Previous AIAS / UPITEC Work on Biefeld Brown and Laithwaite

Please see the blog of on the following dates:

1) Friday 29th August 2008: I discussed the Laithwaite experiment and the disgraceful treatment he received from the dogmatists – his contemporaries. This was a grave miscarriage of justice, later righted to some extent by NASA. Our recent UFT papers on the gyroscope (UFT367 to UFT370) go far beyond that discussion using numerical integration by coauthor Horst Eckardt of relevant differential equations, giving the best theoretical insight achieved to date into the Laithwaite effect. We achieved this with conservation of energy / momentum, removing a major theoretical obstacle, Laithwaite’s claim of violation of conservation of momentum. AIAS Fellow Michael Jackson easily replicated the Laithwaite effect at his home in Texas. There are videos on the blog showing his experiment, and replications.

2) 1st June 2008: I discuss the fact that NASA had claimed to disprove the Biefeld Brown effect by using a high vacuum apparatus to remove ion wind artifact. I also discussed the fact that the Munich group has observed a decrease in weight by rapidly spinning a disk on a weighing machine. Removal of artifact is of course ultra important. This experiment seems to bear a resemblance to the Faraday disk generator (UFT43, a hugely popular paper). A large percentage of the UFT papers are now classics by any standard, some like UFT88 have been read an estimated one hundred thousand times, at the best universities, institutes and similar.

We are now in a far better position to understand these effects. I think that the Faraday cage experiment should be carried out in a high vacuum and a thorough literature search carried out initially.

In a message dated 24/05/2017 03:40:14 GMT Daylight Time, writes:

On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 3:18 AM, <EMyrone> wrote:

Dear Siggi, These plans look very promising. This cc group is the group of scientists with whom I usually correspond, it has been a stable group for well over a decade.

Dear Dr. Evans, (Ladies?) and Gentlemen,

Thank you very much for your message (below).

I am a personal secretary to Siegfried Wolfram, and as such
have his full authorization to communicate on his behalf,
due to his longstanding chronic medical conditions.

To avoid excessive amount of messages within our group
and any unnecessary confusion that may result from it,
I’d like to suggest that we try to address one, or two issues
at a time, in order of priority. There is no pressure,
nor any urgency from our side, therefore let’s proceed
in a relaxed and unhurried manner.

Again, we are very grateful to you for accepting our
humble invitation, and for your interest in our mutual
scientific, as well as potential commercial cooperation.

Our priority are the “Two Simple Gyroscope Experiments”

If these simple experiments do not produce the results
that were predicted by the quantum gravity hypothesis,
then there will not be much left to discuss. Therefore,
I am interested in theoretical opinions of all scientists in our group
in respect to the above two proposed experiments.

As a possible next step, I would hope that Dr. Horst Eckardt
and his München Group would be interested in performing
these experiments.

As Siggi wrote in his message (below), our friend, an electrical engineer,

has started working on the first experiment involving magnetic
and electric shielding of a spinning gyro. Should the preliminary results
be promising enough, we plan to submit them to GÖDE-Stiftung
in Germany for possible further independent examination:


However, Siggi also suggested to Myrone the following option:

“Dear Myrone, what I would like to propose to you
is that you [ Dr. Eckardt ] do your experiment,
and I do mine, we keep it secret for the time being,
and once we both have our respective results, only then
will we exchange them between us for comparison,
and possible future experimental refinement.”

There is one last issue that I would like to address and clarify.

” I could certainly work on the theory, using the ECE2 field
equations of gravitation and electromagnetism,
and Horst Eckardt can apply computer algebra.
This experiment is well worth trying,
and recently
we have developed gyroscope theory in some UFT papers.
[…] Your project looks to be an adaptation of the gyorscope
problems addressed recently in the UFT series,
so the gravitational and electrodynamic field equations
of ECE2 could be used in combination.
[…] I will think about the Faraday cage experiment shortly,
using the fact that the ECE2 field equations of gravitation
and electromagnetism have the same structure.”

We are far from any petty pseudo-scientific theoretical, or more accurately,
dogmatic, ideological, and metaphysical competitions.

What we are primarily concerned with is the working antigravity technology.

” If the experiments hold up, and there is absolutely no doubt in my mind that they will,
the complete mathematical description of quantum antigravity will slowly come later,
in due time, in a fashion similar to Faraday-Maxwell developments. After all,
Thomas Edison didn’t need all the math of quantum mechanics, or of Einstein’s
photoelectric effect, or of de Broglie’s wave–particle duality to make his lightbulb work.”

Should our two experiments constitute the empirical proof of,

and work exactly as described by the ECE2 and the UFT field equations,

then that would be the Great News worth celebrating together.

However, our two simple experiments originated as a direct
implication of the quantum antigravity hypothesis.

The quantum antigravity hypothesis does not, explicitly or implicitly,

presupposes nor denies the possible existence of the Aether,
GTR’s spacetime, Zero-Point Energy field, nor any other similar
physical entities, or phenomena (except Dark Matter and Dark Energy).

It has been our conjecture that

“Quantum gravity and quantum antigravity are essentially not so much different
from electromagnetism. This would explain the reason why there has not been
a successful unification of Einstenian gravity with electromagnetism.
Well, it is simply impossible to unify electromagnetism, or quantum mechanics,
with gravity, when gravity is not properly understood.”

Our hypothesis is based on the Minkowski-Feigel quantum effect,

and on its macro-scale semi-equivalent, the Biefeld-Brown effect.

From this basis, quantum gravity/antigravity forces are postulated
to be the result of hitherto unknown physical interaction between any kind
of angular momentum, particularly the angular momenta of elementary particles,
and magnetic and electric fields. This interaction is believed, in essence,
to constitute the quantum nature of gravity, and antigravity.

The above, of course, is still far away from anything close to
a complete theory of quantum gravity. We suspect the existence of,
and hope for further discovering the connection between the above,
and the so-called “virtual Zero-Point Energy quantum field”,
or, in other words, the Energy from Spacetime (ES).

And here comes in our warm and friendly request to Dr. Evans.

Would you be so kind, and in addition to applying the ECE2
and the UFT field equations of gravitation and electromagnetism
to our two simple experiments, also be willing to consider an alternative
mathematical description for them from the perspective
of the Minkowski-Feigel quantum effect, and its macro-scale
semi-equivalent, the Biefeld-Brown effect

I realize that it might be a somewhat tricky and risky request,
as it could potentially result in a new, rival theory to your ECE2 and UFT.

Or, perhaps, such attempt could potentially enhance and extend
the ECE2 and the UFT in a way that would finally put an end
to the decades long quest for the one and only, true,
ultimate theory of quantum gravity.

Shall we take a risk, and find out?

Please, let us know.

Thank you very much.



The way we usually proceed is that if anything is to be kept confidential between two or three recipients, it is marked “confidential”, but otherwise it is copied to this working group of scientists. They are mainly AIAS / UPITEC Fellows and some are full professors. Being a Civil List Pensioner appointed directly by the Head of State, Queen Elizabeth, I have encountered a lot of personal hostility for more than twenty years because of my advocacy of new ideas on energy from spacetime and counter gravitation, but it has had no effect on progress. This personal hostility is wholly ineffective and is countered by a huge amount of interest in and, twenty two million hits since 2002. I would say that ECE theory is now the leading theory of physics. The Muenich group is an excellent one, and is also self critical. It replicated the Osamu Ide circuit in UFT364. I am thinking at present of adopting the UFT319 paper for your idea about the Faraday cage. Dr. Horst Eckardt and I usually co author papers, I develop the initial ideas, do the preliminary calculations and he adds his own ideas, uses Maxima software for computer algebra, and checks all my notes. The end result is huge international interest, indicating complete international confidence in our work. Actual intellectual criticism of ECE was always negligible and has now stopped completely. I can see this from accurate computer feedback, what I call “scientometrics”. The hostility takes the form of trolling, which is a criminal offence under most laws. Trolling is not science at all as you know. I have taken legal advice about the trolls, they are criminals in legal opinon, so our policy is to ignore them. The professional attitude towards counter gravitation and energy from spacetime has changed completely since I was appointed a Pensioner in 2005 on the advice of the Prime Minister. At that time these subjects were anathema, now there are many patents. We produced the first coherent theory of the effects. I will certainly read your website references with interest. Horst Eckardt is very capable and diligent, and we have produced several hundred papers and books in co authorship, sometime also with Douglas Lindstrom and others. The criminal trolls usually follow and mutilate every posting on my blog on, so I post only what I wish them to see, so more and more evidence is built up against them. Their aim is to try to prevent funding, but they are well known to the police and may well be charged one day. That kind of opposition is marginal, and not scientific at all. In my opinion it is the clear and urgent duty of society to get rid of trolls, they can cause great harm to innocent people and they have driven a few young people to suicide. A troll website is passive, and is useless unless people are foolish enough to read the stuff. It is indicative of a pronounced sadistic and paranoid psychosis, dominated by sadism. On the purely scientific level, things have progressed at a tremendous pace, and could not be better.


In a message dated 22/05/2017 22:08:36 GMT Daylight Time, quantumantigravity writes:

” It is well known that I have encountered hostility of a personal nature

because of my views, from fringe elements of the standard model “

Dear Myrone,

It is well known that if you have no enemies

it means that whatever you do is irrelevant.

Sometimes, a fair indication of how important one’s work is,

is the size and strength of the antagonistic forces

that one has to face.

With respect,


P. s.

Dear Myrone, Agatha has brought it to my attention

that I somehow lost about a half of CC recipients

while replying to your message! 🙂

I need to write you a longer personal message

for you to have a reasonably complete picture

of my life at present. Please, allow few days.

I am a bit slow in general, so please don’t be surprised

if it takes more time for me to respond.

I feel that we have few important things in common

and my impression is that, except for the Third World War,

we will succeed together in bringing all this new technology

to the global market for the benefit of all humanity.

Please, do not get me wrong. I am probably more impatient than you,

to see our prototype Flying Saucers in Earth’s orbit being powered

by the Zero-Point Energy (ES). I hope that Switzerland,

being a neutral nation, would not suddenly demand

the exclusive top-secret military control over our technology ?!!

” The U.S. Air Force preferred to take no chances and, using a little-known power,

ordered Mr. Geer to refrain from speaking in public about his stealth-detection concept.

The following August, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office sent Mr. Geer a warning letter that declared his idea a national secret. The U.S. patent office issued 95 secrecy orders in 2015, one for every 6,628 applications received. There is a legal process to ask the government for compensation, but it takes years and never pays out :

If you have a chance, please read this somewhat long page :

I am patiently waiting for my friend, an electrical engineer,

to let me know about preliminary results from the first experiment.

He started working on it in his private Lab 4 days ago,

and I am the kind of person that would like to hear from him

at least 3 times a day, no matter how slow his progress. 🙂

He is a man of few words and I only hear from him

when he obtains some non-trivial results.

I trust him, so I am not even going to think about rushing him.

Myron, you know better than me, that even if I send you

his technical report outlining the experimental results

together with a photo of a big hole in the ceiling that resulted

from stronger than expected anti-gravity propulsion force,

you will have to replicate them anyway. And since we are planning

to be partners in this anti-gravity commercial tech venture,

it would not hurt to have at least one other professional

and independent replication.

I will think about the Faraday cage experiment shortly,

using the fact that the ECE2 field equations of gravitation

and electromagnetism have the same structure.

I am not merely a healthy skeptic; I am also always skeptical

about my own ideas. In my humble opinion, if this seemingly simple

experiment is correctly performed, it should produce clear and conclusive

results, as predicted.

Dear Myrone, what I would like to propose to you is that

you do your experiment, and I do mine, we keep it secret for the time being,

and once we both have our respective results,

only then will we exchange them between us for comparison,

and possible future experimental refinement.

How does that sound to you?

Please, do let me know.

Sincerely yours,


%d bloggers like this: