The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory

[Koen1]

Simply stated in our patent - the Lee-Tseung theory predicts that we can Lead Out gravitational or electron motion energy via oscillation, vibration, rotation or flux changes.

The example of boat in calm water and good sunshine shows that if you know how to use gravitational or electron motion energy (like Lee, Tseung, Wang Tsing Hua University, Gaby, Ash, Stefan), you do not need to worry about the objection that you violated the Law of Conservation of Energy.  You are not building the impossible perpetual motion machine.

So basically all your patent entails is a claim that the possible OU found in several OU devices invented by others, is somehow based on the extraction of energy from the gravitational field?
How can you patent that? How exactly do you patent a supposed explanation? As far as I know patents are given on a clear process or design, not on a vague supposition that only replaces the mysterious OU source with the gravitational field. All you are saying is basically that the gravitational field can be tapped for energy. That is surely not a patentable idea? It has been around for centuries!

And your "example" or "experiment" only seems to "prove" that in an open system, energy can be used to do work, while that energy was not actually included in the moving parts of the system, which if it were not an open system would simply stall to a halt due to entropy. So basically all that says is that an open system works differently from an closed system, and that in an open system yo can use energy from the environment which is not possible if you make that same system a closed system.

I fail to see what is so groundbreaking about this... All very basic, isn't it?

[Eden]

@ Eden:
ah of course, it is us "westerners" that have trouble understanding other cultures, and that is why we don't see the proof that mr Tseung never posted?
similarly we could say "easterners" have trouble understanding "western" culture, and that is why he is not able to give a form of proof that we "westerners" find satisfactory.

But that seems quite arbitrary, as we are not discussing cultural differences, we are discussing hard scientific theory and application, which is presented to us in a "western" based style of Newtonian physics, but lacking the proof that is so crucial to that same "western" scientific method.
Seems quite delusional to blame the inability of an "eastern" inventor to deliver proof on the assumed inability of "westerners" to understand his cultural background...

koen,
Newtonian Physics is more then 200 years old....
one does not obtain or achieve anything with mockery and insult
if you don't like what you read, and if your questions don't get answered according to your views,
just leave the thread and let the others continue working in their own fashion
why so much abuse only in this thread?

eden

[ltseung888]

Meeting Minutes (7)

After the fun session at the beach, we repeated the Forever Experiment.

The numbers of oscillations per 30 seconds are as follows:
(1)   No other magnetic material around = 30
(2)   With magnetic attraction = 52
(3)   With magnetic repulsion = 19

Fung: ? I never expect the numbers to vary that much.  It shows that magnetic fields can be much stronger than gravitational fields.  The best Cosmic Energy Machines should use magnetic field.?

Forever: ?The strength of the magnetic field in this experiment can be varied by placing the magnets nearer or further away.  If Lee-Tseung Pulsed oscillation can draw out gravitational energy, it can also draw out magnetic energy.?

Tseung: ?The experiment is extremely easy to do and verify. It conclusively demonstrated the similarity of Leading Out gravitational and electron motion (magnetic) energies.?

Fung: ?I agree.  I never expect such simple experiments can be so powerful.?

(to be continued)

[ltseung888]

Meeting Minutes (8 )

The Gravity Wheel Experiment (1 of 3)

Tseung: ?Let us do the gravity wheel experiment.  We were trying to replicate the gravity wheel as described in http://theverylastpageoftheinternet.com/newclaims/GravityMotor/gravity_motor.htm.  We could not produce a perpetual moving gravity wheel but we learned much from the experiments.  This is our best device as of today.?

Fung: ?How long can it rotate??

Tseung: ?The square wheel by itself without any attachment could rotate up to 16 minutes.  When we attached the two cylinders of 80% sand, we could get a rotational time of 30 minutes.  The sand moved inside the tube, providing the pulse.?

Fung: ?That is good evidence that the Pulse is better than the No Pulse case.  What is preventing you from achieving even longer periods??

Tseung: ?We experimented with different pulsing devices ? including hammers, falling balls, falling liquids and falling powders.  When I used falling salt, it gave the best results but the moisture got to the salt and the results were non-reproducible. I finally settled on dry sand.  I had to play with different levels.  It was a painful tuning job.?

Forever: ?The slightest change in environment seemed to affect the results. Examples include wind, opening doors or buses passing.?

Tseung: ?I believe we are close to the ?resonance condition?.  The falling sand provided enough force to overcome friction.  However, the slightest vibration or other effects could change such a balance.  The best result I ever obtained was achieved at the middle of the night when there were no buses and no cars.?

Fung: ?This device has been spinning for over 10 minutes during our conversation and shows no sign of slowing down.  I want to see your other experiments.  I like fishing too.  I can talk to my wife saying that I come fishing all day with you.  We can have more time doing this fun stuff.?

(to be continued)

[ltseung888]

Meeting Minutes (9)

The Gravity Wheel Experiment (2 of 3)

Tseung: ?This second set up used the hammer technique as displayed in the original gravity wheel shown on Internet. http://theverylastpageoftheinternet.com/newclaims/GravityMotor/gravity_motor.htm.
We found that position; weight and shape of the hammer would greatly affect the result.  The first set gave result less than 1 minute because the engineer misunderstood the diagram and the hammer did not hit the rim.  This configuration gave result in the 10 minutes range.?

Fung: ?The gravity wheel had 8 hammers and you used only two.  Would you have better results with eight??

Tseung: ?We also have the eight hammer configuration as described in the original.  That was very difficult to tune.  We could ensure that the hammers had the same weight because the hammers were hollow.  Weights and stopping paper could be put inside.  However, we could not ensure the springs have identical properties even though they were from the same batch from the same store.  The engineers, Mr. Sun et al, showed that just by changing two apparently identical hammers, the results could be very different.?

Fung: ?I can sense the difficulty and frustration with tuning.  I can see the reason that the average person could not replicate the claimed OU devices.  It would take conviction and dedication.  I am retired and I do not mind helping out.  I have time.?

Forever: ?I still have to go to school.  I also have homework.?

(to be continued)