TWO Nobel Prize winning experiments
If my hypothesis is correct, the following simple experiment could potentially help you win US $ 1.1 million, and a Nobel Prize in Physics for:
The empirical discovery of hitherto unknown physical interaction between angular momentum of a spinning gyroscope and Earth’s magnetic and electric fields.
All we need to perform this Nobel Prize winning experiment is a gyroscope with a vertical support, and a Faraday cage.
According to my hypothesis, there will be a measurable time difference between a freely spinning gyroscope inside, and outside the Faraday cage.
A gyroscope freely spinning inside a Faraday cage will come to rest in less time than when spinning outside it.
The reason for this effect is that the gyroscope inside a Faraday cage will be spinning in the absence of Earth’s magnetic and electric fields.
The gyroscope spinning outside the cage in the presence of Earth’s magnetic and electric fields is subject to the influence of the Biefeld-Brown effect (a macro-scale semi-equivalent of the Minkowski-Feigel effect) that causes the gyroscope to resist the attraction of Earth’s gravity, which happens to be none other than pure natural antigravity effect.
” Thanks for your quantum antigravity primer. Your thought process is very much along the lines of Dr. James Woodward in regards to spacetime, a.k.a. the cosmological gravitational and inertial field being the seat of inertia, and Dr. Harold “Sonny” White’s quantum vacuum conjecture that equates spacetime with de Broglie’s version of the quantum vacuum. And then, there are: Paul March’s propellantless propulsion, the MLT – Mach-Lorentz Thruster (MLT photo), and Dr. Brandenburg’s rough GEM conjecture as well. Find attached the Brandenburg and Murad paper I was referring to, with particular attention to the controlled gravity paper, pages 16 to 19 concerning the rotorless gyro experiment.”
— NASA employee at the Advanced Propulsion Physics Laboratory, EAGLEWORKS
“ Scientific discovery consists of seeing what everybody has seen, and thinking what nobody else has thought. Scientific discovery must be, by definition, at variance with existing knowledge. During my lifetime, I made two. Both were rejected offhand by the Popes of that field of science.”
— Nobel Prize Laureate, 1937
We have two experimental conditions for the spinning gyro:
- OUTSIDE the Faraday cage;
- INSIDE the Faraday cage (and under the magnetic shielding).
The measured time difference will be due to the lack of Earth’s electric field inside the cage, and also due to a weaker Earth’s magnetic field under the magnetic shielding.
Considering the intensity (upto 65 micro-Tesla) and the direction of Earth’s magnetic field lines (compass), we could try to perform the experiment under one additional condition.
OUTSIDE the Faraday cage, we could increase the strength of Earth’s magnetic field by placing the spinning gyro between two strong neodymium magnets which will be aligned with Earth’s magnetic lines polarization.
According to my hypothesis, this should strengthen the anti-gravity effect and therefore increase the time needed for the gyro to come to rest. This would give us 3 results:
- LONGEST measured time will be when gyro is outside the cage and between the two magnets;
- MEDIUM measured time will be when gyro is simply alone outside the cage;
- SHORTEST measured time will be when gyro is inside the cage and under the magnetic shielding.
I also described THE SECOND, simpler, Nobel Prize winning experiment at the bottom of this page.
I noticed a problem in the proposed experiment. While it is true that a Faraday cage will shield Earth’s electric field, it will not shield its magnetic field. A possible solution to this problem could be using two test shields with significant differences in their magnetic permeability. Sincerely, H.
Dear H., thank you for pointing out the problem, and thank you for suggesting the solution to it. Much appreciated. According to the Minkowski-Feigel effect, in order for a spinning gyroscope to antigravitate, it needs to spin inside magnetic and electric fields which lines should ideally be perpendicular. If we are lucky, then eliminating the influence of Earth’s electric field inside a Faraday cage could possibly be enough to detect the time difference between gyroscope coming to rest inside and outside of a Faraday cage. Worth trying. Nothing to lose, and possibly a Nobel Prize in Physics to gain.
If you are going to perform similar kinds of experiments to these in the following video in order to demonstrate the nonexistence of any antigravity effect, then it clearly indicates that you do not understand the principles of the Experimental Quantum Antigravity Hypothesis.
THE SECOND, simpler, Nobel Prize winning experiment
If my hypothesis is correct, the following, even simpler experiment, will help you win a Nobel Prize in Physics:
TWO MOTIONLESS GYROS IN BALANCE :
TO ELIMINATE ANY POSSIBILITY OF AERODYNAMIC EFFECTS, BOTH GYROS MAY BE ENCLOSED IN NON-METALLIC CONTAINERS, WHICH SHOULD NOT DIMINISH THE ANTIGRAVITY EFFECT.
THE SPINNING GYRO (WITH THE HORIZONTAL SPIN AXIS) WILL ANTIGRAVITATE :
To be more realistic, and also more empirically precise, we need to perform the above experiment in slightly different way than it seems to be implied by the above illustrations.
The two gyros hang in balance, motionless. By hand, let’s raise one motionless gyro, and let it come down freely. It will oscillate before it comes back to motionless balance again in due time.
Now, let’s repeat it, this time raising a spinning gyro. It will freely come down, but slower. It will take more time due to a little bit of antigravity effect it will generate. This will decrease the frequency of its oscillations before it comes back to the motionless balance again. Perhaps the mean of the amplitude might be slightly shifted upward from the motionless balance level?
It would be interesting to check if the direction of spin has influence on the results. It should not have any.
The reason why the spinning gyro (with the horizontal spin axis) might not take off and antigravitate in a spectacular fashion, as it was suggested by the above illustrations, is that its angular velocity (and angular momentum) will start to instantly decelerate upon releasing it at the motionless balance level.
Then again, it may as well raise, depending on how strong its angular momentum is when it is released at the level of the motionless balance.
If instead of a gyro we would use a rotor with a constant angular velocity (and angular momentum), the spinning rotor would slowly raise (antigravitate) at a constant rate. For the rotor to accelerate its antigravitating movement, we would need to accelerate its angular velocity (and angular momentum).
The spinning gyro (with the horizontal spin axis), should be suspended on the balance-scale in the way that will prevent it from precessing (or rotating), and the gyro should be allowed a degree of freedom to naturally hang horizontally at all times, even when it goes up, or down. The balance-scale should be allowed to move only up, or down. These conditions could be pretty much self-evident from looking at the very primitive graphics that were used above to illustrate the experiment.
What if we repeat this experiment with both gyros having their axis of spin oriented vertically, instead of horizontally? What if one gyro is spinning horizontally, and the other one is spinning vertically? For the above two options we can try each direction of spin, too.
Experimenting with rotors is a bit more difficult, especially for the reason that should they happen to be electrically powered, this could potentially introduce electromagnetic field which in turn could interfere with Earth’s magnetic and electric fields in an unpredictable manner. In this experiment, the natural antigravity effect is the result of a horizontally oriented angular momentum interacting with Earth’s perpendicular magnetic and electric fields, as per the Minkowski-Feigel effect.