kayimbo,
the problem that most of us notice is that what you are doing is _very_ easy to do using known physics. Other posters have mentioned some of the methods.
I wouldn't bother making new videos with paper bits strewn around to 'prove' you aren't using air currents. Moving bits of paper requires quite a bit of force to move (relative to a spinning paper) due to friction, wind resistance, and possibly static electricity. It won't get you any closer to the million dollars. I'd concentrate on getting that money, if I were you.
Does your ability require your hand to be close to the object as depicted in the videos? If so, I can't think of any cheap way to prove that the effect is not due to body heat and air currents. What is the maximum distance at which you can get this effect.
The spinning paper, while sensitive to small forces, is a fairly crude device. Look into Cavendish torsion balances, which are used to measure gravatational force, which is _extremely_ weak. This page tells how to build a pretty nice one in your home
http://www.fourmilab.ch/gravitation/foobar/.
The problem is that this balance will be very sensitive to your body and stray air currents, as well as temperature differences. The article mentions these effects.
Think about this claim carefully. Have _you_ proven that these very basic, well-known physics is not the cause of the effect? If you have, then it will be easy to write up a good application. Just tell us how you proved it, and we can easily generate the language for the application.
If you _haven't_ proven this yet, might I suggest you do this before proceding with the claim. I understand your eagerness for the million, but it'll be embarrasing for you if it turns out you are wrong, and, as far as I am concerned, a bit unethical to waste Randi's time.
This is not an attempt to argue w/ you about whether you can do what you claim; I have no interest in such a discussion. But it is an attempt to point out that what is shown in the video is very, very likely to happen due to well-known physics. A successful application and test will have to prove that these effects are not what is causing the movement.
I'd be happy to elaborate on the physics if you need a better explanation, or to help with wording on the application.
Also, I know Randi will help refine the nature of the test procedures, as long as you very clearly describe what you do, and what will constitute a failure and success.
"I can exert small forces, sufficient to move small objects, solely with my mind. I have built an apparatus (describe it...). I can make the paper spin by (describe it...).
A successful test shall consist of me making the paper move, on command, 10 times in a row. The command shall specify the direction of rotation. The movement will commece within 5 seconds. When told to stop, the movement will cease within 10 seconds. The "movement" must consist of the paper spinning at leat 720 degrees. There will be a mark on the paper to facilitate measuring this.
Failure to do this during any of the 10 trials shall constitute failure"
That probably doesn't exactly fit what you need, but it's a start. Its a clear description of what you do, how it is tested, and what is required to pass, and to fail.
I don't think Randi will accept this experiment, since it is so easy to do it with normal physics, but it should give you an idea of how to proceed.
hope this helps.
roger
