The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory

[chrisC]

Maybe others see this differently, maybe I am missing something to understand how Lead Out Theory explains this, sorry. 


Best Regards
Gyula

You're not the only one. Judging from the dozens of posts and the lack of solid answers other than everything in life is based on LEAD OUT theory, CIA conspiracy and UFO-logy, I believe Harry Porter is real!

btw, do look at Joseph Newman's stuff which ia completely verifiable, shown to the public and 'denied' by the USPTO patent office. No conspiracy theory here and no Crap Out stuff either!

cheers
chrisC

[ltseung888]

Part 1 ? Lenz Law in the case of the Liang and Chao Pulse Motors.

Dear Gyula,

I believe your question is: is the Lenz?s Law applicable in the case of the Pulse Motor?  From the wikipedia website: Lenz?s Law is defined as:

For a current induced in a conductor, the current flows in such a direction that its own magnetic field opposes the change that produced it.

In my explanation, I first pointed out that in the Liang and Chao Pulse Motor, there were NO coils and NO permanent magnets.  Both these devices had Hall Effect ICs. The electric current is used to drive these programmable ICs.  The result is rotation of the inner cylinder.  I do not think that Lenz?s Law is applicable in these two devices as no voltage and no current are generated.

End of Part 1

[ltseung888]

Part 2 ? Lenz Law in the case of the 225 HP Pulse Motors

In the 225 HP Pulse Motor, let us assume
(1)   The rotor permanent magnets (R1 to Rn) all have N poles facing outside. 
(2)   The rotation is in one direction ? clockwise.
(3)   An electromagnet (coil S1) will have Pulse Current making it a magnet with N pole facing inwards.  Only one coil is used in the explanation. 
(4)   Initially the N-N repulsion between S1 and R1 will cause the inner cylinder to rotate in the clockwise direction.
(5)   Because of the Pulsing Current in (3), the N pole of S1 will have varying strength. 
(6)   When R2 approaches S1, the N-N replusion should have a force moving the inner cylinder in the anti-clockwise direction.  However, the N pole of S1 is weaker at this moment.  R2 can then rotate just pass S1 because of the momentum.
(7)   N pole of S1 becomes strong because of the Pulse, the N-N replusion will cause the inner cylinder to rotate in the clockwise direction ( similar to Step 4).
(8 )   Steps 4 to 7 repeats with the Pulsing matching the rotational speed.

This Pulsed Rotation already Leads Out electron motion energy.  The total energy in the system at this point is the sum of the Pulse Energy + the Lead Out electon motion energy. Some of this energy can be collected via a collector coil. Or this energy can be collected via the central rotating axle.

The collector coil will slow down the rotation of the inner cylinder but the Pulse Current will accelerate it again.  Since the collected energy (Output) is the sum of the Pulse energy PLUS the Lead Out energy, the 225 HP is an over unity device.  However, it does NOT violate the Law of Conservation of Energy.  Lenz?s Law may be used but it does not explain the Lead Out energy.

Lawrence Tseung
Lack of Interactive Conversation on the Internet Leads Out frustration and repeatition of the same material.

End of Part 2 (End of reply)

[ltseung888]

btw, do look at Joseph Newman's stuff which is completely verifiable, shown to the public and 'denied' by the USPTO patent office. No conspiracy theory here and no Crap Out stuff either!

That is why I am working with Joseph Newman et al.  They can use the 'boat in calm water and good sunshine' scenario to overcome the objections from the USPTO patent office. 

We used that strategy successfully with the Chinese patent office.

[chrisC]

Sorry to burst your bubble Lawrence.  If the USPTO first denied Newman's patents based on 'lack of technical description' or maybe even out of  'strategic interest' , they are not likely to consider your "boat in calm water" or "good(or bad) sunshine" poetic explanation. Btw, I've seen your 'broad' claims for your patent. The USPTO will never grant claims like these! The USPTO is NOT the Chinese patent office.

Try understanding the technicalities of what is patentable and what is not and specifically the mandatory requirements of USC codes. I seriously don't think Joseph Newman (nor Steorn) need your theories to help them in their patent applications. No offence.

Another 'issue' I have with all your propaganda has to do with trying to impress the world how wonderful these very smart Chinese scientist in their ivory tower universities are doing such a great job and how much the Chinese Goverment is spending on General magnetics etc. etc. Please, spare us all these technicalities. First, clean up all these crappy factories that spill out enough sulphur to kill tens of thousands of Chinese citizens and eject enough pollutants into the air that I don't have to breathe your polluted air in California! Also, Mr. wang may be the GM of General Magnetics and I do wish him success in his UFO research, but please remember too that that is the same Goverment that executed the head of the Ministry of Food(?) for bribery? Maybe they'll go after Mr. Wang's head if that Nanjing flying saucer was not of Chinese design? Maybe it belonged to Harry Porter?

To continually extolling the greatness of the Chinese Research without truly understanding,  perhaps other research institutions and certainly the US Military may be light years ahead of their research is simply naive.

Enough of politics. This is not the forum for such discussions. People here want to experiment OU (practical) and few are interested in Leading In or Leading Out theories. Practical solutions which can be built, tested, explained and entirely reproducible.

cheers
chrisC