The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory

[Cap-Z-ro]

When it comes right down to it...without proof, all conclusions are a leap of faith.

Or a 'jump' to a conclusion...if you wood.

Regardless...

[ltseung888]

Now I invite intelligent comments on the above analysis.  Can Slide 12 be wrong if every step is 100% correct?

I may look at the equations later, but what strikes me immediately is the following.

So what if you have done twice as much horizontal work than vertical work?  How does that create an overunity (or "lead out") situation where there is suddenly more energy out than in?  If I push a ball up a gentle incline, I will do more horizontal work than vertical work, but so what?

Also, based on your "lead out" principle, why does any pendulum ever stop moving?  After all, as it passes the low point, it still has enough kinetic energy to do work, namely lift the ball up the other side.

Dear shruggedatlas,

In Physics, we have to be exact.  ?So what if you have done twice as much horizontal work than vertical work?? is a layman statement.

The correct and exact Physics Statement is ?You supply 2 units of horizontal energy to lead out 1 unit of vertical energy.? 

The correct Physics Statement can be restated as ?You Input 2 units of Lee-Tseung Pull energy.  That Leads Out 1 unit of gravitational energy.  The system now has 3 units of total energy.  2 of these 3 units can be feedback as Input to provide the Lee-Tseung Pull.  The 1 unit remaining can be used to do work or overcome friction.  The feedback 2 units will again lead out another 1 unit of gravitational energy.  Thus theoretically, only the initial 2 units of Lee-Tseung Pull energy is necessary to start the machine.?

Slide 13 shows this concept.  However Slide 13 is no long mathematically 100% correct.  2.014 units of horizontal energy have been approximated to 2 units.

The definition of over unity is (total output energy) / (Input energy).  In the first Lee Tseung Pull in this example, the value is (2 Input + 1 lead out) / (2 Input) or 3/2 or 1.5 approximately.  Thus the Pendulum under the Lee-Tseung Pull happens to be an over unity device.  When the pendulum is let go and no more Lee-Tseung Pull is supplied, the pendulum reveres to a non-overunity device. If you supply Lee-Tseung Pull again, it then becomes an overunity device.  Thus the Lee-Tseung pulled/pulsed pendulum changes from overunity to non-overunity in its operation.

[ltseung888]

When it comes right down to it...without proof, all conclusions are a leap of faith.

Or a 'jump' to a conclusion...if you wood.

Regardless...

In mathematics and physics, there is the concept of a derived theory.  A derived theory is the combined result of two or more established theories. 

The Lee-Tseung theory is a derived theory from Newton?s Laws of Motion, Trigonometry and Pendulum Motion.  If the established theories are correct and that there were no mathematical errors in the derivation, the derived theory will be correct.

That is why I am so confident that the Lee-Tseung Lead Out theory cannot be wrong. If it cannot be wrong, the energy crisis of the World is over.

That is why that many OU devices under development can be correct theoretically if they obey the Lee-Tseung theory.  Every one is effectively a further confirmation of the Lee-Tseung Theory.

[Koen1]

instead of constantly repeating how you are convinced you are correct,
perhaps you could finally show us how you are correct?
Spend less time and text telling people that their statements are not educated
enough  (because you are certainly not the one to talk with all the mistakes you
have shown! Do not act like you are a physics teacher, we are not falling for it.)
and less time sticking feathers up your butt,
and some more time finally actually explaining how we can usefully get this
claimed "lead out" energy you have been going on about for ages now!
You keep referring to Milkovich, but you must have missed the passage on his
website where they point out:

It can be said that MilkoviÃ,,‡'s models satisfy the main precondition of the "eternal motor" - positive balance of energy. The output energy is larger than the input energy. However, these models are still not autonomous. Gradual decrease of energy of the primary oscillator, which is usually a physical pendulum, must be supplemented from outer energy sources.

So perhaps you have a better example?

And by the way, why do you need to use other peoples devices to prove your "lead out" theory?
If it is a proper theory, why don't you have a proper experiment of your own to prove it?
(Oh, I forgot, you have no proof, only drawings)

So far I see you getting back to your ancient pendulum talk...
But not long ago you were going all out about you having solved the energy crisis,
how you were personally going to be the big hero who was going to spread peace
and prosperity with his free energy powered ufos, how you were so great and
fantastic that the UN was going to invest millions to develop your technology,
etcetera etcetera...
What happened?
Had a little reality check?
Maybe you can just stop acting like you're better than the rest of us,
and stop blowing your own horn so much?
You can stick as many feathers up your butt as you want,
it will never make you a chicken.

[shruggedatlas]

In Physics, we have to be exact.  ?So what if you have done twice as much horizontal work than vertical work?? is a layman statement.

Well, first of all, "lead out" is not a physics term.  You just made that up.  You still have to prove your hypothesis, and it is not proper in any scientific field to use your own hypothesis in support of it.

Second, you have not shown that two units of energy leads out three.  All you have shown is that some amount of energy is put in, and the output is two parts horizontal to one part vertical. Maybe what would be helpful is to use actual numbers, instead of units.  So, if you want to convince us "laymen", please show an analysis that has the following:

1.  Mass of bob, in kilograms.
2.  Length of string, in meters or centimeters
3.  Horizontal force applied, in Newtons
4.  Distance the bob moves vertically and horizontally, in meters or centimeters

I think with the above, even we, the untrained, can figure out how much work is done and indeed whether two parts input results in three parts output.