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: 893855
  • *Total Topics: 15705
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 1
  • *Guests: 12
  • *Total: 13

Author Topic: The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory  (Read 1773405 times)

Offline ltseung888

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4363
Re: The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory
« Reply #300 on: September 16, 2007, 08:35:53 AM »
Dear Gaby,

I have completed the first draft of the Lee- Tseung Theoretical Pulse Motor. It is in http://forum.go-here.nl/viewtopic.php?p=265#265

I have also included guidelines to build the flying saucer. Let us get ready for the cheers and jeers.

Lawrence Tseung
Pulses will lead out strong emotions.   :o

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory
« Reply #300 on: September 16, 2007, 08:35:53 AM »

Offline Forever

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 68
Re: The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory
« Reply #301 on: September 16, 2007, 08:50:42 AM »
I have read through the material related to the Lee-Tseung Theoretical Pulse Motor guideline and the flying saucer information. I found it quite easy to follow.

In the Chinese saying(知易行難) knowing how to build something is easy, actually building it may meet with unexpected difficulties. I believe it would be a very difficult task to build such a device in one?s garage. It would be better to have an university environment or similar research facilities.

The flying saucer will be much easier if we have a working pulse motor product. If the right opportunity comes, I would like to participate.  ;D ;D ;D ;D
« Last Edit: September 16, 2007, 09:24:53 AM by Forever »

Offline RoadRunner

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 28
Magnetic pendulum interactions.
« Reply #302 on: September 17, 2007, 12:17:12 PM »
Continued from:
http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,2487

Try to use shorter length (approximately 30 cm).
Understood. (知道了)

Quote
Forever Yuen used disc magnets with hole in the middle costing USD0.5.  I believe your magnets are much stronger.
As it happens, my friend has some ceramics with a hole in but he forgot to bring them here over the weekend as he'd intended.
If my results still conflict after using shorter lengths, I'll see if magnets with a hole in make any difference... I don't expect that they will, but then without testing I couldn't be too sure.

Quote
Since you are using fishing lines, you can put a fishing pole on top of two Chairs.
Correction - Sm0ky2 used fishing line. I don't have such a thing. I was using string which I had pre-stretched.

Quote
There should not be other objects (especially magnetic or iron) to upset the experiment. (I believe Forever used non-stretchable strings.)
I made sure that there was nothing ferrous (or even aluminium) anywhere near the swing.
The chair mentioned in my previous post is a wooden one.

Quote
I shall wait for you and others  to repeat the experiment.  If the results were still inconclusive, I would ask Ms. Forever Yuen to repeat and video the experiment next Sunday  (or during her holidays).
I'd like to see the experiment but I don't think you really need to trouble Yuen Xiaojie.
If I still cannot reproduce her findings after a couple more attempts, then maybe she can demonstrate what a dumbass I am and show me how it's done.

By the way... I saw one of your videos on YouTube...
The one with the weighted float on a chain, being dropped into a tank of water and rising up the column of water.

Now, that's clever thinking but it leads to the question...
"Did you figure a way of retrieving the float from the top of the column and cycling it back down the chain again ?"

You have an airtight gate at the bottom and one at the top, right ?
Thus, you can open either gate without losing the head of water, but not both at the same time.

The RoadRunner..

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Magnetic pendulum interactions.
« Reply #302 on: September 17, 2007, 12:17:12 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline ltseung888

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4363
Re: Magnetic pendulum interactions.
« Reply #303 on: September 17, 2007, 02:04:35 PM »
[
Continued from:
http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,2487

Try to use shorter length (approximately 30 cm).
Understood. (知道了)
...

If I still cannot reproduce her findings after a couple more attempts, then maybe she can demonstrate what a dumbass I am and show me how it's done.

I am sure you will succeed.  The students at Tsing Hua University repeated it with no problem.  Looks like you can speak and write Chinese.  Welcome.

Quote
By the way... I saw one of your videos on YouTube...
The one with the weighted float on a chain, being dropped into a tank of water and rising up the column of water.

Now, that's clever thinking but it leads to the question...
"Did you figure a way of retrieving the float from the top of the column and cycling it back down the chain again?"

You have an airtight gate at the bottom and one at the top, right ?
Thus, you can open either gate without losing the head of water, but not both at the same time.

The RoadRunner..

If you read the comments from ltseung888 on that video, you would find that the video was a demonstration of a FAILED claim  by the inventor.  The inventor "demolished" his house to get his invention installed.  However, he failed to realize that the Float has certain volume.  When the Float is taken out, the water level will fall  - with volume equal to that of the Float.

It was displayed as a warning to the experimenters who did not have a solid theory.  The poor inventor "demolished" his house and spent years for a ?scientific lesson.?

Lawrence Tseung
Not knowing the theory Leads Out high Pulse Rates when the phenomenon is explained.

Offline RoadRunner

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 28
Re: Magnetic pendulum interactions.
« Reply #304 on: September 17, 2007, 03:03:31 PM »
I am sure you will succeed.  The students at Tsing Hua University repeated it with no problem.
I share your optimism... It's not rocket science...


Actually, rocket science, I can manage... Making a magnetic pendulum without busting my magnets... That's a tougher task...  ;)


Quote
  Looks like you can speak and write Chinese.  Welcome.

Looks can be deceptive... ;)


I only understand a little. I'm probably better at writing it than speaking it... Wo shi ying guo ren !!!
It's not easy for ying guo ren... In English, tone is used to change the emphasis of a sentence, almost never to change the meaning of a word. You can imagine that I usually get my tones completely wrong and chong guo ren look at me as if I've just arrived from Mars... For all the good it does, I might just as well be speaking a Martian dialect !

Quote
If you read the comments from ltseung888 on that video, you would find that the video was a demonstration of a FAILED claim  by the inventor.  The inventor "demolished" his house to get his invention installed.
Oh... That's sad.
I couldn't read enough of the Chinese subtitles to understand the meaning of the video.
I was going to ask my wife to read them for me.... Ying wei ta shi chong guo ren.

Quote
However, he failed to realize that the Float has certain volume.  When the Float is taken out, the water level will fall  - with volume equal to that of the Float.
Yes, of course. I hadn't thought of that.... ooops... neither had he.
However, surely all is not completely lost if the net amount of energy gained from the system is more than the amount of energy gained from running that volume of water through a water-wheel...?
That's assuming that he has a pressurised water supply as is the norm for households in the West, and I assume in most developed areas of China too. Not so handy in those rural areas where the only source of water is a well and it needs pumping or carrying !!

Ha... And of course, it's not scalable... There is a limited height to which the atmosphere will support a column of water, so it's not as if he could simply build it taller to gain more energy on the ride down the chain.

There's that problem with 'thought experiments' again.
The guy is in a stiff situation though... He's done all the 'thought experiments' he can.
I guess he didn't have access to complex and accurate simulation software in which he could have modelled his idea... His only recourse would be to build it and try it out... and only then does he find the snag...

I feel sad for the guy. I hope he managed to salvage something workable from the situation.

Quote
It was displayed as a warning to the experimenters who did not have a solid theory.  The poor inventor "demolished" his house and spent years for a ?scientific lesson.?

Then, may I suggest that you include a translation of the subtitles in the video description ?
Most Westerners wouldn't recognise one character from another and even those who are studying Chinese may have difficulty in following the subtitles.
Like me, they may look at the video thinking "What a great idea !" and not think past the problem of the loss of volume.

I guess it's becoming fairly obvious now that I'm not Humbugger, but just so that you can share my amusement, I'll send you a message from within YouTube and you will understand why I was saying to Zero that I would leave him with absolutely NO DOUBT that I am who I claim to be.

The RoadRunner..

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Magnetic pendulum interactions.
« Reply #304 on: September 17, 2007, 03:03:31 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline gaby de wilde

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 470
    • http://blog.360.yahoo.com/Factuurexpress
Re: The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory
« Reply #305 on: September 17, 2007, 04:00:35 PM »
[
By the way... I saw one of your videos on YouTube...
The one with the weighted float on a chain, being dropped into a tank of water and rising up the column of water.

Now, that's clever thinking but it leads to the question...
"Did you figure a way of retrieving the float from the top of the column and cycling it back down the chain again?"

You have an airtight gate at the bottom and one at the top, right ?
Thus, you can open either gate without losing the head of water, but not both at the same time.

The RoadRunner..

If you read the comments from ltseung888 on that video, you would find that the video was a demonstration of a FAILED claim  by the inventor.  The inventor "demolished" his house to get his invention installed.  However, he failed to realize that the Float has certain volume.  When the Float is taken out, the water level will fall  - with volume equal to that of the Float.

I thought this was a very inspiring device. Just looking at it leads out hundreds of other ideas. Last night I figured out that lifting objects takes about 100/1 of the energy as that what is released when lowering it. It appears to me that Milkovic's device is very inefficiency with 12:1 it can be hundreds of times better as that. lol This of course sounds so ridiculous I will  try to debunk it myself the coming few days, if I cant find the bug I will put myself up for review. Eh, I mean the hypothesis. lol

The hypothesis would mean the energy in the flotation device is not in the vertical pull but in the water displacement while the module floats upwards. The shape of the module alone should be able to make the whole column of water rotate and do so most violently. If the pressure is inserted in a rotating shape it will try to continue this motion. The whirling column sucks the water out of the floatator. The flotator it-self pushes most linearly against the water above it. (Like a standing wave should)

We can thus put many hundreds of kilos of water into motion by pushing the flotator though it. Putting the flotator though additional times will make it whirl faster. Now where it gets quite weird is that the module can sail downwards on the whirl again. Still not overunity but already a weird thing to see.

Now pay attention to the pressure difference between the fluid at the rim of the tub and the fluid in the center of it! Floating at the outside means something entirely different as floating in the center.

If  (hypothetically) the tube would be spinning fast enough we could drop the flotator thought the center as there would be nothing but air there.

By creating concave in the tube we can force the inner flow to go downwards and the outer flow upwards. It was really helpful to see the video while thinking about this.

http://gabydewilde.googlepages.com/vortex-engine
gabydewilde - vortex engine

The device must also replenish it-self with rainwater. Vortexing water is incredibly good for all life around it. Anyone already knows how bad water is when you leave it standing still for some time. Leave it alone long enough and it will kill everything. Why do you think showers feel so good? Because it's bad for you? lol

I hear you thinking "why is Gaby now rambling away about biology, isn't he confusing enough the way he is?"

The point is quite simple, Stan Meyer said all bonds in nature hold vibrations, (vibrations are energy) when you break something then this energy becomes available in the environment. So a vortex engine needs to grind down water clusters and micro organisms! Even the slightest vortex will do this.

Victor Schauberger promised us that removing all the small natural vortexes would leave nature with only the really really big one's. All the energy we pump into the environment will come back at us at some later stage either as a whirling mountain creek or as a massive hurricane.

No, I would like to see 100 "unworkable" flotation machines. And if the researcher wants to pull down his house to make such video for me I think that's a bit over the top but it shows most respectable effort.

:)

Offline shruggedatlas

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 549
Re: The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory
« Reply #306 on: September 17, 2007, 04:27:22 PM »
nm
« Last Edit: September 17, 2007, 05:06:02 PM by shruggedatlas »

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory
« Reply #306 on: September 17, 2007, 04:27:22 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline RoadRunner

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 28
Re: The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory
« Reply #307 on: September 17, 2007, 04:36:34 PM »
Gaby, you're so funny !!
I'm going to have to send you the same YouTube message as I've just sent to ltseung888 so you can share the amusement.

I'll let Zero in on the joke... Eventually...

After he's suffered enough rides up and down an elevator shaft whilst standing on a set of bathroom scales... ;)

The RoadRunner..

Offline RoadRunner

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 28
Re: The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory
« Reply #308 on: September 17, 2007, 05:05:24 PM »
What do you mean by that?  It should be equal, shouldn't it?  After all, a pendulum, where an object is essentially just lowered and lifted, could in theory run forever if it were not for friction.  If it took 100 times more energy for the pendulum to swing up, compared to the kinetic energy gained on the way down, it would make barely one swing.

I'm guessing that you've not seen the video.
A weighted float is attached to a chain. It descends under gravity, turning a generator as it goes.
At the bottom, it's dropped into a pool of water where it then bobs up into a column of water in a big tube. It rises all the way to the top of the column so it doesn't need to be lifted all the way back up to the top of the run. At most, it needs to be lifted a foot or so, out of the column and back onto the chain where it makes its descent once more.
It really is quite an ingenious idea (apart from one or two... urm... minor flaws) much like many OU attempts.

The RoadRunner..

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory
« Reply #308 on: September 17, 2007, 05:05:24 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline shruggedatlas

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 549
Re: The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory
« Reply #309 on: September 17, 2007, 05:46:20 PM »
What do you mean by that?  It should be equal, shouldn't it?  After all, a pendulum, where an object is essentially just lowered and lifted, could in theory run forever if it were not for friction.  If it took 100 times more energy for the pendulum to swing up, compared to the kinetic energy gained on the way down, it would make barely one swing.

I'm guessing that you've not seen the video.
A weighted float is attached to a chain. It descends under gravity, turning a generator as it goes.
At the bottom, it's dropped into a pool of water where it then bobs up into a column of water in a big tube. It rises all the way to the top of the column so it doesn't need to be lifted all the way back up to the top of the run. At most, it needs to be lifted a foot or so, out of the column and back onto the chain where it makes its descent once more.
It really is quite an ingenious idea (apart from one or two... urm... minor flaws) much like many OU attempts.

The RoadRunner..

Yes, I have seen the video, and I guess the main problem is the volume of water is not replaced.  But I see now that you are probably right, and Gaby was joking with the 100:1 comment, so I withdraw what I said.

Offline RoadRunner

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 28
Re: The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory
« Reply #310 on: September 17, 2007, 05:51:08 PM »
Yes, I have seen the video, and I guess the main problem is the volume of water is not replaced.  But I see now that you are probably right, and Gaby was joking with the 100:1 comment, so I withdraw what I said.

Ah... I see... Sorry.
I thought I was being helpful and that you'd not seen the vid.   :-[

I think Gaby needs to get a licence for that sense of humour, though. Brandishing it around in public like that, he's going to do someone an injury... ;)

The RoadRunner..

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory
« Reply #310 on: September 17, 2007, 05:51:08 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline gaby de wilde

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 470
    • http://blog.360.yahoo.com/Factuurexpress
Re: The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory
« Reply #311 on: September 17, 2007, 06:08:28 PM »
What do you mean by that?  It should be equal, shouldn't it?  After all, a pendulum, where an object is essentially just lowered and lifted, could in theory run forever if it were not for friction.  If it took 100 times more energy for the pendulum to swing up, compared to the kinetic energy gained on the way down, it would make barely one swing.

My hypothesis is that A pendulum is an incredibly innefficient machine. Most of the gravitational energy is destroyed on the way down. Something like 95% of it.  The gravitational wave can do MUCH more work as just accelerate a body by such little amount. But the more we try to accelerate a mass the less efficiently we can convert potential into motion.

The bob may store a little bit of the gravitational potential, most of it is just destroyed. Mass does not like being accelerated quickly. This means the less we try to accelerate the bob the less energy it costs. The slower the mass moves downward the more gravitational potential we can obtain from the system.

Everyone knows that a longer string also makes the pendulum swing much longer.

I've created a 50 kg pendulum with 2.5 meter string and it never stops moving. It always moves at least 1 mm every 1.58520476 sec. At the moment it waves about 5 mm from left to right. I guess this is the same energy as we need to move 5 kg over 50 mm or 1 kg over 250 mm? And 250 gr over a meter? I really don't see the 250 grams swing a meter from left to right without some energy source.

Moving a big mass slowly leads out much more gravitational potential as moving a small mass quickly. It's silly but gravitational potential, the more load you put on it the longer you can use it. We all know how time works? no?

Dropping the bob seems the worse way to lead it out.  :D

We can do much better as that.

Offline shruggedatlas

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 549
Re: The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory
« Reply #312 on: September 17, 2007, 06:17:32 PM »
My hypothesis is that A pendulum is an incredibly innefficient machine. Most of the gravitational energy is destroyed on the way down. Something like 95% of it.  The gravitational wave can do MUCH more work as just accelerate a body by such little amount. But the more we try to accelerate a mass the less efficiently we can convert potential into motion.

How can you even make this hypothesis?  While I have disagreed with you on some of your overunity theories, I always thought you had a pretty good grasp of basic physics, better than mine, anyway, so I do not see how you can seriously say that, so I assumed you were joking before. 

You see how large pendulums on low friction setups can swing for a very long time.  If 95% of energy was lost in each swing, then how can the pendulum continue for more that a few swings?  If what you are saying is true, a pendulum would only make it up 5% of the way, compared to the previous rise, and we know from simple observations that this is not so.

Offline gaby de wilde

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 470
    • http://blog.360.yahoo.com/Factuurexpress
Re: The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory
« Reply #313 on: September 17, 2007, 11:24:26 PM »
How can you even make this hypothesis?  While I have disagreed with you on some of your overunity theories, I always thought you had a pretty good grasp of basic physics, better than mine, anyway, so I do not see how you can seriously say that, so I assumed you were joking before. 

oh, but I am joking. I'm just not sure who the joke is on here. I haven't explained my reason for making the hypothesis to make it sound extra weird to you. I can assure you it sounds just as weird to me but I'm willing to entertain the thought. Other people need to be tricked into chasing their imagination. I don't intend to trick you into thinking we now have accomplished the holy grail of overunity. I will tell you to just take an idea the way it comes and evaluate it, you don't need to be tricked in any way.

If I tell you half my theory and I claim gravity is the ultimate energy source you should just take that the way it is, = > incredibly amusing!! You should furthermore laugh at the fact  I didn't really desire to share the thought. I can quite accurately predict how you will respond even if I gave you the theory?

Quote
You see how large pendulums on low friction setups can swing for a very long time.  If 95% of energy was lost in each swing, then how can the pendulum continue for more that a few swings?  If what you are saying is true, a pendulum would only make it up 5% of the way, compared to the previous rise, and we know from simple observations that this is not so.

Not at all,

I study the data given and it gives no reason to share my theory. It's obvious the rest of the world is still digesting lesson 1  :D

http://magnetmotor.go-here.nl/veljko-milkovic/video

There are reproductions you know?


Offline RoadRunner

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 28
Re: The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory
« Reply #314 on: September 18, 2007, 12:39:50 AM »
Wow, Gaby.
I am so glad I saw that video.
I was thinking to myself that someone should give that guy a medal... But I notice that they have... more than once !!!

We need more people like him...

Striving for a world where brilliance is welcomed, encouraged and rewarded rather than feared oppressed and punished.

Simple, elegant and incredibly inspiring !!

Demo machines made from bits of old bikes... LOL !!!

I love the Eastern-bloc thinking at times...

There's a well-known story, it may be myth but it's often repeated and even if untrue, it illustrates the mentality.

The USA developed a pen for use by their astronauts. It writes in almost any gravity condition, won't leak, doesn't smell inky (remember in a space-craft, you're breathing recycled air so anything that smells will saturate the volume very quickly) and so on and so on... It cost them $$$$$$$$$ to develop and when US representatives met with Russian representatives, they presented them with one of these pens and told them of their proud accomplishments in managing to develop such a device.
The Russian reply was, "Ah yes. We use pencils !"

The RoadRunner..

 

OneLink