Cosmic Energy Electricity Generators

[Fletcher]

I had a friend visiting me from Hong Kong the last few weeks. He is both smart & perceptive as a corporate communications guy in a large American Corporate. He also happens to have an interest in PM, gravity wheels etc. I told him about this thread. When he gets back to HK in about 2 weeks he just might go look up Mr Lucky 888, his machines & inventors & let us know what he finds, if anything.

[ltseung888]

To Fletcher,

Make sure he has my email ltseung@hotmail.com and my phone (852) 9281 9945.

Tell him to bring his camera with him and if he is computer competent, his PC as well. He is welcome to download whatever open information he desires.

Remember the date - Aug 3, 2006. If he visits me before that, I shall ask him to keep the secret until that day.

[Fletcher]

I'll pass that on to him & he can decide what he wants to do from there, if anything.

[Jon J Hutton]

Mr. Tseung

What exactly are you going to show us the 3rd of Aug.

A picture of a working wheel.

Drawings.

A paper on the theory.

A video, all can see.

An engineering blueprint of how to make it.

All the above.

Each has their own idea of what proof it would take to solve the wheel.....who will you cater to.

JJH

[graham]

Maybe I missed it but is the date "Aug 3rd" a significant factor , or would the 2nd or 4th do just as well ??

We have had "launch" dates from others before but sadly nothing special occurred except that the date was pushed back.

Graham

[ken_behrendt]

Graham...

I think that he picked August 3rd because it is supposed to be exactly one month after he first posted on this board. Maybe he is into numerology or something and somehow considers this lucky.


ken

[graham]

OK Ken thanks, that seems to explain it ,thankyou. I guess I shall have to wait with bated breath until the secret is finally revealed.
I'm glad it will all be over soon and we will then all be able to get on with our lives, sans the quest.

Graham

[LustInBlack]

Heh I'll be back with the local drama in august then . .

[ltseung888]

Hello Lawrence Tseung and Lee Cheung Kin,

I find it nice that someone else is now on my side. I have mathematical proof ready since November 2003. I have studied computer science so I am able to follow your mathematics. I also have the mechanical device built. It generates its energy with its own swinging. I transformed the gravity wheel to a centrifugal device, and so the over unity is unlimited, in the border of material strength. It is a dependency of swinging frequency and mass.

Best regards

Georg Kuenstler

Dear Mr. Kuenstier,

We are glad that some one in the group actually understood our mathematics. The Swinging Pendulum has been proven to be an over unity device of 1.5. The changing of the Swing to a Rotational Device will result in the wheel or cylinder with greatly increased efficiency – rotational speed, mass, radius and matching pulse force will be important factors.

We are definitely interested in your further transforming the gravity wheel to a centrifugal device.

Since we shall show our version of the Bessler Wheel to the group on Aug 3, 2006, we do not mind sending it a few days early to you (See the attached file). You can be one of our key supporters in the inevitable heated discussions. Please keep the secret until Aug 3.

Lawrence Tseung and Lee Cheung Kin

[ltseung888]

To Kuenstier,

I have now reviewed your wheel posted at this forum.

The particular figure shown below should work in principle but is unnecessarily complicated.

Remember our mathematics - the Swing with the push is already an over unity device of COU 1.5. The Cylinder with the pulse force is just a bunch of "Swings in 360 degree rotation".

You already have the generator in 1. That is the pulse force. Why not just extract energy from the central axle 2. The thick walled cylinder 3 already acts as the gravity energy extraction device. Forget about 4 totally.

Would such a design be closer to your "Centrifugal device"?

[jimmyjj]

Hello Lawrence Tseung and Lee Cheung Kin

I am looking forward to the release of your invention.

For electricity i am currently using a chinese GMC generator with a rated outputof approximately 2000 watts. which i run of a nighttime to charge a battery bank. the generator retails here in Australia for $AU600.

I wonder if your device would be suitable for home power generation for those of us not on an electricity grid.

If so how much do you envisage these units would cost?

and how long until they would be released for public sale?

Thankyou and goodluck.

Jimmyjj

[ltseung888]

The big day Aug 3 is less than a week away. The file providing full information is ready. It is being circulated internally for comments. We expect the coming discussion will be heated.

Make sure that you check the mathematics that prove the Swing with a Pulse Force is an Over Unity Device with COU=1.5.

One of the latest suggestion is shown in the following figure. You can comment on it first.

The rotation of the large wheel is clockwise. The rotations of the many small wheels inside are anti-clockwise. The anti-clockwise rotations of the small wheels provide friction as part of the Pulse Force. The unbalanced wheel provides additional Pulse Force.

This is a variation of the unbalanced or overbalanced wheel using some inner motion. Is it unnecessarily complicated?

[ltseung888]

To John Collins

Posted: Sat Jul 29, 2006 11:06 am Post subject: Gravity as a conservative force

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I rushed this a bit but I hope my meaning is clear.

Gravity as a conservative force.

Take a weight on a wheel as starting from the point of highest gravitational potential and allow it to fall, spinning the wheel in the process, and it returns to its starting point of highest gravitational potential. We are taught that this cannot happen under any circumstances. Why not? Gravity is a conservative force. What does that mean?

Weight on a wheel should be analyzed as a Pendulum. See figure.

The Pendulum is proven to be an Over Unity Device of 1.5. The weighted wheel should follow the same mathematically logic.

In other words, the analysis of the weighted wheel, unbalanced wheel or overbalanced wheel is essentially the analysis of the Pendulum!

[ken_behrendt]

Mr. Tseung...

The mechanism you show in unbalance8.jpg is physically impossible. If the small wheels are eccentrically mounted to the ends of the arms carrying them, then these small wheels would not be able to remain in contact with the rim of the larger wheel. I'm assuming, of course, that the large outer rim rotates independently of the axle or, perhaps, is somehow connected to it via a system of gears.


ken

[ltseung888]

To ken_behrendt,

Thank you for your comments on unbalance8.jpg.

See unbalance8a.jpg for the more correct diagram. I assumed the Larger Wheel was supported by separate spokes(1). The small wheels were mounted on the same axle with independent movement.

John Collin's discussion of the weighted wheel gave the much needed connection. The analysis of the weighted, unbalanced or overbalanced wheel is essentially the analysis of the Pendulum.

I personally do not like the overbalanced wheel with internal movements. I believe such internal movements are not necessary and tend to make the final machine less reliable. Unbalance8a.jpg is definitely NOT my preferred design. It was included as part of the juicy discussion (file to be posted on Aug 3).