The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory

[Eddy Currentz]

... and this has what to do with the "lead out" hypothesis?
Nothing?

More than you know.

[Eddy Currentz]

Again, why am I, a layman, explaining the scientific method to you guys?  This is something you should have mastered in high school.  Why are you utterly unwilling and/or unable to run a single experiment to verify your own theory that you have spent ungodly amounts of time working on?

Why don't you run one? Why is it that you can't go to all the trouble of designing a system, buying the parts and constructing it?
I NEVER demand or even ask someone to prove their theory to me. If it sounds reasonable, I build a model and try it myself to see if it works. This teaches me to be discerning with what theory I want to find out about, and building a model teaches me about the theory. If people here would whine less and build more we would have much more success.
I don't know what the hell Lawrence is talking about half the time either. However, I've built enough similar machines to know he is probably on the right track. I might argue that gravity isn't the only explanation for the excess energy, but it really doesn't matter in the end.

[utilitarian]

Why don't you run one? Why is it that you can't go to all the trouble of designing a system, buying the parts and constructing it?
I NEVER demand or even ask someone to prove their theory to me. If it sounds reasonable, I build a model and try it myself to see if it works. This teaches me to be discerning with what theory I want to find out about, and building a model teaches me about the theory. If people here would whine less and build more we would have much more success.
I don't know what the hell Lawrence is talking about half the time either. However, I've built enough similar machines to know he is probably on the right track. I might argue that gravity isn't the only explanation for the excess energy, but it really doesn't matter in the end.

While I agree that we could all help in this, the interesting thing is that Lawrence is actively discouraging such experimentation, by saying that it is likely to be a waste of time to try to guage the effect of a single pull.

Think, why would he say this?  If he was genuine in his belief in Lead Out and was willing to stand by the 150 to 180% efficiency numbers, as stated in the spreadsheet, he would be eager for others to prove up his claims.  So his attitude is surprising.  There is only one reason for it, of course - he wants to hedge against a poor showing.  If someone runs the single pull test and finds no excess energy, the ready answer is, "I told you not to waste time on a single pull test.  Just trust me, when you put all these pulls together in one big device, it will work, I promise."

It is the oldest trick in the book.  Never agree to a specific test of a specific claim, but continue to promise castles in the air based on some kind of nebulous "collective effect" which cannot be broken down into specific, testable components.  The funny thing here is that in one post he sings the praises of the single pull, proclaiming up to 180% efficiency, and in the next breath, he advises against testing the single pull, proclaiming it to be a waste of time.  I am sure he will come up with some slippery way to reconcile these things, but only after I have taken issue with the contradiction.

It makes me angry reading Tseung's crap, and I should not let it get to me, but it bothers me that others are wasting time on it, when he himself has not deemed it necessary to spend even the bare minimum effort to demonstrate the basic tenet of his entire theory.  There is only one reason why he has not bothered to do so, and that is because he knows what will happen.  I do not know what game he is playing, but it is not anything good.

[Eddy Currentz]

While I agree that we could all help in this, the interesting thing is that Lawrence is actively discouraging such experimentation, by saying that it is likely to be a waste of time to try to guage the effect of a single pull.

Think, why would he say this?  If he was genuine in his belief in Lead Out and was willing to stand by the 150 to 180% efficiency numbers, as stated in the spreadsheet, he would be eager for others to prove up his claims.  So his attitude is surprising.  There is only one reason for it, of course - he wants to hedge against a poor showing.  If someone runs the single pull test and finds no excess energy, the ready answer is, "I told you not to waste time on a single pull test.  Just trust me, when you put all these pulls together in one big device, it will work, I promise."

It is the oldest trick in the book.  Never agree to a specific test of a specific claim, but continue to promise castles in the air based on some kind of nebulous "collective effect" which cannot be broken down into specific, testable components.  The funny thing here is that in one post he sings the praises of the single pull, proclaiming up to 180% efficiency, and in the next breath, he advises against testing the single pull, proclaiming it to be a waste of time.  I am sure he will come up with some slippery way to reconcile these things, but only after I have taken issue with the contradiction.

It makes me angry reading Tseung's crap, and I should not let it get to me, but it bothers me that others are wasting time on it, when he himself has not deemed it necessary to spend even the bare minimum effort to demonstrate the basic tenet of his entire theory.  There is only one reason why he has not bothered to do so, and that is because he knows what will happen.  I do not know what game he is playing, but it is not anything good.

Who cares what he is saying. If you want to find out about it, DO THE EXPERIMENT! Otherwise you're just talking out of your ass. And what do you care what other people are working on, at least they're doing something!
If you spent less time psychoanalyzing the guy and more time studying the physical aspects of Nature, you might actually learn something.

[ltseung888]

The US Visitor (Mr. Fung) will arrive my home in approximately 2 hours.

The Agenda planned is as follows:

(1) Examine the NewsPaper Cuttings and photos since Dec 2004. 

(2) Lunch at the restaurant where the Press Conference in Dec 2004 was held.

(3) Examine the CD that was sent to the Chinese Government that helped us won "the best investment project" in 2006.

(4) Examine the Videos from Wang, Liang, Song, Tsing Hua etc.

(5) Examine the selected email and posts from the various forums outside China including Newman, Bedini, Adams, Milkovic, 225 HP etc.

(6) Perform the 4 experiments as suggested by Forever Yuen.

Pictures and videos will be taken.

If you have anything you would like to add, please post now.