Assuming that motion ie. rotation and angular momentum in local space causes gravity, then, why not

? would this not create the conditions necessary to have the antiferromagnetic devices ie. the solid state gyros, cause the "motor{s}, to hoover and/or push away from E1 and simultaneously race towards M1....MX...n!.....?...f=mv2/d*dsdt

Assuming that motion ie. rotation and angular momentum in local space causes gravity, then, why not reverse itmicrosoft net framework

You are correct, rotational motion does cancel gravity in certain circumstances. This is why Jupiter and Saturn are not perfect spheres, but are instead oblate sheroids, due to their very substantial rotation. The space shuttle in orbit does it best by using its rapid circular (orbital) motion to exactly cancel Earth's gravity, allowing for a weightless existance. These are very well understood phenomena. So your point is....?

Assuming that motion ie. rotation and angular momentum in local space causes gravity, then, why not reverse itwindows xp themes internet explorer

NO, Einstein
If your assumption was right it might work...

but the assumption is wrong.

The presence of mass (or more generally of compact energy) causes the curvature of space-time that we perceive as gravity. Whether the mass rotates or not. Whether the mass is composed of antiferromagnetic material (like chromium), paramagnetic (like platinum) or diamagnetic (like bismuth, which is actually pushed away by magnets).

Rotation of an extended mass (meaning: not a singularity) is what gives angular inertia (thence, angular momentum).

Rotation of the mass that generates the gravitational field may cause "frame-dragging"

It takes a lot of mass and rotation to create enough frame-dragging to make it measurable. Or very sensitive measuring devices.