The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory

[ltseung888]

The 2 pendulum experiment suggested by Tinu as a separate discussion

Tinu: ?Take two balls, make two pendulums and collide them. According to the theory, they should make an excellent pulsed-force pendulum and, voila, you already have the over-unity machine, at least according to the theory you promote and to your previous statements. Too bad that reality sadly contradicts you??

According to the Lee-Tseung Lead Out theory, there must be a Pulse Force to Lead Out Gravitational Energy.  The moment you stop applying the Pulse Force, no Gravitational Energy is Lead Out.  Let us focus on Pendulum A.  It is stationary.  Now, we pull Pendulum B up ? to give it the pulse force and energy.  The Pull will Lead Out gravitational energy.  When Pendulum B is let go, it swings towards Pendulum A.  During this swinging back, NO gravitational energy is Lead Out.

Pendulum A is then hit by Pendulum B.  At the impact, Pendulum A can be thought of as receiving a Pulse Force.  However, the duration is short and not much gravitational energy is Lead Out.  There is a loud hitting sound.  Pendulum A swings to approximately the same height as when Pendulum B is pulled. The hitting sound means changing some mechanical energy into sound/heat energy.  Energy goes out of the two-Pendulum system.  Eventually, both pendulums will stop.

In a Milkovic type Pendulum system, each swing can be pushed or pulsed.  The total energy of the system is the sum of the pulse energy + the Lead Out gravitational energy.  This is the reason that Milkovic et al are working so hard.  They believe that they are dealing with Over Unity Devices.  If you accept that Newton?s Laws in the form of Parallelogram of forces can be applied to the Pendulum, then Milkovic et al are NOT wasting their time.

If I am not mistaken, you are doubting the correctness of applying the Law of Parallelogram of Forces to the Pendulum System.  Tinu: "This rationale is having a physical meaning in equilibrium only! (Static setup/no movement). However, the pendulum that is starting from the vertical will not stop at this angle. So, the force equality does not hold and you should know it. Then why applying this simple equality? This is another (and quite a huge) mistake."
I do not share that doubt.

(If you can find a way for Pendulum B to hit Pendulum A perfectly with no sound or no loss of energy whatsoever, you will find that Pendulum A swings slightly to a higher position than Pendulum B.  The cycle should repeat with both pendulums swinging higher - but how can you prevent energy loss?)

Now study the phenomena of resonance.  A high pitched sound can crack many glasses if the natural frequencies were just right.  Resonance effect is not just for mechanical systems.  It can be found in sound, electric, magnetic, electromagnetic wave environments.  This is indeed the advice I can give to Milkovic at el.  (In addition to increasing the effective gravitational constant g via permanent magnets.)

Lawrence Tseung
Having no doubts in the application of the Law of Parallelogram of Forces in Pendulum Systems Leads Out confidence in the Milkovic et al inventions.

[ltseung888]

Cracking glasses with resonance effects

I believe most physicists agree that the energy used to crack the glass is already with the glass.  It is just Lead Out by the high pitched sound for self destructive purposes.

If it can be Lead Out for self destructive purposes, can it be Lead Out for useful purposes???

Lawrence Tseung
Resonance effects Lead Out possibility of using the Energy inherent in the object.

[tinu]

Mr. Tseung,

I?m glad we are talking. I still disagree with the theory and I keep suggesting presenting it in a proper way, free of errors.

It is not the vectors summation I doubt but the other forces you neglect (centripetal/centrifugal) that always play an important role in non-linear motion.

I also doubt the rationale behind the ?lead-out? energy. Please follow me: a true pulse is so short in duration that the huge and slow pendulum may and actually can ? for all practical purposes - be considered frozen in time. Of course, the pendulum has to change its speed in order to gain energy from the pulsed force, so it is not completely ?frozen? but the approximation will hold. (I am now also sure that you are very familiar with this kind of approximations but I said it mainly for other readers, to be able to follow our conversation.) If the angle at which the pendulum is pulsed is small, the ratio between vertical and horizontal displacement is very small, so the vertical displacement during the duration of pulsed force may be approximated to zero, in the same manner in which the mathematical treatment considers the pendulum almost frozen in time. But if the vertical displacement can be approximated to zero, this is clearly telling us that no gravitational exchange of energy is involved. Basically no exchange of energy between the pendulum and the gravitational field of Earth can take place in such a short duration of time, during which the pendulum does not travel on the vertical. So, no ?lead out? gravitational energy can manifest.

Pulses may give an excellent study environment for astute students but may I remind you that their treatment is based on the law of conservation of energy? Why? Because the nature always tells us it happens this way. Your explanation based on the mechanical loses in the case of two colliding pendulums may hold up to a point but it will not satisfy a logic person. Remember that around us there are no-loses interactions (gas molecules, for instance). They are the perfect example of pulsed interaction and it happens that they are also immersed in the gravitational field. Yet, an isolated container does not heat itself up as it should be if the molecules would gain energy from the gravitational field. It will remain for an undefined period in thermal equilibrium, despite of trillions of pulsed interactions / seconds?

There are also other macro-molecular setups, in which loses can be lowered very close to zero. For instance, instead of colliding two balls of steel, two balls electrically charged or two magnets can be used to transfer the energy in a pulsed manner. No mechanical losses during such a ?non-contact? collision would manifest. For such a system placed in a good vacuum, all mechanical loses may be lowered very, very much, just enough to detect the effect of any ?lead-out? energy, if real. I would go for experiment but because of the above example with gas remaining in equilibrium, my actual guess is that either the physical assumptions made or the mathematical model used to solve the differential equations is having a flaw. I?m human and I may be wrong. If fact, like I said it before in other threads, I almost desperately wish I am wrong but the person to step forward and show me the free energy is still waited...

We keep in touch. The week to follow it will be very busy for me and on top of it I?m also going to travel through my county. I?ll read your posts when I can but most probably I will not have the time to reply. But who?s in a hurry, here?

Have a nice day,
Tinu

[tinu]

Cracking glasses with resonance effects

I believe most physicists agree that the energy used to crack the glass is already with the glass.  It is just Lead Out by the high pitched sound for self destructive purposes.

If it can be Lead Out for self destructive purposes, can it be Lead Out for useful purposes???

Lawrence Tseung
Resonance effects Lead Out possibility of using the Energy inherent in the object.

One more, just for fun: If ?most physicists agree that the energy used to crack the glass is already with the glass?, I must be among the few of them?

I simply believe that the wave (the sound) energy accumulates because of resonant condition, up to the point the glass can no longer increase its amplitude (beyond its elasticity limits) and when this happens, the glass cracks. (In the absence of resonant frequency, the energy simply can not accumulate in the glass.) There are good movies on internet in which you can actually see this amplitude increasing at resonance, over a period of seconds (2-3s or more). It does not take a large amount of energy to break a thin glass (maybe a fraction of Joule is more than enough). A loud sound is carrying enough power to provide this amount of energy needed to break the glass.

I wanted to respond because this is my major concern with various anomalous effects posted in TPU threads. If a coil is pumped at high power levels and if it can not radiate well (i.e. donut-shaped coil(s)) then at some point after integrating this power of tents of W for several seconds, all this energy has to leak-out somehow, somewhere. And at tents of W for several seconds we are talking about energies that can easily kill a man, not to mention damaging a sensitive oscilloscope?

Tinu

[ltseung888]

Resonance Experiment

Dear Tinu,

I remember way back at University some 40 years ago, I watched a film related to resonance.  The film started with a tuning fork that caused a piano, many string instruments and other tuning forks to vibrate. The resultant sound was much louder than that from the tuning fork alone.  Even after the tuning fork was stopped, these instruments continued to resonate or vibrate to produce the tune for sometime.

The professor at that time gave the explanation that resonance can be ?stimulated?.  The resultant sound energy or the continued vibration of many devices do not come from the first tuning fork alone.  He used this to explain the collapse the Old Tacoma Narrows Bridge in 1940.  He also compared this with the Laser (Light Amplification by Stimulated Emission of Radiation).  Have we been taught two different versions of Physics?

At least we agree on one thing ? The TPU experimenters need to be very careful in dealing with high frequency pulses at resonance conditions.

Lawrence Tseung
Resonance Leads Out discussion on the source of energy.  Does all energy come from the original source?