The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory

[chrisC]

@ TopGun:

I am sorry to see that you still do not get it.  You are missing a fundamental part of all this.  Go ahead and suspend this in the air so it is free swinging and see what happens.  You won't because you already know.  Everyone already knows.  As I said before, unless you are planning to take the table with you into space, this will not work as a propulsion device.  I really wish it would, but, it won't.

Respectfully,

Bill

That could easily explain why he can't use a drill! Even simple common sense is exceeding difficult for this Top Turkey to understand!

cheers
chrisC

[utilitarian]

In the next part, we need to introduce the concept of elastic and inelastic collisions.

In Physics, eleastic collision refers to the situation where there is no loss of kinetic energy - nothing is converted into heat or sound.  The object and the wall will not deform.  The solid surface is an approximation.  On hitting the surface, the velocity is reversed.  There is a change of momentum of the magnet from mv to -mv or (mv-(-mv)).  The value is thus 2mv.  The force F1 is given by the rate of change of momentum.  The value is 2mv/t1.  t1 is made to be as short as possible so that F1 is as large as possible.

This part can be considered alone.  Thus F1 can be determined.

In Physics, inelastic collision refers to the situation where there is loss of kinetic energy - much of it is converted into heat, sound or deformation.  The padded surface is an approximation.  On hitting the padded surface, the velocity is also reverse but its value will be much less (v1).  The value is (mv -(-mv1) or m(v+v1).  Since v1 is less than v, the change in momentum is less than 2 mv.  This value is less than the solid surface case.  The force F2 is the rate of change of momentum.  The valude is m(v+v1)/t2.  t2 is made to be as long as possible so that F2 is as small as possible.

The trick is to have the largest difference between F1 and F2.  This is the design principle.  The Bull and Naudin devices did not follow the above design principle and are thus useless devices.

The analysis contains a fundamental error.  You are comparing average forces, but those are not at issue.  Momentum is still conserved, and the center of mass in the closed system will not move.

On the padded side, you forget to multiply the average force by the time the force is applied.  You cannot cheat the system.  F1*t1 will equal F2*t2.  You simply look at the average force on the padded side, and of course that will be lower.  But that does not matter in the slightest.  The lower F2, the higher t2 needs to be - there is no way around it - and the equation will balance.

I suspect you know all this, and just attempting to play a trick on the reader, focusing on the fact that kinetic energy is not conserved.  That is irrelevant.  In a complicated scenario like this, with elastic and inelastic collisions, it is true that kinetic energy is not conserved, but momentum always is, and that is why your device cannot move its center of mass in a frictionless environment.

The only reason the object in the experiment moves is that it includes the table (and the building and the planet Earth) in its closed system.  Once the table is removed from the system, the result will be quite different.

[Top Gun]

Man-made flying saucers are already flying and sighted by many.

They are engine driven rather than aerodynamically driven.  Thus they can fly in outer space; make sharp turns; hover; vertical take-off and land etc..

The principle used is propulsion system from unbalanced forces generated from within.

Possible techniques to create unbalanced forces include:
(1) Unbalanced padding
(2) Unbalanced pulsing
(3) Rotational Systems using centripetal forces
(4) Flux change Systems
(5) Other undisclosed techniques

We need to look for systems that can be repeated rapidly.

[TinselKoala]

There you go again.

There is no evidence for any of your statements.
(Well, except for the "sightings" part---unfortunately reports of "sightings" are just that: reports of sightings. Nothing more, and proof of nothing.)

What you need to look for, is actual evidence that the LTLOT is correct. So far, it has failed every scientific test proposed.

Please stop making claims for which you have no evidence.

[Top Gun]

Mr. Tong Po Chi modified Experiment001 as shown.

What do you think is the outcome of the Experiment?