Conditional on me or any associate actually carrying out the experiment described here, will we find preliminary evidence of violation for at least one compound, by the end of 2026?

"Carrying out the experiment" means that either I or a collaborator (including citizen scientists if they end up actually being involved, as long as they do report back) compares the period of at least 100 pendulum pairs whose bobs have been filled with at least 10 different compounds overall. If this does not happen by the end of 2026 I will resolve NA.

"Find preliminary evidence of violation" means that the period of at least two couples of pendulums differ in such a way that compound A has a significantly shorter/longer period (to 5 sigma of statistical errors however estimated) than compound B in one couple and, independently, compound A has a significantly shorter/longer period (again to 5 sigma) than compound C in a different couple.

This obviously does not mean that a real anomaly was found (it may be due to systematics), but is enough to resolve YES.

If no such repeated 5-sigma differences are found, I will resolve NO.

Edit: check out the 100x amplified version of this market here

Update: I did not win an ACX grant to do this. I still plan to test a reasonable number of compounds with my own pendulum rather than with a citizen science setup. Meanwhile I am going to try to publish a paper describing the planned citizen science project plus the results of my own tests and see whether I can get funding elsewhere for that. Running tests on my own is very cheap compared to the full citizen science setup, so I will most likely do it.