The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory

[ltseung888]

My email to : bedini_motor@yahoogroups.com

Dear Sirs,

I believe that you have been working on the Bedini motor for sometime. 

I approached the inventions from a different direction.  Lee Cheung Kin and I are theoreticians.  We have a theory that states that Gravitational and Electron Motion Energy can be Lead Out via Pulsed oscillation, vibration or rotation.  Patrick Kelly alerted us to your work.

http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,2794.msg53128.html#msg53128

I would like to help to contribute so that we can get a win-win scenario that will benefit the World.  Detailed information can be found on the thread ? The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory at:

http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,2794.0.html

Looking forward to working together.

Lawrence Tseung

[shruggedatlas]

I will take jeffc's recommendations and post constructive criticism.  I posted the pendulum desk toy partially as a joke, but now I think it can be used to completely refute the Lead Out theory.  I have one of these myself and I enjoy watching it go.  There is a simple experiment I did with it that I want to share.

I first pulled up all the pendulums except for one, and I observed a single pendulum in motion and measured its angles over time and also measured how long the pendulum took to stop.  Next, I allowed two pendulums to drop, set them in motion, and watched them collide into each other over time.  What I noticed that the two pendulums maintained their energy pretty well, but not as long as the single pendulum.

Per the lead out theory, even a single pulse should "lead out" gravitational energy.  I understand that my experiment is not perfectly precise.  However, based on Lawrence's theory, there should be an extra 50% energy gain from the pulse force.  Yet the paired pendulums, pulsing into each other at regular intervals, cannot beat a single pendulum for energy efficiency.

I will get a video camera and record this and post it up sometime, and hopefully that will be the end of this.  (Or maybe a powerpoint presentation of still pictures, like the bowl of water experiment - that will prove it for sure!)  Maybe Ms. Foreven Yuen can confirm as well, since I know that Lawrence is "not good with tools" and therefore cannot actually put anything he claims into practice.

[ltseung888]

I will take jeffc's recommendations and post constructive criticism.  I posted the pendulum desk toy partially as a joke, but now I think it can be used to completely refute the Lead Out theory.  I have one of these myself and I enjoy watching it go.  There is a simple experiment I did with it that I want to share.

I first pulled up all the pendulums except for one, and I observed a single pendulum in motion and measured its angles over time and also measured how long the pendulum took to stop.  Next, I allowed two pendulums to drop, set them in motion, and watched them collide into each other over time.  What I noticed that the two pendulums maintained their energy pretty well, but not as long as the single pendulum.

Per the lead out theory, even a single pulse should "lead out" gravitational energy.  I understand that my experiment is not perfectly precise.  However, based on Lawrence's theory, there should be an extra 50% energy gain from the pulse force.  (*** Please read and understand the Lee-Tseung theory thoroughly.) Yet the paired pendulums, pulsing into each other at regular intervals, cannot beat a single pendulum for energy efficiency.

I will get a video camera and record this and post it up sometime, and hopefully that will be the end of this.  (Or maybe a powerpoint presentation of still pictures, like the bowl of water experiment - that will prove it for sure!)  Maybe Ms. Foreven Yuen can confirm as well, since I know that Lawrence is "not good with tools" and therefore cannot actually put anything he claims into practice.

Dear Lawyer shruggedatlas,

I know that Lawyers like to use their own words to describe an event.  They like to select sections and ignore other parts(at least that is the impression from Television). 

Remember to read that gravitational energy is only Lead Out  during the application of the Pulse Force. 

The moment that the Pulse Force stops, no more gravitational energy is Lead Out.

Please rethink your pendulum toy experiment in the light of the above full statements.  The CoP = 1.5 applies to the tiny portion of the period of the oscillation during the impact of the Pulse Force!!!

I checked.  In my reply to you on

http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,2794.msg48244.html#msg48244

<Reply #273 on: September 08, 2007, 06:26:50 AM>

Page 19 of this thread.  It took some time to search!

The issue of CoP at the application of the Pulse Force and the CoP of the entire Pulsed Pendulum were discussed and calculated.  Please refresh your memory.

Please use a scientist's reasoning and NOT a lawyer's interpretation.

Lawrence Tseung
Lawyer's interpretation of a scientific statement may Lead Out total misinterpretation.

[shruggedatlas]

Dear Lawyer shruggedatlas,

I know that Lawyers like to use their own words to describe an event.  They like to select sections and ignore other parts(at least that is the impression from Television). 

Remember to read that gravitational energy is only Lead Out  during the application of the Pulse Force. 

The moment that the Pulse Force stops, no more gravitational energy is Lead Out.

Please rethink your pendulum toy experiment in the light of the above full statements.  The CoP = 1.5 applies to the tiny portion of the period of the oscillation during the impact of the Pulse Force!!!

Please use a scientist's reasoning and NOT a lawyer's interpretation.

Lawrence Tseung
Lawyer's interpretation of a scientific statement may Lead Out total misinterpretation.

Did you even read my experiment?  I did use a control, you know.  I am not claiming that the Lead Out theory is false merely because two pendulums are not an overunity device.  I am claiming the Lead Out theory is false because the paired pendulums fail to improve on the efficiency of the single pendulum.  Even a single pulse force, according to your theory, should lead out energy and therefore increase efficiency, even if to a small degree.  This clearly did not happen, because the paired pendulums did not have the efficiency of a single pendulum.

[ltseung888]

.Did you even read my experiment?  I did use a control, you know.  I am not claiming that the Lead Out theory is false merely because two pendulums are not an overunity device.  I am claiming the Lead Out theory is false because the paired pendulums fail to improve on the efficiency of the single pendulum.  Even a single pulse force, according to "shruggedatlas's interpretation of the Lee-Tseung" theory, should lead out energy and therefore increase efficiency, even if to a small degree.  This clearly did not happen, because the paired pendulums did not have the efficiency of a single pendulum.

I shall ask for the opinion of the other forum members whether I should repeat the correct interpretation of the Lee-Tseung theory again here.

Are you the only one who does not understand it?  Your use of the multiple pendulum to "prove or disprove" the Lee-Tseung theory demonstrated some "non-thorough" understanding of the Lee-Tseung theory.

May be it is better for someone who understand the Lee-Tseung theory to post a reply to you.

Edited to add:

(1) May be it is a good time to ask the members whether they think your pendulum toy experiment can be used to "prove or disprove" the Lee-Tseung Theory?

(2) Whether a two pendulum swing necessarily has higher efficiency than a one pendulum swing according to the Lee-Tseung theory?

(3) Are there better experiments that can prove or disprove the Lee-Tseung Theory conclusively and settle the issue forever?

Lawrence