12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !

[Pirate88179]

Whether Lawrence's work functions is quite another matter.

Yes it is.  Simple physics and basic mechanics will tell you that it will not/can not work as Lawrence describes.  (See machine shop reply above)

Bill

[ltseung888]

Reaction From The Machine Shop:

This is the most cockamamie idea we have ever heard of.  If this were to be true, we could unbalance our lathes and surface grinder spindles and get more accurate results.  We know this not to be true.  We could also loosen the belts on our machines but, that would only decrease efficiency.  While we appreciate your inquiry, we suggest that you go somewhere else as we have to make money in order to survive and working on a project like this, which has exactly 0 chance of working, is not our cup of tea.

Thank you,

Machine Shop

Fortunately, the modern day educated Chinese are much more clever.  The machine shop owner is young and eager to explore new opportunities.

When a no-lose situation arises - get paid to do a customer order and free to use the idea no matter what happens, he will take the opportunity.

Only stupid Westerners who believe in their superiority in knowledge and misinterpretation of Physics will walk away and jeer.

Get the focus back to the Tsinghua University Energy Multiplier simplified prototype.

Sow seeds.  Some will fall on hard rock..

Lawrence Tseung
see reply 2826

[sm0ky2]

Fortunately, the modern day educated Chinese are much more clever.  The machine shop owner is young and eager to explore new opportunities.

When a no-lose situation arises - get paid to do a customer order and free to use the idea no matter what happens, he will take the opportunity.

Only stupid Westerners who believe in their superiority in knowledge and misinterpretation of Physics will walk away and jeer.

Get the focus back to the Tsinghua University Energy Multiplier simplified prototype.

Sow seeds.  Some will fall on hard rock..

Lawrence Tseung
see reply 2826

The more likely outcome, if this were to work. Is China will crash the markets with cheap energy, and we will buy it for next to nothing. Far less than oil or natural gas,. sounds like a WIN - WIN.
When can we expect this to happen???

On the other hand if it does NOT happen....  we can always revert back to the QUERTY idea, and attach Tseung to a keyboard generator, and get our "free energy" that way.....

[Pirate88179]

Fortunately, the modern day educated Chinese are much more clever.  The machine shop owner is young and eager to explore new opportunities.

When a no-lose situation arises - get paid to do a customer order and free to use the idea no matter what happens, he will take the opportunity.

Only stupid Westerners who believe in their superiority in knowledge and misinterpretation of Physics will walk away and jeer.

Get the focus back to the Tsinghua University Energy Multiplier simplified prototype.

Sow seeds.  Some will fall on hard rock..

Lawrence Tseung
see reply 2826

Well, I worked in a machine shop since I was 12 years old.  Then, I went on to own my own shop serving the aerospace industry machining industrial and technical ceramics.  I have over 20 years in this business and, if you had written to me, my reply above would have been what you would have received.  We would machine anything you would like but, we would make you pay in advance. (Known as CIA, Cash In Advance)
If this "young" machine shop guy (which really means little to no experience) is excited about your delusional theory, then, I suppose we will have to wait yet again to see what, if anything, comes from it. 

It has been many years since you introduced your theory and, so far, there has not been one working device to prove that it is valid.  Not one.  The "working devices" that you claim work on your theory have ALL been proven NOT to work.  All we would like to see is one, just one device that works as your theory claims it should.  You have not/can not produce such a device so, you really can not blame us for being a bit skeptical.

I mean no disrespect Lawrence.  I like you.  I have said on these forums many times over the years that I admire the way that you continue to cling to your theory in the face of adversity, when device after device that you have named has failed.  This is, in a way, admirable.  You are consistent which is more than can be said of most folks these days.

I do wish you luck in proving your theory.  You probably do not believe this, but I really do.

Bill

[sm0ky2]

That's admirable Bill,

I would like to see a working device come to fruition, as my experiences have taught me such is possible, just not fully understood by science.

However, I have thoroughly read Tseungs theory of Lead-Out energy, and it simply is not what he makes it out to be.....
On top of that, he makes direct reference to devices that do not comply with his theory in the slightest. Yet he proclaims these as "evidence". Most importantly the device concerned in THIS thread....

The exact physics behind this device are well known, well presented, and available to the public.
There's nothing "Lead-Out" about it....