perhaps it is indeed mr Tseung himself posting as this alleged mr Fung. In which case we might want to toss this entire thread in the junk box as it invalidates everything... As far as there was anything valid to go on, for as utalitarian and others have remarked a number of times already: NO proof nor experiments are provided, only claims.
Besides, 4 hours may be more than enough to figure out you have been duped by a nutter of course...

So, let me voice our common wish in the hopes that mr Tseung finally understands and comes forward:
GIVE US PROOF! GIVE US EXPERIMENTS! GIVE US ANYTHING MORE SOLID THAN VAGUE CLAIMS AND PEOPLE PUSHING A CHAIR!


I mean come on... Let's take your "kid and punching bag" example, we can extrapolate a very similar experiment quite easily...
We take a pendulum and connect it to a hinge not through a string, but through a rod. We replace the hinge with a gear setup that allows the pendulum to swing left to right with no resistance (except for normal mechanical friction). We allo the pendulum to swing right to left only via the gears, thereby turning a cogwheel or axle.
This way we could extract (which is the normal English term for what you appear to mean with "lead out") energy from the pendulums swing.
Now we setup a spring or a different setup that allows us to give a periodic push to the pendulum when it is swinging downward left to right.
Starting the experiment, let us lift the pendulum to the highest point on the left, and let it go to start the pendulum swinging. Let us call the energy contained in this E1, which is obviously the potential energy contained in the pendulum at rest in its highest point, which obviously is turned into kinetic energy at the lowest point of the swing.
Now it swings back from right to left, starting at the highest point right with energy level E2 which is E1 minus the friction. Let us say we can extract 10% of that energy using our gearbox, and the rest is enough to allow the pendulum to swing back to the left but not as high as before. So the energy level when it reaches the top left position again is now 0.9*E2 minus the friction. Let us say we give a push that is exactly enough to get the pendulums energy level back to its starting level, which was E1, so we need to input (((E1 - friction) * 0.1) + 2 * friction) at least. Every swing.
How is that over unity?
I see more energy going in... 

Oh...  :'(

So mr Tseung is one of those digital multiple personality patients, that's what you're saying?
Dammit!

So it's just another one of the Bowsers in this world eh? too bad, I had hoped there was actually something to his claims...
...well at least he sticks with the topic and doesn't use crumpled straws...

Well if that is really the case, then I guess we can forget about ever getting a proper explanation of his "theory"?  :'(

G'day all,

Here is another oldie but goodie on the subject. (notice that this is his answer to a specific question)

Lawrence has learned a lot from these postings as they were too transparent. That is why he switched tactics and posts as a number of people now rather than having "conversations' with them in his posts.

Hans von Lieven

Quote from: brnbrade on August 13, 2007, 12:50:25 AM

Hi ITseung888

It can you to post a diagram of this such one cosmic device really working ?

regards

The scene is Richard and Nancy at the home of Tseung.

Richard: "Looks like some members of the overunity.com forum are interested in the Sung device.  I saw that 40 minute video and was convinced that the device worked.  You can use rapidshare as the attach file limit here is only 12MB."

Tseung: "That is not a problem.  I shall zip the 96 MB file.  It should be read with Windows Media Player.   Before I do that, I shall quote the warning from the Inventor and the Chinese Police.  That video was used by some unauthorized persons to solicit funds.  It MUST NOT be used for that purpose again.  It may be used for scientific discussions only."

Nancy: "Can you repeat the story of why Sung gave up the development of his inventions?  The video seemed to indicate excellent working prototypes?"

Tseung smiled: "I shall repeat the story one more time.  Note that I use the term story because I was not personally involved.  The story was that Dr. Liang Sing Yan heard about the Sung Invention and wanted to use that invention to recharge his battery car.  They worked together for a few months.

Dr. Liang then got the brilliant idea that he could rotate the inner cylinder with ICs.  He did not need to use the permanent magnets and the complex setup of the Sung invention.  He succeeded.  All the potential investors for Sung changed ship.  Sung was obviously unhappy.  However, as a scientist, he accepted the fact that his invention was not as good.  He abandoned further development on his devices.

We also have the video on the Dr. Liang Car.  That video was definitely used by criminals to solicit funds.  Some of these criminals are in jail now. 

Mr. Chao did a big improvement to overcome the hill-climbing drawback of the Liang car using banks of batteries.  That improved car traveled 1,500 kilometers to Beijing with 8 newspapers and televisions following the journey in 2006.  We have two videos.  One of them was done by the Chinese Official Television Station CCTV.

I shall post these videos when appropriate.  Here is the first one.  It will be available for 90 days.  The download time is approximately 1 hour.  The link is:
http://rapidshare.com/files/48650021/Sung.ZIP.html

Lawrence Tseung
The third generation Cosmic Energy Machines Lead Out abandonment of the first and second generation.

Okay, so basically what you're saying is that OTHER people have come up with devices that use pulses and rotation, like Bedini, and for some reason that gives credibility to mr. Tseungs claims?
Not it does not.
mr Tseung still does not actually present a theory at all. He presents a hypothesis consisting of an accumulation of statements and assumptions that all free energy/over unity researches in the past have also suggested or said, coupled to a spreadsheet, with no experimental backing of his own at all.

And I fail to see how mr Tseungs claim that his "theory" which does not actually explain anything is somehow supported by these interesting inventions MADE BY OTHER PEOPLE can in any way be considered to be an "experiment".
Sure, you could replicate a Bedini motor. But then you're only replicated a Bedini motor, you have not done any experiment proposed by mr Tseung.
Besides, did not Bedinis motor capture the back mmf from the moving motor, acting as a dynamo in that phase of operation? I believe it does... No mysterious "gravity conversion" going on, just the effects of inertia and mmf...
There is NO experiment that mr Tseung has presented, which proves first of all that it is his theory, and second of all that the theory has any basis in reality.

Now with the truth coming out that he has been multi-accounting and discussing things with his own multis on the Steorn forum, it is clear he is blowing his own horn and keeps repeating himself on different fora. It also seems like he is intentionally creating confusion and being unclear in his statements. And when push comes to shove he never has a good reply to questions of anyone except his own multiple personalities. To others he just keeps repeating himself, and accusing them of unwillingness or lack of understanding, instead of actually explaining things properly.
Does anyone hear F-R-A-U-D? No? Maybe H-O-A-X then?

Okay, so basically what you're saying is that OTHER people have come up with devices that use pulses and rotation, like Bedini, and for some reason that gives credibility to mr. Tseungs claims?
Not it does not.
mr Tseung still does not actually present a theory at all. He presents a hypothesis consisting of an accumulation of statements and assumptions that all free energy/over unity researches in the past have also suggested or said, coupled to a spreadsheet, with no experimental backing of his own at all.

And I fail to see how mr Tseungs claim that his "theory" which does not actually explain anything is somehow supported by these interesting inventions MADE BY OTHER PEOPLE can in any way be considered to be an "experiment".
Sure, you could replicate a Bedini motor. But then you're only replicated a Bedini motor, you have not done any experiment proposed by mr Tseung.
Besides, did not Bedinis motor capture the back mmf from the moving motor, acting as a dynamo in that phase of operation? I believe it does... No mysterious "gravity conversion" going on, just the effects of inertia and mmf...
There is NO experiment that mr Tseung has presented, which proves first of all that it is his theory, and second of all that the theory has any basis in reality.

Now with the truth coming out that he has been multi-accounting and discussing things with his own multis on the Steorn forum, it is clear he is blowing his own horn and keeps repeating himself on different fora. It also seems like he is intentionally creating confusion and being unclear in his statements. And when push comes to shove he never has a good reply to questions of anyone except his own multiple personalities. To others he just keeps repeating himself, and accusing them of unwillingness or lack of understanding, instead of actually explaining things properly.
Does anyone hear F-R-A-U-D? No? Maybe H-O-A-X then?

So, all the inventors you have studied are models of mental equanimity? Did Tesla's penchant for calculating the volume of the food he was about to consume, or any of his other eccentricities, detract from his brilliance?
Bedini's 1984 "Watson" machine did not capture the "back mmf" from the motor. The motor was a 12 VDC unit which was driven from a commutator for a little less than half a rotation. This then provided a mechanical pulse to the flywheel, which then drove a magneto. The output of the magneto was fed back to the battery during the time it was not driving the motor.
Let's see... commutator pulses motor, motor pulses flywheel, flywheel drives generator, generator charges battery.  Sounds a lot like Chas Campbell's setup to me. It also sounds a lot like what Mr. Tseung is talking about.
Bedini gave the technology of the machine to a guy named Jim Watson. Watson built a big old replica that worked quite well. Just look at the size of the flywheel he used (bottom photo). The goons got to Watson and that was the end of that.

(http://www.icehouse.net/john1/jon1.jpg)

Meeting Minutes (1)

Mr. Bill Fung was our visitor from USA.  He was born in Hong Kong.  He had his secondary schooling in Hong Kong and went to USA for his University education.  He had a B.Sc. in Chemical Engineering and worked for Eastman Kodak until his retirement.  He was in the technical area except for the last eight years when he was in management helping to set up the Kodak operation in China.

His home is in San Francisco, California.  His son works for a famous French Bank in Hong Kong ? helping the Bank to get into the China Market.  He and his wife will be spending some time in Hong Kong.  He is willing and capable in doing some validation.

The first thing we discussed were the many newspaper cuttings since December 2004.  He can read Chinese.  He can easily verify the many published articles and our ranked Number One in the 2006 International Venture Forum.  He also saw the dozens of photos of us at Tsing Hua University and with many influential persons.

The first technical topic  we covered was the boat in calm waters and good sunshine. The picture was taken from my balcony.  If a scientist does not know how to use solar energy, he might advocate using muscle energy to row the boat.  However, if he knows how to use solar panels to generate electricity, he could build a boat using solar energy.  No Laws of Physics would be violated.

If a scientist knows how to use gravitational energy that already surrounds us, his machine would not be labeled as the impossible perpetual motion machine.  So all we need to prove is that we can indeed Lead Out and use gravitational energy.

Then we went for lunch, walked next to the beautiful scenery of boats in calm waters and good sunshine.

(to be continued)

I am sorry Eddy, but I am very weary of the "goon stories"

It anyone has genuinely made a breakthrough on OU it is Dr Griffin and Dave. Dave has had a self sustaining reactor run for 60 days producing energy on top.

He has documented it all along and gave us a detailled blow by blow account as things happened. He has published a report that holds nothing back and can be readily replicated by anyone who is so inclined.

He has not been bothered by anyone.

He has issued the report under his own name, has shown a photograph of himself and he works as a research scientist. In other words HE IS EASY TO FIND!

It may not mean much to you, but to me it says a lot.

Most of the suppression stories are a bullshit cop-out to disguise the fact that the f*cking thing didn't work.

Hans von Lieven

Believe what you want Hans. There are enough accounts of successful inventors getting harassed, or worse, where their machines worked just fine.
I'm glad that Dr Griffin and Dave haven't had any run-ins yet. Most inventors don't have any trouble until they try to market their device. This is not always the case, but that's the general pattern.
Jim Watson was building these machines because they worked. He evidently built quite a few of them and was starting a business to sell these machines. During the conference, where his big machine was displayed, his batteries mysteriously disappeared. Not long after the conference, so did Watson.
There was no reason for him to just pack up and leave. He hadn't conned or swindled anyone, and had proved that the machine worked on a number of occasions.
You are welcome to draw whatever conclusion you want, but this incident follows a rather disturbing pattern.