The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory

[ramset]

CHRIS ALL THAT WORK and IT doesn't? Chet

[Top Gun]

From what i learned on friday; as it was searching more info after i found the newman data/clips by accident that i found this site.

I think it more than a little presumtious to Quote "Newman" as an example of  "Your"   theory; as he appears to have been working on this for 20 years+ himself.

Dear Tribune,

If you spent the time following the Tseung Posts, you would have found that he did not do prototypes.

After he worked out the Lee-Tseung theory, he looked for working prototypes all over the World.  He found some in China and some outside China. 

Many inventions were developed before the Lee-Tseung theory.  The inventors were great because they invented without theory.  Many were rejected by the Patent Offices Worldwide as impossible perpetual motion machines.  Even Lee-Tseung were rejected by the PCT Office initially.  Tseung quoted inventions from others in his reply to the Patent Examiner.

There will be much more fun.  But master slides 10-12 first.

[ltseung888]

It is Easter Sunday in Hong Kong.  Many non-pious people attend Church.  In the teaching, the Pastor quoted: "Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit, but in humility consider others better than youselves.  Each of you should look not only to your own interests, but also to the interests of others."

In other words, I should stick to benefiting the World.  Forget personal fame and fortune.  Consider others as better than myself.

The last sentence is most difficult for me.  However, I shall be humble in accepting all comments on Slides 10-12.

Please feel free to voice your comments.  You will not hear any bad words from me - even if I totally disagree with your points of view.

[Koen1]

Please refer to the two documents in the post by M@rcel (reply 1906)

(1)   http://www.wipo.int/pctdb/en/wo.jsp?wo=2006077451
This is our patent application document.

(2)   http://www.wipo.int/ipdl/IPDL-IMAGES/PATENTSCOPE/74/32/bd/0032bd.pdf
This is our reply to the patent examiner.  You can also click on the document tab in (1) to get this document.

Like I said Tseung, it really does not matter what letters you sent the patent authority after they had already
decided your patent application is useless.

The fact remains that you never got a patent because you cannot explain your claims properly nor can you
give any valid physical explanation that can be substantiated by any form of proof.
After all, if it could, you would simply have convinced the patent authority by showing your proof.
But instead they poined out your theory is a bunch of unschientific and unsubstantiated bullshit.

You can send them a thousand replies that you disagree with them, that does not add any value
to your "theory".

P.S. What are you doing in Hong Kong? Your living address is in California, USA! 

[ltseung888]

I shall sum up the various suggestions or comments on Slide 10-12 so far.

(1)   Slide 10 shows only two forces.  They are the Weight Mg and the Tension of the String T.  T = Mg.  All agreed on this slide 100%.

(2)   Slide 11 shows three forces.  They are the Weight Mg, the New Tension of the String T1 and the Horizontal Force F.  In the first Lee-Tseung Pull, these three forces are at equilibrium.  The analysis can be done via the Parallelogram of Forces.  All agree on this slide 100%.

(3)   Slide 12 calculates the displacement of the bob.  There is both vertical and horizontal displacement.  There is 100% agreement on this displacement.  Slide 12 continues to calculate the work done and the energy involved.  The horizontal work done = horizontal force F x horizontal displacement dX.  The vertical work done = vertical component of T1 x vertical displacement dH. There is disagreement on the last statement.

(4)   The disagreement is that the String can do no work if it was not stretched or shortened.  Another explanation to this disagreement was that the displacement dl is always perpendicular to the tension.  The Pendulum is considered to be undergoing circular motion and no work is done.  (We can obviously discuss this further with existing members of this forum.)

(5)   One suggestion is to get some established professors who have already seen and agreed to Slides 10-12 to voice their comments.  These established professors are not currently members of this forum.

(6)   Another suggestion is to get the opinion of Prof. Lu of Polytech University in Hong Kong who might not have seen Slides 10-12.  Prof Lu is not currently a member of this forum.

Are there any relevant constructive comments or suggestions that I missed?