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: 525459
  • *Total Topics: 15645
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 3
  • *Guests: 8
  • *Total: 11

Author Topic: The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory  (Read 1747831 times)

Offline Mr.Entropy

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 195
Re: The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory
« Reply #480 on: October 09, 2007, 03:45:56 AM »
(*** May be I should have used the word "periodically repeated" instead of the word "pulse" ***)

So, the first pulse does not add more energy that you put in.  What about the second pulse?  When does the free energy start?  How do the initial pulses change the system so that subsequent pulses suddenly become overunity events?

Quote
One of the qualifying conditions in the Lee-Tseung theory is that the Pulse Force must be applied at the right time (normally at resonance).  We quoted the case of the swing.  In order for it to swing high, we must push it at the appropriate time.  [... mistake deleted...]

I hope this explanation will clarify the ?required pulse at the right time? in the Lee-Tseung theory.

It's OK that timing is important, but "resonance" is not a time.  At what time can a pulse be applied to a pendulum so that you get more energy out than you put in?

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory
« Reply #480 on: October 09, 2007, 03:45:56 AM »

Offline gaby de wilde

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 470
    • http://blog.360.yahoo.com/Factuurexpress
Re: The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory
« Reply #481 on: October 09, 2007, 05:52:40 AM »
(3) if you apply say pulses into a system such as a pendulum or a flywheel cylinder and if those pulses are in phase with the natural resonance of the apparatus, gavitational energy can be Lead Out.

Are you talking about the Schumann Resonance?

I've always liked this gn0sis video.
schumann resonance

Offline shruggedatlas

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 549
Re: The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory
« Reply #482 on: October 09, 2007, 06:35:27 AM »
(*** May be I should have used the word "periodically repeated" instead of the word "pulse" ***)

So, the first pulse does not add more energy that you put in.  What about the second pulse?  When does the free energy start?  How do the initial pulses change the system so that subsequent pulses suddenly become overunity events?

Quote
One of the qualifying conditions in the Lee-Tseung theory is that the Pulse Force must be applied at the right time (normally at resonance).  We quoted the case of the swing.  In order for it to swing high, we must push it at the appropriate time.  [... mistake deleted...]

I hope this explanation will clarify the ?required pulse at the right time? in the Lee-Tseung theory.

It's OK that timing is important, but "resonance" is not a time.  At what time can a pulse be applied to a pendulum so that you get more energy out than you put in?


I think Tseung is playing games.  He keeps narrowing the definition, making it harder to disprove the theory.  With the new narrow definition, he now has an out to just about any demonstration.  The pat answer in case of failure will be that the pulse was not applied at the appropriate time, or not at resonance, or something like that.  Even the punching bag scenario becomes slippery.  If another boxer does not notice this phenomenon - oops, didn't push the bag correctly.

Franky, I do not understand why the motion state of the pendulum matters to the Lead Out equation.  What difference does it make whether one of the pendulms is stopped?  The tension of the string is still there to "lead out" gravitational force, just like it is there during "resonance" or when the pendulum is moving forward or whatever.  I understand that a force applied against on object which is moving towards it is unlikely to generate a perpetual motion situation, but energy should still be "lead out", and we should notice an overall energy gain.

Moreover, there are many instances in modern technology where this Lead Out theory, if true, would have already lead engineers to develop overunity devices.  For example, take the internal combustion engine.  The piston is basically a modified pendulum.  I have attached a drawing, though I am sure you all are familiar.  With the thousands (millions?) of manhours spent on perfecting the hybrid engine (Prius, etc.), and all the effort made to convert mechanical enegry to electrical and vice versa, don't you think someone would have observed and said "Gee, when the spark ignites and the piston is on the way down, we get alot more energy that way - more than we put in.  Screw gasoline; maybe if we just hook the battery up to the engine and make it push the pistons, we have enough power to recharge the battery PLUS move the car."  It is inconceivable that with the meticulous testing that has been done on engines over decades, that something like this could have been missed.  I cannot believe I have wasted time analyzing this. 

This leads me to conclude that the Lead Out theory is either a con (note that Tseung has asked for a million dollars in the past), or just plain delusion.

And Mr. Tseung, please stop referring to the "hundreds of posts" of yours in the Steorn forum.  This was not a genuine discussion.  This was a thread where you took on no less than 8 different personas and basically held a discussion with yourself.  Why you made it so obvious by signing off with your patented "Lead Out" phrases, I cannot fathom.  Here is the thread:

http://www.steorn.com/forum/comments.php?DiscussionID=43821

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory
« Reply #482 on: October 09, 2007, 06:35:27 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline hansvonlieven

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2558
    • Keelytech
Re: The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory
« Reply #483 on: October 09, 2007, 06:53:17 AM »
Not to mention the flywheel in every vehicle shrugged atlas :-)

Hans von Lieven

Offline ashtweth_nihilisti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 727
    • Panacea-BOCAF
Re: The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory
« Reply #484 on: October 09, 2007, 07:35:33 AM »
Hi Lawrence thanks for that information I have totally changed the web page and added new informaiton.

I have also forwarded to Patrick Kelly, As a result of  the time needed here to get to technical stuff due to what Jeff describes, please contact me via Email in future.

regards
Ashtweth

« Last Edit: October 09, 2007, 09:15:35 AM by ashtweth_nihilisti »

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory
« Reply #484 on: October 09, 2007, 07:35:33 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Pirate88179

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8366
Re: The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory
« Reply #485 on: October 09, 2007, 08:05:34 AM »
Gee, for an attorney, she makes a lot of sense. (smile)

Bill

Offline tagor

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1333
Re: The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory
« Reply #486 on: October 09, 2007, 11:44:14 AM »
The piston is basically a modified pendulum.  I have attached a drawing, though I am sure you all are familiar.  With the thousands (millions?) of manhours spent on perfecting the hybrid engine (Prius,
there was  650 millions of car in 2005

so I take 700 millions of car for the math , if they have 4 cylinders
this is 2800 millions of pendulum

if the motor of a car run at 3000 RPM and if we start all these cars
potentially it is : 3000 x 2800 millions = 8400000 millions or 840 billions of OVERUNITY UNIT
so this a big revolution in the energy of th earth !!

so the co2 is never more a problem

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory
« Reply #486 on: October 09, 2007, 11:44:14 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Freezer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 414
Re: The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory
« Reply #487 on: October 09, 2007, 11:54:02 AM »
It's OK that timing is important, but "resonance" is not a time.  At what time can a pulse be applied to a pendulum so that you get more energy out than you put in?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r003GmW4ZrM


Moreover, there are many instances in modern technology where this Lead Out theory, if true, would have already lead engineers to develop overunity devices.  For example, take the internal combustion engine.  The piston is basically a modified pendulum.  I have attached a drawing, though I am sure you all are familiar.  With the thousands (millions?) of manhours spent on perfecting the hybrid engine (Prius, etc.), and all the effort made to convert mechanical enegry to electrical and vice versa, don't you think someone would have observed and said "Gee, when the spark ignites and the piston is on the way down, we get alot more energy that way - more than we put in.  Screw gasoline; maybe if we just hook the battery up to the engine and make it push the pistons, we have enough power to recharge the battery PLUS move the car."  It is inconceivable that with the meticulous testing that has been done on engines over decades, that something like this could have been missed.  I cannot believe I have wasted time analyzing this. 

Why did GM get rid of the electric car?  Take a look at that video.

What if our science is a tad bit wrong, wouldn't that handicap all those who hold it so sacred, and set in stone.  If you want an example of technology being surpressed, just look at the U.S. military.  They have the most current, up to date technology that no one in the public realm sees.  Quote from Ben Rich - "Father of Stealth technology"

"We already have the means to travel among the stars, but these technologies are locked up in black projects and it would take an act of God to ever get them out to benefit humanity"

"We now have the technology to take et home"

There's three shades, white, gray, and black programs.  The x-33 being a white program in that its known and information is available.  The f-117 would be a gray program today, being that its known, but signature characteristics are secret.  In a black program they don't even acknowledge it exists period.  Point being is these guys are light years ahead of mainstream science.  There scientific laws are probably a lot different from whats in the books.  Look at the B-2 stealth.  The leading edges of its wings are electrically charged to produce an anti-gravity effect.
http://www.americanantigravity.com/laviolette-b2-bomber.shtml

As Stanton Freidmon said, every scientist in his day thinks they know all there is too know, and history would tell us they're always wrong.  I just think its wrong to think that, if this was true and free energy was possible, we would already have people building it.  They are building it, just behind closed doors, away from they public eye.  The U.S. military sets aside something around the order of 40 billion dollars, annually.  Multiply that by 50 years...  Their secrecy is paramount, anyone not convinced, just take a trip to area 51.  ;)  They have great stuff there that would change the world instantly, and they purportedly spend more money to keep it secret than on the programs themselves.  You'd be surprised at what x-military disinformation officers have to say.
« Last Edit: October 10, 2007, 02:40:20 AM by Freezer »

Offline hansvonlieven

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2558
    • Keelytech
Re: The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory
« Reply #488 on: October 09, 2007, 10:38:00 PM »
You have me confused, let me clarify.

You claim if you apply say pulses into a system such as a pendulum or a flywheel and if those pulses are in phase with the natural resonance of the apparatus there will be more energy  in the system than you put in and this is the energy that you can Lead out.

Is THAT what you are saying?

Hans von Lieven

Dear Hans,

To be more exact, I am saying:

(1) There is gravitational field surrounding us all the time.
(2) You can use this gravitational energy.
(3) if you apply say pulses into a system such as a pendulum or a flywheel cylinder and if those pulses are in phase with the natural resonance of the apparatus, gavitational energy can be Lead Out.
(4) There will be more energy in the system than you put in.
(5) In the particular case of a pendulum being pulled  by a horizontal force, approximately 1 part of gravitational energy can be lead out when you apply 2 parts of horizontal energy.

The details are already posted from the beginning of this thread.  Please read them carefully.

(Pulse Force = Periodically repeatable force  in this context.)

Yes, that was exactly my point when I said:

If I understand your theory correctly, what you are saying is that Newton is wrong when he says that every action causes an equal and opposite reaction.

In effect what you state is that the reaction to an action contains more energy and that the difference between the two can be "lead out" to produce work.


Now, please don't misunderstand me here, I do not have a problem with that. When it comes to resonant circuits it has been my observation that many phenomena cannot be explained in strict Newtonian terms. It is possible to create acoustic and electric circuits that will exhibit more energy than you put in, the surplus energy coming from resonant fields in the vicinity that interact with the apparatus.

Where I do have an issue is with your statement that this applies to a pendulum and to a flywheel.

THAT has never been observed or demonstrated in a verifiable fashion.

How you can LEAD OUT energy from still air is another puzzle that you claim but don't explain.

Hans von Lieven

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory
« Reply #488 on: October 09, 2007, 10:38:00 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline ltseung888

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4363
Re: The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory
« Reply #489 on: October 10, 2007, 03:04:53 AM »
.....
How you can LEAD OUT energy from still air is another puzzle that you claim but don't explain.

Hans von Lieven

Let us answer the easy one first.

Quote
If you read the first post of this thread, it will lead you to

http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,2621.msg40277.html#msg40277

From that, you can get the TPU_Theory1.5.doc file.

In chapter 3, the Technique of Extracting Energy from Still Air is described.

The TPU_Theory1.5.doc further explains the Lead Out theory.  Please read it carefully.


Offline ltseung888

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4363
Re: The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory
« Reply #490 on: October 10, 2007, 03:15:12 AM »
It's OK that timing is important, but "resonance" is not a time.  At what time can a pulse be applied to a pendulum so that you get more energy out than you put in?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r003GmW4ZrM

Dear Freezer,

I love your video.  If possible, can you produce one with a punch bag and show:

(1) A little boy punching it.  It hardly moved.
(2) The same little boy pushing it like a swing.  The multiple pushes will increase the amplitude of the swing.
(3) Let the swinging punch bag hit a dummy (use a dummy to avoid hurting the little boy.  Or you may find a special actor).

Thank you.

Lawrence Tseung
The experiment done by the naugthy Tseung 50 years ago Leads Out  the use of infinite gravitational energy for Mankind.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory
« Reply #490 on: October 10, 2007, 03:15:12 AM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline ltseung888

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4363
Re: The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory
« Reply #491 on: October 10, 2007, 03:29:05 AM »
(*** May be I should have used the word "periodically repeated" instead of the word "pulse" ***)

So, the first pulse does not add more energy  that you put in.  What about the second pulse?  When does the free energy start?  How do the initial pulses change the system so that subsequent pulses suddenly become overunity events?

Dear Mr. Entropy,

I am glad that we found our disagreement so early.

If I am not mistaken, you have concluded that the first pulse does not add more energy that you put in.

The Lee-Tseung Theory DEMANDS that the first pulse (periodically repeatable force) add more energy and Lead Out some gravitation energy to the pendulum system.  Two parts horizontal energy Lead out one part gravitational energy.

Am I mistaken in your conclusion???

Lawrence Tseung
Disagreement on the First Pulse Leads Out roadblock in discussing Second and subsequent Pulses.

Offline ltseung888

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4363
Re: The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory
« Reply #492 on: October 10, 2007, 03:35:05 AM »
Quote from: shruggedatlas link=topic=2794.msg53646#msg53646

..... The piston is basically a modified pendulum. 


Dear Lawyer shruggedatlas,

My scientific training does not agree with

"The piston is basically a modified pendulum."

Sorry.

Offline Mr.Entropy

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 195
Re: The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory
« Reply #493 on: October 10, 2007, 03:56:39 AM »
I think Tseung is playing games.  He keeps narrowing the definition, making it harder to disprove the theory.

I don't mind a narrow definition, as long as it's well defined.  If he'd just settle on something testable, I'd test it and know one way or the other.  Or he could end up defining his theory as untestable, and therefore unusable in practical scenarios, in which case we could just ignore it.  The problem is that Lawrence isn't doing either of those things.  He doesn't seem to have the math or physics required to do either of those things, but he does seem to learn quickly.  I will correct him some more, in the hope that he will soon learn enough to say something physically meaningful (correct or not) about overunity.

And you could be right, of course -- he could just be playing games.  That would be a bit sad, because "hold yourself and your friends up to ridicule for as long as you possibly can" doesn't sound like a very fun game, but it wouldn't bother me otherwise.  One does not come to an overunity forum expecting reasonable discourse. ;-)

Quote
I do not understand why the motion state of the pendulum matters to the Lead Out equation.  What difference does it make whether one of the pendulms is stopped?

At the moment, there is no Lead Out equation, because the equations provided so far have been nonsensical.  In the absense of that, why wouldn't the motion state make a difference?  We are talking about new unwirtten physical laws, after all.  Maybe it only works on Tuesday during an eclipse?  Who's to say except Lawrence?

Cheers,

Mr. Entropy

Offline Mr.Entropy

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 195
Re: The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory
« Reply #494 on: October 10, 2007, 04:01:28 AM »
If I am not mistaken, you have concluded that the first pulse does not add more energy that you put in.

No, that's what you said.  I said "why not a punch", and you said "periodically repeated", implying that one punch won't do.  If one pulse will do, then, again, what is it about a punch that doesn't qualify as a "pulse" that leads out gravitational energy?

 

OneLink