Gravity & Matter Quantum Behaviour from Accelerations, during Electric discharges into Graphite-Based Superconductor

Explain where to get everything for this scheme, I remember something about it, I need to do experiments, look at me ...

I myself am a geologist-geophysicist, I am a poor electronics engineer, you tell me with my equipment with constant discharges, I can do what you are doing ...

I found this:

https://tu-dresden.de/ing/maschinenwesen/ilr/rfs/ressourcen/dateien/forschung/folder-2007-08-21-5231434330/ag_raumfahrtantriebe/JPC-Null-Results-of-a-Superconducting-Gravity-Impulse-Generator.pdf?lang=en

But it's possible that ^his emitter wasn't up to spec. I am curious if anyone else has been able to independently verify / replicate Poher's results.

With that said, Poher's first published work on this was in 2007 I think. Any mediocre engineer should be able to, for example, construct an over-unity device. Or demonstrate a prototype propulsion system for a spaceship or a drone. I am confused by the lack of interest and of the lack of progress on part of Poher (am I to believe he's content just running experiments in his lab?).

Then again, why publish null results? Purely to rubbish the theory of a Superconducting-Gravity-Impulse-Generator which I believe to be an impossibility! Anti-gravity and anti-matter theories are easy to refute.

Quote from Dr Richard*

Then again, why publish null results? Purely to rubbish the theory of a Superconducting-Gravity-Impulse-Generator which I believe to be an impossibility! Anti-gravity and anti-matter theories are easy to refute.

I like to keep an open mind (with a healthy dose of skepticism of course).

Poher has put out a lot of stuff (on his site), with much of it being in French which takes some time to translate and to understand. It also doesn't help that Physics isn't exactly my forte (most of the theoretical stuff just sounds like 'woo woo' to me, in that there is no way for me to discern what is plausible and what is not). Mechanical Engineering (and Philosophy) comes more naturally to me.

In any case, the Null results were from 2016. I don't believe Poher has responded to it. In his more recent work, Poher has moved away from using LN2 immersed YBCO super conductors (used by Lorincz and M. Tajmar in their attempts to replicate) and instead makes use of Graphite conductors in distilled water at room temperature:

Quote from Gravity & Matter Quantum Behaviour from Accelerations, during Electric discharges into Graphite-Based Superconductor

Experiments with cryogenic superconductors were made difficult by the required immersion into liquid nitrogen,
in order to get the material under its critical temperature. The liquid cooling bath of YBCO emitters was creating
artefacts, for accurate measurements of very brief propelling accelerations, during several dozen microseconds,
because of its incompressible nature. Then, came the publication of Graphite partially superconducting behaviour,
at room temperature (Esquinazi, 1999, 2012, 2014).
We started building new emitters, with Graphite-based material, in 2012, and get efficient propelling results in
2015, with immersion of emitters into distilled water, at room temperature. We improved that technology and were
able to begin experiments without immersion into a cooling liquid, in late 2019. So our 2020 experiments described
here, with new efficient Graphite-based emitters, became possible in air, at laboratory temperature, with
professional acceleration sensors.

Display More

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/0159/da25a13ee687640ab980cead0e10c27256e6.pdf

I have a few questions..

- If the propulsive effect is caused by the expansion of gases (in LN2), would distilled water also have the same reaction?

- If the propulsive effect is caused by the expansion of gases, why did the control copper emitter not produce the same reaction?