
This proposal tests whether fall acceleration in vacuum depends on object density: graphene aerogel cube (ρ ≈ 0.16 mg/cm³) vs tungsten cube (ρ = 19.3 g/cm³) dropped simultaneously from 1–3 m height. Standard Newtonian/GR physics predicts identical fall times t ≈ √(2h/g) = 0.452 s (1 m), 0.639 s (2 m), 0.782 s (3 m) with a = 9.81 m/s². The alternative pressure-gradient model predicts aerogel t > 2–10 s (a ≈ 0.06–2 m/s²) due to reduced external squeeze from cosmic density gradients. Tiers: access to existing super-lab facilities, professor-borrowed classroom setups, and DIY home (~200 €). Vacuum residuals quantified. All raw data—video, pressure logs, graphs—open under CC-BY-4.0. A positive anomaly falsifies Galilean equivalence and supports gravity as external pressure, not mass-pull.
equivalence principle, density-dependent acceleration, graphene aerogel, open science, vacuum drop test, tungsten cube, pressure gradient, microgravity, gravity
equivalence principle, density-dependent acceleration, graphene aerogel, open science, vacuum drop test, tungsten cube, pressure gradient, microgravity, gravity
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 0 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
