The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory

[nightlife]

chrisC, who is to say that the scientific community doesn't know about this? Who is to say that this isn't being hid from us? The same goes for all the thinks we talk about here. I for one can not believe that we are the only ones to think of the things we talk about here.

There are some things that disturb me about his allegations but I would think with all the top secret scientist we have, they most likely know of this and all others but are not allowed to let the public know about them. When people start showing them, they end up dead and or never heard from again. That is why it may be best for people like us to just tell everyone about our ideas so that we can build them ourselves and or sell kits like some others do. 

[Evil Roy Slade]

The phrase 'Flogging a Dead Horse'  comes to mind.

Hans, Chris: May be time to just let them be.  Kudos for trying.

ERS

[Koen1]

That is why it may be best for people like us to just tell everyone about our ideas so that we can build them ourselves and or sell kits like some others do. 

And that is why we have been asking mr Tseung for clear and exact descriptions of his experiments and measurements, so that we can replicate them ourselves.
That would be equivalent to having your own do-it-yourself kit.
The problem, and the main reason why ChrisC and others are rightfully "busting his balls" as you call it, is that mr Tseung only keeps repeating how fantastic his theory is, but he never gives these very clear descriptions and measurements that we ask for.
He in fact does not provide any substantiating proof of his "theory" at all.
If a guy comes up to you and says "I have a great theory and can tell you how to extract free energy from still air" and you ask "How?", you would expect the guy to say "Like this. See? And here's my measurements that clearly prove it."
But this guy comes up to us and says he has a great heory, and we say "How?", and he says "Because it is great and you don't understand it.". We then say "That is not what we asked.", and he replies "You just don't understand, but it really is great, and it is proof that OU is possible!".
Again, we go "Alright, but How? Explain please.", but the guy only keeps repeating what he already said, and still never explains how.
That's what is going on here. Tseung claims he has the solution to generating free energy, but he refuses to give any experiments that we could test to substantiate his claim, he refuses to substantiate his own claim, and he refuses to give clear explanation. He even refuses to admit his "theory" is in fact not a theory but an extrapolation of his personal interpretation of certain classical physics formulae.
It's like the argument little kids often have, where one keeps shouting "Yes!" and the other keeps shouting "No!". It doesn't go anywhere.

Now we have finally pieced together the water pump experiment mainly by ourselves because Tseung was extremely unwilling to even give a clear description of the setup, and now that we fianlly know what we're talking about and an experienced retired physicist has given his analysis, mr Tseung reverts back to his practise of ignoring the fact that he has been disproven and falls back to blowing his own horn and acting as if nothing happened. He does that every time someone says something intelligent that shows his claims unsubstantiated. It's the ostrich-effect: something happens you don't like, stick your head down the sand and hope that it goes away.
mr Tseung does this all the time. And then he starts accusing us of not wanting to understand him, or even of being CIA agents. Which again just goes to show the degree of sanity mr Tseung has command over.

[RD Edwards]

quote: "Some of the crowd are actually Senior Officials from both China and USA.
Thanks to Hans and others for challenging my experiments.  That got the attention and interest of these Officials.  It created opportunity for me to present to them and their top technical advisors in both China and USA."

So out of all the boards, out of all the flame wars in the world on the internet, out of all the experiments for free energy on youtube, Hans gets the attention of the Chinese govt with his posts recently? Really?  How did he get their attention when they already gave you the keys to the city? With patents no less from them?

I think Mr. Lawrence has proven that he is totally incapable of even holding a conversation, let alone the keys to mankinds future. There is NO WAY a govt would all of a sudden call or email tseung and say hey! I hear hans disagrees with you, lets build that thing! (even though they already have he says).

I think he is nuts, I think forever is tseung, and so are all the other personalities like fung, and I think the most important hot button for people in dealing with this fraud is this:
He cant stand it when people disagree with him. You can write him for years with no response to his hotmail address, but when you write him saying it doesnt work, he writes you right back! Thats a fact.
And here is one thing that nobody can deny, if they are on the fence, like I was for so long: If lawrence had spent as much time building a 10 dollar device for proof, or learning to run an electric drill (God forbid!) instead of scribbling furiously on here, he may have been listened to. But now we can throw his name in with PT Barnum and all the rest. Next!

[hansvonlieven]

G'day all,

@Koen, I have never claimed to be a physicist. I am merely a humble engineer, though I did major in physics for my degree.

@ Lawrence

There is no way in which static back pressure can be cancelled or ameliorated with one way valves. Periodic, or pulsed, back pressure yes, but not the static component. In a system such as described there is ONLY static back pressure and any inclusion of one way valves will only impede the process.

I challenge you or anyone to prove my analysis of the square wheel and the still air concept wrong on a scientific basis.

I, as well as anyone else, am subject to criticism and analysis of what I say. But let that criticism be founded on science and not on wild accusations of membership in the CIA or with fictitious anecdotal "evidence" or for that matter by claiming academic seniority.

Hans von Lieven