The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory

[gaby de wilde]

So one kid pushing another on a swing is an overunity device?  There is a pulse force and a pendulum, after all.  If this was true, it would be trivially simple to construct an overunity device.  Just have a pendulum and a hammer hitting it from one end.  Then use the excess force of the pendulum to retrigger the hammer, and presto!

You nailed it down quite nicely with the hammer stuffs.

That's how you put energy into the thing

You then extract the energy from the bob's pull at the string.

Easy,

why act as if it's so complicated?

[ltseung888]

So one kid pushing another on a swing is an overunity device?  There is a pulse force and a pendulum, after all.  If this was true, it would be trivially simple to construct an overunity device.  Just have a pendulum and a hammer hitting it from one end.  Then use the excess force of the pendulum to retrigger the hammer, and presto!

You nailed it down quite nicely with the hammer stuffs.

That's how you put energy into the thing

You then extract the energy from the bob's pull at the string.

Easy,

why act as if it's so complicated?

Thank you.  Gaby.

With you around, I do not have to repeat the posts of the simple gravity wheel:
http://theverylastpageoftheinternet.com/newclaims/GravityMotor/gravity_motor.htm

and the related reproduction stories from Sun et al again.

Regards,

Lawrence Tseung

[ltseung888]

Hi ltseung888

I was not criticizing or questionning the "Lead Out" theory. I (sometimes) see what you mean especially when you are talking about boat, water, sunshine and 'calmness'.

I undestand that you are not talking about COE violation. I also 'beleive' that a Bessler-like device is possible. I need not to be convinced. I'm far from a skeptic. Actually I'm a skeptic fighter. I fight with my native language that is why my posts here are short (I whish I could be more fluent in English).

My question was not a "scientific" one but a mere "gramatical" and "semantical" one. I just wanted to get a synonym for "Lead out".

Best

Thanks for your clarification.  Note that since I could not find a better English Word than LEAD OUT, I "abused" it.  I deliberately use the incorrect English grammar of LEAD, LEAD and LEAD for present, past and future tense.  The correct grammar should be Lead, Led, Led.  That ?mistake? was pointed out by some of the steorn.com/forum members.

[ltseung888]

Thank you for your patience, Mr. Tseung.

Please, let's not split hairs.  You know what I mean.  Frankly, I do not care about CoE at this point.  I just want to know if the lead out theory dictates whether a mother pushing a child, or the desk toy I mentioned, or the simple pendulum clock is overunity. 

***The correct answer is
(1)   I now know that you are a lawyer and not a physicist.  So I am using layman scenario - When you Lead Out existing Gravitational Energy, it is like you are at the top of a hill with a huge water tank.  You use a bucket to get the water from the tank and pour it down the hill.  You LEAD OUT the potential energy of water with your muscle energy to get the water.  However, that is NOT the potential energy of the water coming down the hill.

(2) A mother pushing a child on a swing, the simple desktop toy and the pendulum are NOT overunity devices as they do not have a feedback mechanism to re-pulse the system.  Bill Mehess tried to do that with his Korean parts pendulum.  You can read more about his invention in this forum.

***
....

I take exception to this logic.  You seem to imply that a single pulse does nothing, while multiple pulses would accomplish the trick.  This makes no sense.  Under the lead out theory, even a single pulse will result in free energy.  More pulses may create more energy, but a single pulse should be enough.

*** I never imply that a single pulse does nothing.  The implication of Tpulse <<Toscillation is as follows:
The time of the pulse (Tpulse) is much shorter than the time of an oscillation (Toscillation). The COP =1.5 part occurs only during the time of Tpulse.  If the Toscillation is 100 times longer than Tpulse, the COP of the pulsed pendulum system as a whole is NOT 1.5. 

If the COP is zero for the rest of the period.  It is 1/100 of 1.5 or 0.015.  0.015 is much less than 1. 

If the COP is 1 (ideal machine) for the rest of the period.  It is 1 + 1/100 of 0.5 or 1.005.  If the COP is slightly less than 1 in reality, the total COP drops below 1.

Thus the Lee-Tseung theory demands higher pulse rates or longer pulse periods to increase the COP value.  One effective way to do it is via pulsed rotation rather than pulsed oscillation.

I am leaving the answer to your last part to Ms. Forever Yuen. She has just completed her school certificate examination in Physics. Her answer would be straightly from textbooks.

[Forever]

Mr .Tseung ask me to clarify the following concepts in Physics

*** .....but tension does not by itself create energy.  For example, if I am trying to lift a weight in the gym, a weight much too heavy for me, and I struggle and pull and tug with all my might, but fail to get the weight off the ground, I am exerting great tension on my arms, but there is no way to extract any energy from this.  I would actually have to move the weight in order to accomplish any work.  So your explanation is a little nonsensical.***

There are some elementary formulae in Physics that Tinu or other Physicists can confirm and clarify for you :

(1) Tension is a Force.  Force by itself is NOT energy.
(2) Force is a vector quantity (has direction).  In order for it to do Work, there must be Displacement.
(3) Displacement is NOT distance.  Displacement is also a vector quantity.
(4) In order for the Force to do Work, there must be Displacement in the direction of the Force.
(5) When Work is done, Energy is exchanged.  Both Work and Energy are scalar quantities. (No direction) Note that the product of two vector quantities becomes a scalar quantity.
(6) Tension in the pendulum string by itself does not imply Work done or Energy Exchange.  However, the pendulum swings to a different position.  This implies Displacement.  We can resolve this Displacement into vertical and horizontal components. (Vector arithmetic).
(7) We can also resolve the Tension (a Force) into vertical and horizontal components (Vector arithmetic).
( The product of Tension(vertical) x Displacement(vertical) represents the Work done or Energy exchange in the vertical direction.
(9) The product of Tension(horizontal) x Displacement(horizontal) represents the Work done or Energy exchange in the horizontal direction.
(10) The sum of ( and (9) represents the energy exchanged.

I hope that the above information clarifies the physics concept.