The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory

[ltseung888]

Meeting Minutes (2)

At the restaurant, the first thing we did was to walk over to the photo and newspaper cutting describing the Dec 20, 2004 Press Conference that was held at that restaurant.  There was already a change of ownership.  The actual pump setup was dismantled but the photographs were still available.  The theoretical diagram is in reply 640.

G'day Lawrence,

Are you telling us here that you actually used a half horsepower air compressor to blow water and air 34 stories up and that this experiment has since been dismantled, or was it much smaller than this. Please give us some details and data on this demonstration. some photos would be nice.

*** I did not buy the half horsepower air compressor nor set up the apparatus.  I only checked the results and took photos. The credit goes to Mr. Terry Cheung et al and Mr. Raymond Ting.

Hans von Lieven

As I told Mr. Bill Fung, I could supply him with a beach pump and all the data related.  However I could not give him the data of the working system as negotiation is going on.

It will be more credible for him to post after he has digested the material and/or repeated the experiment with the beach pump.

** When will you post the recommendation letter for Mr. Lee Cheung Kin?

Lawrence Tseung
Please spend the waiting time to read and understand reply 643 and 758.

[hansvonlieven]

As usual you are being evasive Lawrence,

All I wanted to know was, if this experiment was actually done, how many stories up it went and perhaps how much water came out at the top.

Perhaps a photo of the demo. I did not ask for any confidential construction details.

You have already posted a diagram of the system so I cannot see where confidentiality would be breached by showing us what I asked for.

So, if this is real, let us have a look.

Hans von Lieven

[Koen1]

Dear Mr. Koen1,

I now understand from Mr. Bill Fung's visit that understanding reply 643 and 758 is the key.  Not understand or disagreeing with Lead Out will make all my posts junk.

If after you have read 643 and 758, you still have questions, I shall be happy to answer them.

Well, in fact, have you yourself read post 644 for example?
But in reaction to your post 643, I do indeed have some questions.
I wonder how you wish to explain your apparent conviction that a pendulum is that same as something dropping on a linear, though sloped, trajectory...
At least, that is what you seem to imply?
And let us just assume you have explained that (), then how exactly do you propose to extract any energy from a pendulum without it stopping?

Also, I'd like to know exactly what you want to achieve with all this posting of unclear information.
If you really do have a viable and working theory of how to produce an OU device, be it a gravity wheel or a pmm or whatever, then why do you waste so much time and energy on posting hundreds of very unclear and unsubstantiated claims and mesages? Would it not be much more efficient to simply stop posting for a while, get everything down on paper (or on Word doc ), from the very basic explanation, step by step, to actual testable experiments with full and complete discriptions, step by step procedures, and clear and concise cause-effect descriptions if possible, and THEN back it up with the formulae that check out and show it all to be mathematically sound; and after that, just post that Word doc (or whatever) on this forum?
That would avoid a lot of confusion, would allow you to explain exactly what you mean to explain but have not apparently managed to so far, would give us a clear picture of your story, and would also do away with all the private discussions you feel you need to quote or even have with your alter egos.

Oh, and canyou explain why no company under the name of "General Magnetic", or any variation of the name for that matter, is listed ANYWHERE on the internet?
There's a General Magnetic ltd in Singapore, but none in China, as far as can be tracked. There is a General Magnetics Institute in Beijing, but that's not a company and was already there before 2007...
The "evidence" you come up with to attempt to support your credibility is shaky, which causes obvious suspicion.
The fact that you feel the need to constantly throw with names of others and other institutions also does not serve to boost your image, I must say...
After all, if you truly have this great, fantastic, theory, a theory that shows us how to build OU machines, then that alone should be more than enough to convince us.
Instead you seem intent on avoiding any possible physical TEST of your "theory"... You must know that for a hypothesis to become a theory, it needs PROOF? If there is no experimetal proof, a hypotesis remains a hypothesis. You know, just like Einsteins theory of relativity was a hypothesis untill they actually witnessed the gravitational lensing effect Einstein had predicted? And with proof of your "theory" of course I do not mean your suggestion that someone else's bessler wheel replication might work while it in fact didn't, or vague descriptions of water pumping experiments done by someone else, of which you cannot or will not give any clear details (details such as: what type of pumping mechanism was used EXACTLY, what were the diameters and lengths of the hoses used and what material were they, exactly how much water was pumped up from the bottom source, and exactly how much ended up in an elevated container, exactly how high was this container, exactly how was the hose attached to this container and pump, and exactly how were the bubbles introduced in the water?). 
Please give us something usefull.

[ltseung888]

Beach Pump Pictures 1

I have now spoken to my friends who helped to set up the demonstration at Tai Po.  We agreed to show the original concepts picture with full details.  That demonstration was originally done in July 2004 in Hong Kong.  The entire set up cost less than USD20 and had been repeated many times.

Improvements using electric pumps, better one-way valves, better and wider tubes, etc will not be shown as that would reveal too much and endanger the on-going negotiations.

The First Picture is using the beach pump as a water pump.  The maximum height at which water could be delivered was less than 5 meters.  The lady shown in the picture could only pump water to approximately 3 meters.

[ltseung888]

Beach Pump Picture 2

The following set up used the simple double beach pump arrangement to pump water+ air up.  The double beach pump arrangement was used because we could achieve a more constant airflow.

The Water tank was a plastic box with holes drilled.  The raised water height was achieved by putting it on the luggage wheeler.  (The drilling of holes almost drilled my leg and a piece of plastic almost blinded me.  That was the reason that I would never do hands-on experiments myself again.)

The most important theoretically formulae are:
Energy of Air-In = Pressure of Air-In x Volume of Air-In
Energy of Air-Out = Pressure of Air-Out x Volume of Air-Out

The Pressure of Air-In and the Pressure of Air-Out are both approximately equal to the atmospheric pressure.  However, the air is actually compressed or decreased in Volume inside the device.  This means Volume of Air-In is greater than Volume of Air-Out.

As a result, Energy of Air-In ? Energy of Air-Out has a significant difference.  This difference is energy contributed by the pumped in air.  This energy helped to raise water+ air to greater heights.