The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory

[hansvonlieven]

The Forever Yuen Magnetic Pendulum Experiment

I took part in the Forever Yuen Magnetic Pendulum Experiment this afternoon.  The results were extremely conclusive. 

With a 25 cm magnetic pendulum, the number of oscillation per 30 second are:

(1) with no other magnetic material around   31 times
(2) With repulsion  25 times
(3) With attraction 41 times

The videos is being edited by Ms. Forever Yuen.  The exact size and type of magnets, string length, the arrangement etc. will be available on the video.  The position of the bottom magnet can change the repulsive or attractive force.  The above results were obtained when distance of bottom magnet and pendulum is approximately 10 cm.

These results conclusively confirm that the effective gravitational constant g can be changed.  If we can Lead Out Energy from Gravity, we can also Lead Out Energy from Electron Motion (Magnetic field).

You are welcome to repeat the experiment.  The results may vary somewhat with the type of magnets.  However, the general trend should be the same.  There is no fear of challenge of results as this experiment can be repeated thousands of times worldwide.

Lawrence Tseung
Forever Yuen experiment Leads Out confirmation of change of effective g.  This will increase the happy heat beat (pulse).

Yep, Sounds to me like this is what he is talking about :-)

Hans von Lieven

[Pirate88179]

I recall hearing that if someone built a large enough version of this that the rotation of the earth would keep it moving forever. How large, I have no idea.  My thoughts are that the wind would actually have more of an effect upon it than the rotation. I may order the "toy" from the website.  I love to look at stuff like this and I think it stimulates my mind to working on more practicle devices. (In my opinion)

Bill

[ltseung888]

Hans:

Those have been around since I was a kid...(long time ago ha ha) I remember playing around with one when my Father worked at Bell Labs in NJ.  This is what he is talking about?  The "big" break-through? I am going to have to go back and read all of the posts on this but, if this is really what it is........let China have this "advanced" technology.

Bill

Dear Bill,

Now you have the incentive to reading the posts carefully.  Please focus on just the following point for now:

(1)   A pendulum with no pulse force can be analyzed with the simple law of conservation of energy.  At any point in time, the sum of potential energy and kinetic energy are equal.

  mgh + 1/2 * m *v *v = constant

(2)   When a pulse force is applied, how should the analysis be done?  Can we apply the Law of parallelogram of forces?  Will this pulse force supply energy to the system?  Will the tension of the string contribute to the resulting forces and the resulting energy?

I believe a good write-up from you is better than me repeating the same analysis a million times.

@hans,
Thank you for your information about the toy.  I shall try to buy it (and improve it to illustrate Leading Energy out from Gravity as well as Leading Energy out from Electron Motion.)

Lawrence Tseung
Analyzing one Pulse at a time  Leads Out easier understanding for the Forum Members.

[Pirate88179]

Itseung888:

What the heck does that have to do with anything?  The sum of potential energy and kinetic energy are always equal in any system...at least the ones we know about.  I fail to see how this applies in any way to your theory. I will re-read all of the previous posts (almost done) and I mean no disrespect to you at all. If I have read this right thus far, the "energy" you are describing could easily be described by a bouncing ball, which will also come to rest eventually.  It does not emit or give off or generate any additional energy even though it is "defying" gravity during half of it's cycles.  Maybe I am just ignorant, which is always possible. I always try to maintain an open mind on such matters.  I will research this phenomenon a little more.  Thanks for your reply.

Bill

[jeffc]

G'day jeffo and all,

I do not claim to have contacted everyone at Tsing Hua, all I have done is contact a few people myself and via a Chinese lecturer, who lectures  here in Sydney, a man who speaks the language and also has a few contacts there. We have not been able to locate anyone who had knowledge of these matters.

What I am saying is NOT definitive, the absence of proof never is.

There may well be someone there who takes this thing seriously, I don't know. All I know is that this is a reputable institution who does not endorse things lightly without a lot of proof.

Let Lawrence come up with some contacts there and their status at Tsing Hua, in other words not the janitor.

Then we can verify his claims. Until then we are pissing in the wind.

Hans von Lieven

Hans,
Thank you for the clarifications, and for not making a definitive claim without supporting proof.  You do, as always, raise valid points here which if answered with facts will take us closer to some sort of conclusion. 

It had been my previous opinion that Lawrence must be relaying accurate information about his relationship with Tsing Hua, based on the assumption that it would surely not take long for someone to discover if faked.  Your comments raised the suspicion, and I guess we'll have to await further information.  I don't feel comfortable discrediting him, although obviously in the context of these forums, establishing credibility is the responsibility of the person making claims.

Regards,
jeffc