Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Custom Search

[chrisC]

@ TopGun:

I am sorry to see that you still do not get it.  You are missing a fundamental part of all this.  Go ahead and suspend this in the air so it is free swinging and see what happens.  You won't because you already know.  Everyone already knows.  As I said before, unless you are planning to take the table with you into space, this will not work as a propulsion device.  I really wish it would, but, it won't.

Respectfully,

Bill

That could easily explain why he can't use a drill! Even simple common sense is exceeding difficult for this Top Turkey to understand!

cheers
chrisC

[utilitarian]

In the next part, we need to introduce the concept of elastic and inelastic collisions.

In Physics, eleastic collision refers to the situation where there is no loss of kinetic energy - nothing is converted into heat or sound.  The object and the wall will not deform.  The solid surface is an approximation.  On hitting the surface, the velocity is reversed.  There is a change of momentum of the magnet from mv to -mv or (mv-(-mv)).  The value is thus 2mv.  The force F1 is given by the rate of change of momentum.  The value is 2mv/t1.  t1 is made to be as short as possible so that F1 is as large as possible.

This part can be considered alone.  Thus F1 can be determined.

In Physics, inelastic collision refers to the situation where there is loss of kinetic energy - much of it is converted into heat, sound or deformation.  The padded surface is an approximation.  On hitting the padded surface, the velocity is also reverse but its value will be much less (v1).  The value is (mv -(-mv1) or m(v+v1).  Since v1 is less than v, the change in momentum is less than 2 mv.  This value is less than the solid surface case.  The force F2 is the rate of change of momentum.  The valude is m(v+v1)/t2.  t2 is made to be as long as possible so that F2 is as small as possible.

The trick is to have the largest difference between F1 and F2.  This is the design principle.  The Bull and Naudin devices did not follow the above design principle and are thus useless devices.

The analysis contains a fundamental error.  You are comparing average forces, but those are not at issue.  Momentum is still conserved, and the center of mass in the closed system will not move.

On the padded side, you forget to multiply the average force by the time the force is applied.  You cannot cheat the system.  F1*t1 will equal F2*t2.  You simply look at the average force on the padded side, and of course that will be lower.  But that does not matter in the slightest.  The lower F2, the higher t2 needs to be - there is no way around it - and the equation will balance.

I suspect you know all this, and just attempting to play a trick on the reader, focusing on the fact that kinetic energy is not conserved.  That is irrelevant.  In a complicated scenario like this, with elastic and inelastic collisions, it is true that kinetic energy is not conserved, but momentum always is, and that is why your device cannot move its center of mass in a frictionless environment.

The only reason the object in the experiment moves is that it includes the table (and the building and the planet Earth) in its closed system.  Once the table is removed from the system, the result will be quite different.

[Top Gun]

Man-made flying saucers are already flying and sighted by many.

They are engine driven rather than aerodynamically driven.  Thus they can fly in outer space; make sharp turns; hover; vertical take-off and land etc..

The principle used is propulsion system from unbalanced forces generated from within.

Possible techniques to create unbalanced forces include:
(1) Unbalanced padding
(2) Unbalanced pulsing
(3) Rotational Systems using centripetal forces
(4) Flux change Systems
(5) Other undisclosed techniques

We need to look for systems that can be repeated rapidly.

[TinselKoala]

There you go again.

There is no evidence for any of your statements.
(Well, except for the "sightings" part---unfortunately reports of "sightings" are just that: reports of sightings. Nothing more, and proof of nothing.)

What you need to look for, is actual evidence that the LTLOT is correct. So far, it has failed every scientific test proposed.

Please stop making claims for which you have no evidence.

[Top Gun]

Mr. Tong Po Chi modified Experiment001 as shown.

What do you think is the outcome of the Experiment?

[Top Gun]

Mr. Tong did the improvement as shown in the figure.

He is absolutely certain that he can:
(1) Produce enough force for the cylinder to jump vertically even a couple of meters.
(2) The force produced will be sufficient to carry a small battery to jump up together.
(3) The Pulse strength and rate can be adjusted to be in many pulses per minute.

All the elements of producing a flying saucer prototype is available.

If the Lee Tseung theory that unbalanced forces can be produced from within a system, a prototype can be developed to fly, hover, move left and right, vertical take off and land.

Lee Cheung Kin and team took 6 months to get a working prototype.  Mr. Tong took less than 3 weeks to come up with a possible theme.  I am sure other possible ones will emerge shortly from China.  (The USA scientists may believe the non-physicist forum members here.)

[TinselKoala]

What you have outlined above is not an attempt at falsification, it is an attempt at verification.

Let me tell you what I mean. I have here a foolproof black cat detector. It only responds to black cats, and nothing else. How will we test it?

Your experiment is equivalent to testing my detector by showing it a black cat. When it lights up, you would say my detector is proven.

However, the correct way to test the detector is to present it with something OTHER than a black cat, and see if it lights up. If it does, it really isn't a black cat detector, is it, even though it passed YOUR test.

Now, on to the above experiment.

When the moveable magnet strikes the top wall, of course the assembly will "jump" up--assuming the other parts are light enough and the magnet strikes with sufficient force.
When the electromagnet pulses, though, the table experiences a reaction force.
This means, if the apparatus were suspended in space, at the moment the electromagnet is triggered, the housing and electromagnet will be pushed downward at the same time, and with equal momentum, as the moveable magnet is pushed upward. Then, when the moveable magnet hits the top wall, there is another, symmetrical wrt momentum, interaction. The net motion of the center of mass is zero.

Please ask Mr. Tong to suspend the device as a pendulum and make it sustain a horizontal displacement. Or explain what happens in the vertical orientation when there isn't a table to push against.

[TinselKoala]

And of course your next statement is complete garbage.
In the first place, all the motion of the device comes from reaction against a substrate. I don't care how powerful the pulses are or how light the batteries are. It won't jump unless it pushes off of something!!

WHY in the world don't you show a test of this simple proposal?
A proper frictonless surface for the horizontal version.
A pendulum or hover test of the vertical version.
 

Show such a demo, or please STFU about the non-existent flying saucer.

[TinselKoala]

And, finally for now, does anyone notice that the horizontal version above, is IDENTICAL to one that I showed in my video, tested as a pendulum, that did NOT show motion of the center of mass?

[Top Gun]

And, finally for now, does anyone notice that the horizontal version above, is IDENTICAL to one that I showed in my video, tested as a pendulum, that did NOT show motion of the center of mass?

Your set up could not even do the simple Experiment001.

Your solenoid could not even repel the magnet away.  Please do Experiment001 correctly.

How can it be identical???

[chrisC]

Man-made flying saucers are already flying and sighted by many.

.....

Of course, how stupid of us not to notice those UFO sighted by many are actually thought incarnations of your unproven theories. Well, what can we say, your a genius Tseung!

So clever, you can't even understand your own delusions and expect us to believe in your unsubstantiated crap. You're not Chairman Mao and you're not living in the 1930's in China. Get over it!

cheers
chrisC

[Pirate88179]

TopGun:

If what you said in your above post were true, and it isn't, a kid on a pogo stick would fly off into deep space.  He only goes up because he has the earth to push off against.  It is exactly the same with your vertical tube on the table. If you can't/ won't see this, neither I, nor anyone else, can help you.

Bill

[utilitarian]

And of course your next statement is complete garbage.
In the first place, all the motion of the device comes from reaction against a substrate. I don't care how powerful the pulses are or how light the batteries are. It won't jump unless it pushes off of something!!

WHY in the world don't you show a test of this simple proposal?
A proper frictonless surface for the horizontal version.
A pendulum or hover test of the vertical version.
 

Show such a demo, or please STFU about the non-existent flying saucer.

I feel your frustration, and I cannot believe I am still involved in this debate.  Just remember, you are dealing with a liar.  Not just someone who is mistaken about something, but someone who actively lies to preserve the point of view.  This is a completely different animal than what you normally see from a garage inventor.

[Top Gun]

The conclusive conceptual Experiment in the Experiment001 series.

In the attached diagram, M an N are Coil type (Ex001Explain04) devices.  They are physically joined together.  M and N are built strong enough that any one can jump with a large enough force to carry both to a few meters.  There is no need to carry the battery and other parts up at this stage.

(1)   M is started.  It will carry both M and N upwards.
(2)   While in the upward movement, N is started.
(3)   If the joined M and N device moves upwards a little more, the flying saucer prototype can be built.

The successful result essentially confirms the Lee-Tseung statement that an unbalanced force for propulsion can be generated from within.  One can argue that M can jump up because of the ground.  There is no ground for N to react against.

If N can increase the upward motion, the rest is engineering and tuning.

Tinselkoala, please build Experiment001 or to simplify things a little bit, build the Ex001explain04 set up.  You must be able to repel the magnet away from your electromagnet with sufficient momentum before any discussions or actions are meaningful.  Email Lawrence Tseung at ltseung@hotmail.com and he will put you in touch directly with Mr. Tong Po Chi so that he can help you to do the right setup.

If you can do Ex001Explain06 yourself, there could be no cheating.  I shall give you plenty of time to do it.  I shall not post the Tong results or videos until you have tried.

[TinselKoala]

Sorry. The explain004 has zero chance of working as you describe.

And I will not build it for you. Why not? Because if I do, and a null result occurs, you will once again weasel out by handwaving and modifying the necessary conditions of the experiment.

This is why, in scientific research, it is important to do several things at the outset:

-Formulate a clear statement of the overarching theory
-Use that theory to make one or more testable, falsifiable hypotheses
-Operationalize the constructs involved: this means to define terms and assign values to variables
-Decide on precise criteria for evaluating and interpreting results and data

When these preliminary tasks are accomplished, then one may proceed to:

-Perform experiments in an attempt to FALSIFY an hypothesis
-Use the results from an honest intellectual and mathematical evaluation of results to either a) reject the hypothesis and hence the overarching theory, or b)  fail to reject  the hypothesis and use the results to expand the theory and/or generate new falsifiable hypotheses

Now, the only way that I would even consider performing explain004 for you, is if you agree, beforehand, on the exact construction details of the device and the energizing apparatus AND you agree, in front of your ancestors and this forum, that if the experiment FAILS to perform as you predict above, it will be a conclusive FALSIFICATION of the Lee-Tseung Lead-Out Theory, and you will not make unsupported claims about it in the future.

I insist on these conditions, because I am perfectly willing to accept the converse conditions. If the device, built to your exact specifications, does indeed hover and sustain flight as you describe above, I will publicly acknowledge your superior understanding and the efficacy of the LTLOT, while eating my hat, and I will give up my criticisms of you and the LTLOT.