The Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory

[Mr.Entropy]

(*** May be I should have used the word "periodically repeated" instead of the word "pulse" ***)

So, the first pulse does not add more energy that you put in.  What about the second pulse?  When does the free energy start?  How do the initial pulses change the system so that subsequent pulses suddenly become overunity events?

One of the qualifying conditions in the Lee-Tseung theory is that the Pulse Force must be applied at the right time (normally at resonance).  We quoted the case of the swing.  In order for it to swing high, we must push it at the appropriate time.  [... mistake deleted...]

I hope this explanation will clarify the ?required pulse at the right time? in the Lee-Tseung theory.

It's OK that timing is important, but "resonance" is not a time.  At what time can a pulse be applied to a pendulum so that you get more energy out than you put in?

[gaby de wilde]

(3) if you apply say pulses into a system such as a pendulum or a flywheel cylinder and if those pulses are in phase with the natural resonance of the apparatus, gavitational energy can be Lead Out.

Are you talking about the Schumann Resonance?

I've always liked this gn0sis video.
schumann resonance

[shruggedatlas]

(*** May be I should have used the word "periodically repeated" instead of the word "pulse" ***)

So, the first pulse does not add more energy that you put in.  What about the second pulse?  When does the free energy start?  How do the initial pulses change the system so that subsequent pulses suddenly become overunity events?

One of the qualifying conditions in the Lee-Tseung theory is that the Pulse Force must be applied at the right time (normally at resonance).  We quoted the case of the swing.  In order for it to swing high, we must push it at the appropriate time.  [... mistake deleted...]

I hope this explanation will clarify the ?required pulse at the right time? in the Lee-Tseung theory.

It's OK that timing is important, but "resonance" is not a time.  At what time can a pulse be applied to a pendulum so that you get more energy out than you put in?

I think Tseung is playing games.  He keeps narrowing the definition, making it harder to disprove the theory.  With the new narrow definition, he now has an out to just about any demonstration.  The pat answer in case of failure will be that the pulse was not applied at the appropriate time, or not at resonance, or something like that.  Even the punching bag scenario becomes slippery.  If another boxer does not notice this phenomenon - oops, didn't push the bag correctly.

Franky, I do not understand why the motion state of the pendulum matters to the Lead Out equation.  What difference does it make whether one of the pendulms is stopped?  The tension of the string is still there to "lead out" gravitational force, just like it is there during "resonance" or when the pendulum is moving forward or whatever.  I understand that a force applied against on object which is moving towards it is unlikely to generate a perpetual motion situation, but energy should still be "lead out", and we should notice an overall energy gain.

Moreover, there are many instances in modern technology where this Lead Out theory, if true, would have already lead engineers to develop overunity devices.  For example, take the internal combustion engine.  The piston is basically a modified pendulum.  I have attached a drawing, though I am sure you all are familiar.  With the thousands (millions?) of manhours spent on perfecting the hybrid engine (Prius, etc.), and all the effort made to convert mechanical enegry to electrical and vice versa, don't you think someone would have observed and said "Gee, when the spark ignites and the piston is on the way down, we get alot more energy that way - more than we put in.  Screw gasoline; maybe if we just hook the battery up to the engine and make it push the pistons, we have enough power to recharge the battery PLUS move the car."  It is inconceivable that with the meticulous testing that has been done on engines over decades, that something like this could have been missed.  I cannot believe I have wasted time analyzing this. 

This leads me to conclude that the Lead Out theory is either a con (note that Tseung has asked for a million dollars in the past), or just plain delusion.

And Mr. Tseung, please stop referring to the "hundreds of posts" of yours in the Steorn forum.  This was not a genuine discussion.  This was a thread where you took on no less than 8 different personas and basically held a discussion with yourself.  Why you made it so obvious by signing off with your patented "Lead Out" phrases, I cannot fathom.  Here is the thread:

http://www.steorn.com/forum/comments.php?DiscussionID=43821

[hansvonlieven]

Not to mention the flywheel in every vehicle shrugged atlas :-)

Hans von Lieven

[ashtweth_nihilisti]

Hi Lawrence thanks for that information I have totally changed the web page and added new informaiton.

I have also forwarded to Patrick Kelly, As a result of  the time needed here to get to technical stuff due to what Jeff describes, please contact me via Email in future.

regards
Ashtweth