The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory

[utilitarian]

Stupid Mortals, I did not say that the pulled pendulum would convert mass into energy.

The pulled pendulum will increase tension of the string.  The vertical component of the tension time the vertical displacement equals work done in the vertical direction by the string.

The string itself does not have energy.  The energy comes from gravity. 

Recite the above 666 times before you post again.

Then let's follow that logic.

1.  The energy in the string comes from gravity.
2.  The energy coming from gravity does not reduce the the mass of the earth.
3.  Because mass of earth is not reduced, gravitational energy will never be reduced.
4.  Because gravitational energy will never be reduced, we have an infinite pool of gravitational energy.
5.  Violation of CoE.

[Devil]

Then let's follow that logic.

1.  The energy in the string comes from gravity.
2.  The energy coming from gravity does not reduce the the mass of the earth.
3.  Because mass of earth is not reduced, gravitational energy will never be reduced. ***Extremely stupid - the correct statement should be - Because mass of earth is not reduced, the ability to generate gravitational energy will not be reduced.  Gravitational energy is not a static pool.  Gravitational energy is a result of the work done by the moving masses.  Even if we focus on earth only, the gravitational pull from the sun, the moon, the planets and from ourselves effectively have gravitational energy exchanges all the time.

The gravitational energies are always interchanged to other forms such as motion of the waves (tide) etc.

Thus we need to consider energy in the context of "mass-energy".  They are interchangeable. 

4.  Because gravitational energy will never be reduced, we have an infinite pool of gravitational energy. ***Stupid.  The effect of gravitational energy shown as changes of potential or kinetic energy of certain objects are constantly changing.  The stupid statement of "gravitational energy will never be reduced" is totally against the understanding of O-levle physics.
5.  Violation of CoE.

Stupid Humans,

Why do you use stupid logic to confuse yourself?

There is no such thing as a pool of gravitational energy.

There are masses that attract each other - giving rise to gravitational energy.
These masses are in constant motion - energy is being exchanged all the time.

The lead-out-energy devices use the "mass in motion" technique in special ways to use gravitational energy.

The general statement in the patent can be summarized as:
We can use pulsed (Lee-Tseung pulled) oscillation, vibration, rotation or flux changes to lead out gravitational or electron motion (e.g. magnetic) energy.

[spinner]

Hi! Just popped in to say hello to Lawrence!  I see you're all having a good time! Keep on!

Ah, almost forgot - Angelina is sending you a friendly hug...

[ltseung888]

Hello Mr Tseung

I would like to introduce myself

I am from New Zealand I am 31 and live on the West Coast I am no one special just an ordinary bloke.

I have been following the free energy scene for about 7 years now and have duplicated a number of devices. I started with a Tesla coil which is what interested me in the free energy scene. I have tried the Tesla switch some of john bedini?s devices I have made the EV gray tube and lastly I made the pulsed carbon Juan device that is discussed on www.overunity.com .

I had some interesting experiences with the EV gray tube with electronic interference etc but apart from that all the devices I have worked on just sat and hummed which is starting to annoy me.

I don?t suggest that the people who have invented the devices were wrong but maybe I don?t have all the required information or did something wrong.

Anyway that brings me to the present. I am looking for a project that will really make the lightning strike. I do not have a death wish at all but I do want to see some action.

I always take every precaution when working and especially with high voltage follow the one hand rule rigidly.

Anyway I downloaded the .pdf
Chas Campbell Devices
Gravity Wheel and Electricity Magnifier
A Mechanical Cosmic Energy Machine

As Explained by the Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory

By: Lawrence Tseung

Version 1.2 on September 12, 2007

about the chas energy magnifier

And after reading it through once I am going back to read it again and better grasp the principles explained therein.

I notice the last update on peswiki is in may 2007. I am just wondering what is the current state of research.

After having a look at the Chas Campbell device and your comments on it I got an idea and made up a little proof of concept but I am not sure after looking at the results if I am seeing anything or not.

I basically got a reasonably big computer fan and cast a rubber ring in the fins so it is a solid rubber ring instead of a fan and used that as my flywheel. I hooked it up to a smoothed 12.5 volt supply and tested it at different pulse settings and in the horizontal and vertical axis positions.

The way I read the Chas and Tseung information I should see a speed increase in the axis horizontal position over the axis vertical positions. There are two axis vertical positions to allow for the bearing difference in the fan one is with the flywheel above the motor the (up) and the other is with the flywheel hanging on the motor (down).

I think the way the blades are angled that the motor was designed to handle the down position better which is reflected in the results. I would like to work out what energy I should bee seeing according to the formula 2mgr that is given in the free energy devices in the Chas Campbell discussion. If I have a 50% duty cycle then the pulse time should be one half the revolution time. Is the result in joules mass in grams and radius in mm? Anyway if you could take a look at the Mini Chas results sheet attached and let me know what you think I would be grateful.

Keep up the good work.

Thankyou for your time and effort in the free energy area.

I shall let others comment on this first.

[Top Gun]

Mr. Tseung has asked me to review his book for him.  We discussed the tasks involved and decided that we can open certain sections for general comments from forum members.

Here is sections 1.0

1.0  History of the development of Lawrence Tseung ? the formative years

I shall start the story of Mr. Lawrence Tseung (short form Tseung) from his formative years.  Tseung was born into a reasonably well-to-do family.  He has 4 brothers and 3 sisters.  He is ranked number 5 in this group of 8 children.  There was nothing unusual about him in his primary school days or before the age of 12.  His story begins with his entering Secondary School at Wah Yan College, Kowloon.  Wah Yan College was a Catholic, boy?s only school run by the Jesuit priests from Ireland.   Tseung told me that in his first physics lesson, the teacher asked him: ?What is the shortest distance between two points??

Tseung stood up in front of the class.  He thought he knew the answer but could not utter a single word.  The teacher was very encouraging and drew two points on the blackboard.  The teacher said: ?Can you draw the shortest path between these two points??  Mr. Tseung drew a line joining the two points.  The teacher said, ?Correct. The shortest distance between two points is a straight line.?  The class applauded and Tseung fell in love with physics from that instance.

Tseung was red-faced when he stood there not uttering a word.  His mind told him that the question was easy but he could not find the words.  If his classmates jeered him then, he could have lost all interest in physics.  The simple but important act from the teacher turned the shy, red-faced boy into a dedicated physicist for life.  The educators often ignore these small acts in school and in life.  Budding innovators need such encouragement.

Cartoon picture of boy drawing the straight line???


Another very important small act that affected the development of Tseung was the advice from his Home Room Teacher.  The teacher was a graduate from England.  He said, ?That is no way that I can give proper attention to every one of you (The size of the class was 40 then.).  I propose that you form yourselves into groups of four or five and help each other.?

Obediently, Tseung got a group of four.  They stayed after school doing homework or played balls together.  They never let academic questions or difficulties linger on for more than a day.  One of them was likely to come up with the answer.  They approached the teachers on the rare occasions that all four of them failed to come up with the answer.  School was fun.  They challenged and helped each other.  This group learning technique should be appropriately promoted.  The Tseung group was successful but many other groups did not turn out so well.  They either broke up after quarrels or became irrelevant.  A good thing might not always work with different persons or in different environments.

Cartoon figure of 4 youngsters discussing homework???


Comments from the Editor and reviewers:

(a) I believe educators should think through the group learning technique and develop models for our students.  Innovative ideas may not always work.  But if they are not tried, we shall never know.  They do not need to be perfect.  They do not need to work for everyone.  It is like medicine.  Some may not need it.  Some may benefit from it.  It may not be the cure for everything.  But a good teacher or school should have a full range of such medicine or educational techniques.

(b) The subtle encouragements in class - e.g. getting Tseung to draw a straight line on the blackboard - could have important impact on the future of Tseung.  Should this type of encouragement be taught to our teachers?

You are encourged to draw the cartoons or put in additional comments.