I would like to let you know that my anti-gravity
experiments have
been successfully
replicated by
the Aerospace
Engineering Department at
the New
Sciences & Technologies
Faculty of the
University of Tehran in
the Islamic Republic of
Iran. I have developed complete quantum
anti-gravity hypothesis with
direct testable predictions
that are
simple, clear, easy, and
inexpensive.
As you
know, present-day quantum
gravity theories suffer
from too many mathematical
space dimensions, and from too
few conclusive
experimental results.
My
hypothesis is simple, clear,
and subject to easy
empirical verification. I
offer clear explanation of
the principles of quantum
gravity, and also precisely
describe how to perform
simple and inexpensive experiments
to verify it.
In order
to clearly understand
quantum anti-gravity, please
follow these 8 steps:
- Start
from this brief overview
— Quantum
Gravity in a Nutshell
- The
theoretical basis for
quantum gravity are the
Abraham’s equations of
the Abraham-Minkowski
controversy,
and their empirical
counterpart — the Abraham
force
- To
understand how the Biefeld-Brown
effect works, you need
to be clear where B-B
vectors point
— “up” or “down”
- The Biefeld-Brown
effect is
an instance of the
Abraham force.
- Study
the section about gyroscope’s
anomalous effect.
-
Please, study all the
material on THE
BOYD BUSHMAN EFFECT page
in order to appreciate
the potential complex
magnetic fields have for
shaping quantum gravity
interactions.
- Now,
you are ready to read
the
short introduction to
quantum gravity.
-
Perform two
simple experiments for
empirical verification.
The
following are the 10
“mysteries” that my
hypothesis sheds new light
upon:
-
The main prediction of
my hypothesis (2016) is
that anti-hydrogen
will anti-gravitate.
-
Gravitational waves mystery.
-
EmDrive mystery.
-
Solar mystery.
-
Mass mystery.
-
Bicycle
mystery.
-
Propeller
mystery.
-
Cloud
mystery.
-
Pioneer
mystery.
-
Missing
mystery.
I have
designed 4 progressively
more complex
experiments, and we have
successfully performed one
of them, the one of medium
difficulty,
which constitutes:
The
empirical discovery of
hitherto unknown physical
interaction between angular
momentum of a spinning
gyroscope and Earth’s
magnetic and electric
fields.
To perform
this experiment, we need a
gyroscope with a vertical
support, and magnetic and
electric shielding cages.
According
to my
hypothesis, there
will be a measurable time
difference between a freely
spinning gyroscope
inside, and outside the
cages. A gyroscope freely
spinning inside both cages
will come to rest in less
time than when spinning
outside them.
The
experiment was performed successfully
and was recorded in the
following two videos:
To have a
clear idea what is involved
in the experiment, please
take a closer look at the
above two videos first.
For the
experiment, we used the
following small and light
gyroscope at 10,000 rpm:
It would
be much better to use
a heavier gyro, because the
heavier the gyro, the
stronger the effect, at the
same rate of rpm.
The value
of angular velocity (rpm) is
important only insofar as to
generate sufficient angular
momentum to allow the
gyro to spin freely for a
longer time before it comes
to rest.
The
objective of the experiment
was to obtain two values of
the gyro’s run time:
-
Outside
the shielding;
-
Inside the
shielding.
In my
experiment, the two sample
values are, respectively:
-
55.54 seconds
-
51.87 seconds
There was
a 3.67 second
difference, which amounts
to 6.6%. The time
difference is directly
proportional to the
quality and quantity of electrostatic shielding
of the Faraday cage.
Applying the magnetic shielding
in addition to the electric
one would further increase
the time difference.
As you can
see in the video, it is
important that the gyro is
elevated by means of a
vertical support. Ideally,
gyro should start
spinning as close to a
vertical position as
possible, and also be able
to pass lower, while still
spinning, than its
horizontal position.
The reason
for this effect is that the
gyroscope inside the
cages will be spinning in reduced
strength of Earth’s
magnetic and electric
fields, which in turn
reduces the strength of the Biefeld-Brown
effect acting
upon it.
The gyroscope outside the
cages, spinning in the undiminished strength of Earth’s
magnetic and electric
fields, is subject to the
full influence of the Biefeld-Brown
effect that
causes the gyroscope to
resist Earth’s gravity pull,
which happens to be none
other than pure natural
antigravity effect.
OBJECTIONS
- All
conductors, like the
brass gyro, exhibit an
effective diamagnetism
when they experience a
changing magnetic
field. The Lorentz
force on electrons
causes them to circulate
around forming eddy
currents. The eddy
currents then produce an
induced magnetic field
that opposes the applied
field and resist the
conductor’s motion.
— That
is true for both, the gyro
spinning inside and outside
the Faraday cage in Earth’s
magnetic field. It does not
make any difference.
- But
the gyro’s induced
magnetic field will
generate eddy currents
in the Faraday cage and
the resultant magnetic
field will slow down
gyro’s spin (magnetic
breaking), and hence the
whole effect. It is
like dropping a magnet
down a copper pipe:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8dFFL8TDt2Q
—
The analogy in the video
applies, but only in
principle. Spinning
brass gyro is not a strong neodymium
magnet, and if, in
principle, it generates
any magnetic field, it is so
weak that it will not even
affect a needle of a
compass. As opposed to the
copper pipe in the video,
the enamel-coated copper
mesh Faraday cage has much
larger diameter (the
inverse-square law), so it
is enough to drop a strong neodymium
magnet down the Faraday cage
to see how much it would
slow down, if at all. As
you can see in the above
video, even few empty slits
in the copper pipe greatly
weaken the eddy currents,
this being the reason for
using enamel-coated copper
mesh. Diamagnetic
materials, like brass, or
copper, have a relative
magnetic permeability that
is less than or equal to 1,
and therefore a magnetic
susceptibility less than or
equal to 0, since
susceptibility is defined
as χv=μv−1. This means that
diamagnetic materials, in
principle, are repelled
by magnetic fields.
However, since diamagnetism
is such a weak property, its
effects are not observable
in everyday life. Moreover,
there is a big difference
between Faraday cage made of
solid copper, and one made
of enamel-coated copper
mesh. The magnetic field
induced in the gyro is weak,
because Earth’s magnetic
field is weak, so whatever
little eddy currents could
be induced by the gyro
in solid copper Faraday cage
will become irrelevant
in the enamel-coated copper
mesh Faraday cage, as you
can see in the following two
videos:
Even
though it is true that the
experiment, in principle, is
open to influences from
various phenomena, including
the Carnegie
curve, the overall
result is clearly well
beyond being attributed
exclusively to these other
phenomena.
To
completely eliminate
above objections, magnetic
shielding needs to be
applied in addition to the
Faraday cage, and the gyro
should be custom-made from a
material which does not
allow for eddy currents to
flow in it.
Naturally, I will be happy
to answer any questions that
you may have for
me regarding the theoretical
foundations
as well as replication
of the experiment.
With
respect and much gratitude,
I am
Sincerely yours,
Official probe is launched into Carillion
fat cat bosses who... 
Carillion makes last-ditch plea to banks
with £1.5billion... 
