The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory

[FreeEnergy]

wouldn't it be cool if you could ignore a thread and not be able to see it anywhere on this forum?

does anyone know if this is possible?

[ltseung888]

Plans for the second session at IVE on Monday Nov 23, 2009

1. Take Scope Pictures of Input and Output voltage for 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9 drive coils with 6 collectors in series.  Repeat the Input and Output voltage and current measurement to confirm OVERUNITY one more time.  This may be the best configuration to have maximum Output and best COP.

2. Repeat the rpm measurements with scope and rpm meters.  Confirm that the ratio is roughly 1 to 2.

3. Check whether a significant portion of the Output Energy is due to gravity by placing the Wheel in a horizontal position.  Redo the Input and Output Voltage and current measurements one more time.

4. Use the DC voltage converter to replace the battery and check the OUTPUT Voltage and Current with 12V, 13V, 14V ….. 24V.  This will help our Loopback experiments later on.

5. Do the charging of battery experiments.
5a. If the DC Voltage Output of Step 1 is greater than 13 V with one light as load (expected), recharge a rundown 12 V battery (I shall bring one).  Put in meters to check current flow.  See if the battery can be fully recharged by another similar battery. (I shall bring that one too.)  If this can be confirmed, we can win the cash prize from Stefan at OVERUNITY.COM.  There will be the minor task of reducing weight to less than 20 kg.

5b.  Check whether we can recharge two  rundown 6 V batteries simultaneously with a 12V battery setup.  If so, check how many pairs of rundown 6V batteries can be recharged with the 12V battery.  The 12V battery can be a pair of 6V batteries.  This will perform the same feat as the Newman or Bedini claims of recharging batteries.  If successful, we may be able to help to recharge the solar panel batteries in the dark. 

We may not have enough time on Monday afternoon to finish 5b.  That particular part can be done after we leave.  I shall be very happy if we can achieve everything up to 5a.  (We can be assured of the cash Prize.)

Kenneth, can you please provide: the scope, the meters, the thicker wires, the rechargeable 6V batteries, the diodes and the capacitors (we may have to guess the best value and type at this point).

I shall bring the two small 12V batteries, three 50 watt light for 12 V to drain batteries quickly if needed.  Email me if you think of anything else that may not be available at IVE.

[Top Gun]

The surprising role of the HK$10 Proximity Switch (PS)

Tseung et al tried since 2004 and failed at least 7 times to produce an OVERUNITY lead-out energy machine.  The failures led them to believe that many millions needed to be poured to succeed.

Tong Po Chi used the HK$10 Proximity Switch and turned the tide around.  What is so special about this inexpensive device?
1.   It has a simple ON function when a magnet gets close.  That can be used together with a relay to allow a relatively large current to pass through.  When the magnet leaves, it has a simple OFF function.  That OFF function will prevent the relay to pass current.
2.   The PS  used has a DC voltage from 12 to 24V.  It can be driven by a totally independent battery.  In the Tseung et al case, they used the same battery as the relay.  For a proper Loopback system, they must separate the two.  In a proper loopback system, the looped back voltage is expected to be much higher than 24V.
3.   The PS has a limiting frequency.  From the Tseung experiments, that seemed to be approximately 1000 cycles per minute.  When that frequency is reached, its ON function ceased to function.  That actually worked to the advantage of Tseung et al.  The Lead-Out Energy Mechanism has a chance to perform fully.
4.   The Lead-Out Mechanism demands that the Work Done or Energy Gained = Force x Displacement.  The force in this case is not a steady force,  It is a Pulse Force in the form of magnetic repulsion.  That Pulse Force must be given time to complete its Work (or fully lead out the energy).  The pausing of the ON function of the PS helped that to happen.
5.   If Tseung et al  do not use the PS, they need another control mechanism such as stopping the current at a frequency f1 and turning it back on at a lower frequency f2.  This type of control mechanism may be the eventual choice when they progress to program control.

At present, Tseung and Tong et al are happy that the inexpensive PS helped them to demonstrate OVERUNITY and win the prize money from Stefan.  Is that luck? Or is that a Blessing from the Divine?  Or is it a reward for not giving up after so many years and so many failures?

Tseung et al are not worried about the simple copycats.  The technology keeps on advancing.  The real competition is from the top-secret Government Establishments.  However Tseung et al can still win the Nobel Prize and be rewarded as the Fathers of Lead-Out Energy.  The scientists at the top-secret Establishments are not allowed to publish any papers.  They may be years ahead but they cannot say anything.  They have to bypass that Nobel Prize.  Is that another favor from the Divine?

[Pirate88179]

Lawrence:

Are you saying that you get your rotor up to speed, call it speed X, and then this switch cuts the input power off at its limits, and then you measure the input energy/output energy from it while the rotor is spinning down from the stored momentum?  Is this what you are calling "Lead Out"?  This is why you need a switch that turns on at X freq. and cuts off at X+ frequency?

If this is the case, a more accurate and fair way to measure input/output would be to see that you used energy to get up to X rpm or freq. and what you think you are saving when it runs down with little to no input energy will be lost when you ramp it back up to X rpm/freq. again.  So, you need to measure the entire time the rotor is ramping up and then stabilizes at X as well as when you are now measuring it as it winds down.  You will see that you paid for this stored energy and you can't leave that out of the equation.

Maybe my understanding of what you are saying is incorrect, which is entirely possible.  But, asking for a switch that cuts on at a certain frequency and then off again at a higher frequency can mean only one thing to me.

An example would be a children's merry go round in the park.  If you spin that heavy flywheel up to x rpm and then hook a generator to it and measure the output as it spins down, this is not a valid measurement.  it only shows one side of the picture. You have to account for the energy input it took to get it up to speed.

Bill

[Top Gun]

Lawrence:

Are you saying that you get your rotor up to speed, call it speed X, and then this switch cuts the input power off at its limits, and then you measure the input energy/output energy from it while the rotor is spinning down from the stored momentum?  Is this what you are calling "Lead Out"?  This is why you need a switch that turns on at X freq. and cuts off at X+ frequency?

*** NO NO and NO.  Lead-Out Energy does not work on stored momentum.  It works on some component of the Pulse Force x Displacement. ***

If this is the case, a more accurate and fair way to measure input/output would be to see that you used energy to get up to X rpm or freq. and what you think you are saving when it runs down with little to no input energy will be lost when you ramp it back up to X rpm/freq. again.  So, you need to measure the entire time the rotor is ramping up and then stabilizes at X as well as when you are now measuring it as it winds down.  You will see that you paid for this stored energy and you can't leave that out of the equation.

Maybe my understanding of what you are saying is incorrect, which is entirely possible.  But, asking for a switch that cuts on at a certain frequency and then off again at a higher frequency can mean only one thing to me.

*** Your understanding is WRONG WRONG and WRONG.  Please study the Lead-Out Energy theory carefully once more.  This time, throw away your dogma of misapplying the Law of Conservation of Energy.  ***

An example would be a children's merry go round in the park.  If you spin that heavy flywheel up to x rpm and then hook a generator to it and measure the output as it spins down, this is not a valid measurement.  it only shows one side of the picture. You have to account for the energy input it took to get it up to speed.

*** You still do not get the essence - In the Lead-Out Energy Machine, the INPUT ENERGY is used to LEAD OUT (or obtain) additional energy from its surrounding.  Thus the REAL INPUT energy into the machine is the sum of supplied INPUT PLUS Lead-Out energy.  Thus the OUTPUT energy can be greater than the supplied INPUT.  The LEAD-OUT ENERGY theory does not violate the Law of Conservation of Energy. ***

Bill

We can use the scope readings.  The rectangular peak represents the supplied INPUT ENERGY.  The AC component of the INPUT, the AC component of the OUTPUT and the rotating axle represents the total OUTPUT.  If we do a scope analysis, the AC component of the OUTPUT is already greater than the supplied INPUT ENERGY.  OVERUNITY is already confirmed beyond a shadow of doubt.