## Ideas for Applying ECE2 to Two Gyroscopes

These are good ideas by Horst, the key new advance in UFT367 to UFT370 is the implementation of code to allow the integration of simultaneous partial differential equations, resulting in a new and detailed knowledge about the motion of a single gyroscope. So the code could be implemented for any configuration of experimental interest. Bold g = – bold Q dot is a very interesting equation. The idea is to get a positive g that would exceed the negative g due to the earth.

Dear Agatha,

the Shipov experiment I had in mind is that of Fig. 24 in the overview article I sent over, see attached image. The rotation direction of both gyros seems to be unclear when compared with Sandy Kidd’s construction. We would have to investigate both possibilities which is no problem.

Meanwhile I am not sure if the simple construction of Shipov as shown in the figure will work, it may be an oversimplification. The device of Kidd (described in his patent application) is significantly more complicated. It is not clear to me why he changed the angle between the gyro axis by a “cam”. If the angle has to be different from 180 degrees, why did he choose such a small value, and is this value allowed to change during operation?

Thank you for hinting to your second device on your web page, two gyros on a scale. This seems indeed to be the most simple experiment. I will propose our group to start with this.

Concerning the explanation of the impact of the gyro on gravity: The simplest approach from view of ECE theory would be a comparison with electrodynamics. As you know there is a one-to-one correspondence between the laws of electrodynamics and mechanics. A gyro with rotating masses corresponds to a coil with a circulating current. If the coil is mechanically rotated, the associated vector potential is rotated too. Its field vector A becomes time-dependent, and an electric field E is induced according to the law

bold E = – bold A dot.

The same should hold for a gyro under enforced precession. The gravito-magnetic vector potential Q is rotated, leading to an additional acceleration

bold g = – bold Q dot.

This was my first idea for Shipov-like experiments. It is probably not suited to explain the weight loss of a gyro. I will further think about this. The resonance mechanism described in the latest notes is a candidate but relies on certain resonance conditions. The weight loss of the gyro seems not to require such a condition which indicates another mechanism.

Because to my holoday it will take at least two weeks until we can start any experiments here in Munich.

Best regards,

HorstAm 04.06.2017 um 03:40 schrieb Dr. Agatha Lorentz-Ferenstein, Ph.D.:

Gentlemen,In case you have

notnoticed by now,the SECOND, simpler,

Nobel Prizewinning

quantumgravityexperiment:is basically a much

simplerand technicallyeasierversionof the

Sandy Kidd’s deviceexperiment ( seebelow).Thank you for your attention,

Gentlemen.Dr. Bill Ferrier of Dundee University had this to say

aboutSandy Kidd’s device:

“ There is no doubt that thedevice does produce vertical lift.

Several modifications were then made at my suggestions

in order to disprove other possibilities of lift,

particularlyaerodynamiceffects.”

- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Taj4VA1L_vw
v=MmtOAfrGnw0- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OL_Gasok8xw
http://www.rexresearch.com/kidd/kidd.htm- https://beta.groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/caostheory/conversations/messages/14532
I am interested in theoretical

opinions of all scientists in our groupin respect to the

purported lift effectproduced by the Sandy Kidd’s device.In your opinion, is this lift a

genuine anomaly?

If so, how exactly yourUFT(ECE2) could explain it?

And I am NOT asking for any mathematical equations, please!! :))

All I need from you is a short and clear explanation from the standpoint

of general principles of physical phenomena involved :

According to our Quantum Antigravity Hypothesis,

the lift produced by the Sandy Kidd’s device (powered rotors)is a

genuine antigravity effect,exactly as understood

and predicted by our Hypothesis.I would even dare to say that it does constitute

an empirical proof of the validity

of ourQuantum Antigravity Hypothesis.Looking forward to hear from all of you, Gentlemen.

Agatha

No trackbacks yet.