KJW

Trump isn't president yet. In the letter to Kamala Harris, Stephen Spoonamore says to her: "You should reverse your concession, call for both a full investigation of criminal activity and demand hand recounts in all seven swing states." It seems to me that he knows what can be done even if I don't (remember, I'm not an American). But maybe the legal avenues that Trump tried to use to overturn the 2020 election could be legitimately used to overturn the 2024 election.

Perhaps you could post the full procedure here.

Did you actually look up the references?

But that doesn't guarantee anything for Trump. Let's not forget Trump's "little secret" comment at the Madison Square Garden rally on October 27, 2024. https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/little-secret-trump-johnson-election/ That article was written before the election and therefore postulates that Trump's plan was to steal the Electoral College outright by getting states Trump loses to refuse to certify the results of their election, but maybe the "little secret" comment referred to something else. The letter to Kamala Harris said that the abnormally large number of drop-off votes or bullet ballots only occurred in the seven swing states, and in neighbouring states where there was a run-away winner, the number of drop-off votes or bullet ballots was normal. It's an large anomaly, and though it doesn't prove anything, warrants an investigation, especially given the suspicious circumstances of Musk’s $1M lottery for people to go online and sign a pledge to vote for Trump, and the series of bomb threats to polling locations originating from Russian email domains.

"Space warp" doesn't explain gravitational attraction. What explains the gravitational attraction is the spacetime curvature implied by gravitational redshift. That is, it is about what happens to time, not space. It should be noted that spacetime curvature is a factually real physically measurable quantity, not merely an abstract theoretical notion.

I came across the following that might be of interest: https://substack.com/home/post/p-151721941 ================================================== Duty to Warn Letter - to VP Harris - Re: Election 2024 (Revised 430PM) Stephen Spoonamore Nov 16, 2024 November 15, 2024 Honorable VP Kamala Harris The White House Office of the Vice President 1600 Pennsylvania Ave Washington DC 20500 Dear Madam Vice President. This is my second Duty to Warn Letter regarding hacking of the 2024 Presidential Election. The first letter on November 7 was directed to Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Officials. Both warnings are made per DNI Clapper’s 2015 directive to all agencies and contractors associated with intelligence and financial agency technologies to warn of suspicions of hacking. Professionally I have worked as the CEO or CTO at seven high technology firms including two which specialized in hacking and counter-hacking operations. My clients have included numerous governments DoD, DHS, Dept. of State, F100 Financials and F500 Industrials. I am a lifelong Republican who has long placed service and participatory democracy over party. In government, I have twice been invited to SoCom to give lectures on electronic warfare and techniques to find terrorist money laundering and gave a keynote speech of the National Counterintel Summit on this same topic. I served as an after-action reviewer of communications and data failures on 9/11 under the direction of Jim Woolsey and FDNY Commissioner Scopetta, and later co-wrote multiple hacking risk analysis of Smart Grid technologies for the Obama administration. You should reverse your concession, call for both a full investigation of criminal activity and demand hand recounts in all seven swing states. In my professional view there are multiple and extremely clear indications the Presidential vote was willfully compromised. I wholly agree with the public letter of Duncan Buell, et. al. of Nov. 13th stating they believe there is a possibility of hacking and calling for hand-recounts. https://freespeechforpeople.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/letter-to-vp-harris-111324.pdf This letter’s clear call to action is commendable, but its cautious tone may belie the severity of what I believe has happened. In my view it is a near certainty the results have been changed at a scale which reversed the US Presidential Election. They imply there is a chance a hand-recount will show you won more votes. I am stating a hand recount will most likely show you did win. Both letters call on you to act. In my view, a capable and skilled series of exploits, electronic tools and hacks were used to change the Presidential vote in all seven swing states. These activities have reversed the outcomes in at least Arizona, Michigan, North Carolina, and Wisconsin. I will lay out the basics of the attack, starting with unusual elements within the results. I will then outline two processes which could have been followed to insert these false results into the system. Finally I will outline how I would recommend investigating. Unusual elements within the results. The results of the attack are improbable in the extreme and well tailored to the sole benefit of your opponent. Approximately 600,000 votes are for Donald Trump but with no down ballot choices. These are either inserted “bullet ballots” for the Presidential race or manipulated data fields. They are surgically added to totals in limited jurisdictions and within only the seven swing States. This historically unprecedented set of numbers found in the 2024 swing states is absent in every other state. In AZ, MI, NC and WI the effect of these drop-off votes reverses the voters' will and even more improbably always pushes the winning margin beyond the mandatory recount numbers. It is a result too perfect for belief. It is a bespoke and programmed outcome. In other states including PA and NV, removing these strange and bespoke added votes, it appears Donald Trump may have won the cast votes but within a margin which would force recounts. The inserted votes raise his totals, to avoid any scrutiny during mandatory recount results which would have slowed his claim on the Presidency. In GA and FL the same pattern exists with unclear impact on the results. This attack is not technically difficult. It is modest in scale. It would require: Modest and common computer programming skills. Access to 10-100 tabulators or to the handful of facilities programming them in advance. A credible database of voter IDs of non-voters around which to create false ballots. Perhaps as few as 1, but more likely 3-5 human program managers. Access to eBollBook Data during the election to determine who had not voted. (Possibly) Human access to some tabulators during counting. If I was asked to lead this hack, I would expect to have a core team of 6-10 people, and operating costs under $10M with a timeline of 3-12 months. The tell: A historically absurd number of Trump-only bullet ballots or undervote ballots. There are always a handful of voters who cast a vote in one race which they care about, and do not make other selections on the ballot. These are called bullet ballots. In Presidential Races since 1980, these bullet ballots rarely account for more than 1% of the total votes including in Mr. Trump’s winning 2016 election and losing 2020 election, and when they do it warrants further investigation. In 2024 in the 43 non-swing states, bullet ballots make up a nominal >1%. In the seven swing states the numbers are so high to be unbelievable, unprecedented and demanding of further investigation. Here is analysis from totals as of late Nov. 12th Here are the unprecedented results of drop-offs in the two western swing states: AZ - 123K+ 7.2%+ of Trump’s total vote. Enough to reverse the outcome. NV - 43K+ 5.5%+ of Trump’s total vote. Enough to exceed recount threshold. It is my belief these two states have illegally added votes. For comparison, examine Trump’s 2024 results in three states which border AZ and NV. They have equally passionate Trump supporters, but have the normal levels of drop off or bullet ballots. ID <2K 0.03% of Trump’s total. OR <4K 0.05% of Trump’s total UT <1K 0.01% of Trump’s total. In the case of Idaho and Utah, Mr. Trump was a run-away winner and had no need to add votes. In the case of Oregon, Ms. Harris was a run-away winner and adding votes to Trump’s total would add risk without adding value. The same pattern of large numbers of drop-off votes or bullet ballots exists in the totals of MI, NC, PA, WI. North Carolina is the most extreme. The public results indicate over 350K voters cast a ballot for Trump and no other race making up over 11% of Trump’s voters in NC drop off votes or bullet ballots. Hack Part 1: Creating the pool of bullet ballot voters. There are two possible methods to execute this attack. The simple version would only manipulate electronic totals and hand-counting the target precincts would discover this. The second involved ePollbook hacking and introducing bullet ballots. This would add the need to compare the ePollBook timestamps to find possible bad actors or other sources for these anomalous votes. When Mr. Musk announced his $1M lottery for people to go online and sign a pledge to vote for Trump, I became personally suspicious of why such a promotion would be done. I signed up to see what information he wanted and what the pledge actually stated. He did not want to know people’s socials or send them texts. To sign up you had to provide your street address. That was all they cared about. Once they had the people’s names, and street address this would allow for building a pool of ghost voters who could logically be marked for fake ballots, structured in a manner which matched ePollBook and precinct data. You, as a member of law enforcement, understand criminals need certain pre-conditions to act. A database of pledged supporters with street addresses is required for this hack. Law enforcement should immediately find the team of programmers who pulled the lottery data capture. They will find those programmers immediately parsed the data into a system based on voting precincts and created macros to constantly update the pledged lists of who had cast a vote, and who had not. The programmers likely did not know they were working on a system to be used to steal the election. When confronted with that fact, law enforcement would likely gain cooperating witnesses. Musk’s team used this system to build a list of voters pledged to vote for Trump. This list could also be used to make a ghost-ballot voter list. ePollBook data is nearly always linked to the internet, and in many jurisdictions this link was being made in real time via Mr. Musk’s Starlink or any available wireless network. Throughout the day, Musk’s team could compare existing turnout models to likely outcomes, based on well established voter profile databases vs. the actual voter turnout coming in from the ePollBooks. They would have been able to have a very good estimation in the closing hours of polls how many votes short Trump would likely be at the tabulation level. They would also have exact lists of the pledged voters for Trump and would know who had not shown up. The pledged voters who did not vote, became the bullet ballots. With any network connection to the ePollBooks, or via other compromised connectivity, they could be marked as voted. Hack Part 2: Matching the tabulation to the ePollBooks. The exact number of added voters to the ePollBooks as having voted would have to match the tabulation process. This attack could have been done in at least two different ways. The easiest method to execute phase two, is also the easiest to discover by hand-recount. In a few jurisdictions where the tabulators either had network connectivity, approved or otherwise, or where a person on the team had physical access to the tabulation machine, the Trump votes that were added to the ePollBooks, would need to be added to the tabulators. At which point the ePollBooks and the tabulation totals would match, having been digitally stuffed with demographically credible voters for Trump. But there will be no paper ballot for these votes. A hand-recount will quickly discover the fraud. As I write this letter, several hundred people are self organizing on Reddit and other forums. They include: data scientists, statisticians, and legal experts. They are examining the precinct level data of every swing state, and by Monday these teams will have lists of many precincts where these historically unprecedented Trump bullet ballots occur. The highest likelihood is that those ballots don’t actually exist. Those votes were electronically created but have no paper. This would be easily proven with a hand recount. A second possibility involves the same compromise as described above, but is then combined with human ballot stuffing, or ballot substitution, at tabulation to match the epollbook numbers. This possibility is raised as it appears these historically unprecedented bullet ballots fall heavily in a few counties. Maricopa County AZ, seems to be the source of the vast majority, perhaps nearly all, of the AZ bullet ballot voters for Trump. If these ballots were introduced it would require co-conspirators working inside the tabulation center. I appreciate that many people, even sophisticated people outside this field, think this hack is an impossible task. It is not. Just 8 weeks ago the world watched a vastly larger and more complicated one. Unknown hackers intercepted over 3000 communications devices over 24 months destined for use by Hamas across the entire Mideast. The devices all had additional software, hardware and explosives inserted. The devices were then delivered to users and functioned normally for months until the hackers triggered the inserted series of exploits and explosions. This hack, the entire world witnessed, was orders of magnitude more complicated than introducing Trump bullet ballots into - at most - 100 tabulation locations. I have personally managed full year long operations in which hundreds of credit card point of sale devices were rebuilt with added hardware and software and inserted in order to discover fraudsters and money laundering. No one knew we were there. The users never were aware. The devices did their normal job processing credit cards for merchants. While they also did a hacked job and helped my team and I root out criminals. The access, technical difficulty, and scale of the election hack I am describing is less than either of these. But the effect is vastly greater, and the FBI has excellent people who could address this very quickly. Lastly, this hack methodology may or may not have some correlation with the series of Bomb Threats called in by Russian affiliated assets. The use of distraction or diversion of this kind is common. My first thought was, and my thinking remains, these bomb threats were called into tabulation centers and precincts where the hackers had already planned to conduct ghost bullet ballot introductions. I believe they wanted a disruption in the chain of custody, so lawyers could claim after the hacking events that the chain of custody on the ballots was flawed. The creation of the false-argument of a broken custody chain would be used as a pretext to prevent hand recounting, as hand recounting would not match the Trump favorable result. However, by a reverse of that logic, any jurisdiction which was subject to a bomb threat was forced to break standard operating procedure. This alone should be grounds for you to ask for a hand-recount. Lastly, I have been advised by an attorney that Arizona and Georgia have mechanisms in place for members of the public to demand a recount, but only you have the ability to demand a recount across all the jurisdictions of concern. A final formal note. This is principally a Duty to Warn letter. It is also a fulfillment of my constitutional oath of office as possibly the lowest level sworn office of public trust in America. I was appointed by my township to serve as a local Parks Commissioner. I am the public appointee to the Mt. Nittany Conservancy, a nature reserve. I have spent the last four years variously overseeing how public funds are spent on sports fields, kids playgrounds, hiking trails, and bike paths. To do this, I must make annual conflict and financial disclosures and I must swear nearly the same oath you did. I am under the sworn obligation to defend our nation against all enemies, foreign and domestic. Which, I am honored to do. I will continue to investigate with a growing group of volunteers. We are also planning to offer rewards for information. But our efforts to preserve the integrity of this election can not take this to completion. You, and only you, can call for a full hand-recount and engage the vast public resources at your disposal. I can’t. This is all I can do. Let me know how I can help. Sincerely, ESignature - Stephen R. Spoonamore Stephen Spoonamore College Township PA Former CEO or CTO of multiple Technology Firms https://www.linkedin.com/in/spoonamore/ CC: Secretary. of States and Governors of AZ, FL, GA, MI, NC, NV, PA and WI. Additional PA representative Chris Dush (PA State Sen.), Paul Takac (PA State Rep.), Dustin Best (PA College Township Supervisor), and Robert Ziegler (PA Milhiem Township Supervisor.) ================================================== It seems to me that Trump's claim that the 2020 election was stolen from him may have made it easier for him to get away with stealing the 2024 election by inhibiting the Democrats from making the claim that the 2024 election was stolen from them due to their desire to take the higher moral ground and not appear to be hypocrites.

No. Apart from the local interactions that produced the entanglement in the first place, the correlation between separated particles is non-causal. An indication that the correlation is non-causal is that experiments have shown that the correlation can act faster-than-light and even backwards-in-time. Although you might not regard acting faster-than-light or backwards-in-time as an impediment to the view that the correlation between entangled particles is a communication between the particles, in fact it should be considered a strong indicator that the correlation between entangled particles is not a communication between the particles.

The difficulty with explaining entanglement is that there are two aspects to it: the correlation and the quantum superposition. Both are necessary for there to be entanglement. The correlation can be explained in purely classical terms. But the quantum superposition cannot. Therefore, simply explaining the correlation in classical terms is not enough. The tricky part is that multiple particles, even distantly separated particles can form multi-particle states in quantum superposition such that a measurement of any of the particles can be a measurement of them all. However, being in quantum superposition implies that the multi-particle states satisfy Bell's theorem which highlights the inadequacy of explaining the correlation in purely classical terms.

Measuring one entangled particle doesn't affect the other entangled particle. The correlation between the entangled particles already exists within the two-particle state even in the absence of measurement so that measurement of one particle is a measurement of both.

No. According to the no-communication theorem: "In physics, the no-communication theorem or no-signaling principle is a no-go theorem from quantum information theory which states that, during measurement of an entangled quantum state, it is not possible for one observer, by making a measurement of a subsystem of the total state, to communicate information to another observer. The theorem is important because, in quantum mechanics, quantum entanglement is an effect by which certain widely separated events can be correlated in ways that, at first glance, suggest the possibility of communication faster-than-light. The no-communication theorem gives conditions under which such transfer of information between two observers is impossible. These results can be applied to understand the so-called paradoxes in quantum mechanics, such as the EPR paradox, or violations of local realism obtained in tests of Bell's theorem. In these experiments, the no-communication theorem shows that failure of local realism does not lead to what could be referred to as "spooky communication at a distance" (in analogy with Einstein's labeling of quantum entanglement as requiring "spooky action at a distance" on the assumption of QM's completeness)."

You mentioned "entanglement". Unfortunately for your idea, you have a popular but mistaken view of what entanglement is. Entanglement is not a communication channel between remote entities. Entanglement cannot be used to communicate information. Entanglement is a correlation between entities that had at some time a causal connection. The entanglement persists while the entities are isolated from the environment but is generally broken by any interaction with the environment (e.g., a measurement of any of the entities).

Yes, it is worth keeping in mind that even as we sit in front of our screens, there are frames of reference relative to which we are moving at arbitrarily high speeds even if those frames of reference do not correspond to any observer or object.

No, but I had to dispel the view that if Falcon 2 is more massive from the perspective of Earth then Earth is less massive from the perspective of Falcon 2.

Also: [math]\text{For }v \approx 0: \\ \dfrac{1}{\sqrt{1 - \dfrac{v^2}{c^2}}} \approx 1 + \dfrac{1}{2} \dfrac{v^2}{c^2}[/math] [math]\text{Therefore:} \\ m_{\text{relativistic}}\ c^2 - m_{\text{rest}}\ c^2 = m_{\text{rest}}\ c^2 \left(\dfrac{1}{\sqrt{1 - \dfrac{v^2}{c^2}}} - 1\right) \\ \approx \dfrac{1}{2} m_{\text{rest}}\ v^2[/math]

In special relativity, the energy-momentum vector is a four-component vector in spacetime. The time component corresponds to the energy, the three spatial components correspond to the momentum, and the magnitude of the vector corresponds to the invariant rest mass. (Note however that for dimensional consistency of units, E=pc=mc2). Because it's being described in the earth's frame of reference, and in that frame of reference, the energy component of the four-component energy-momentum vector is increasing, though the invariant magnitude of this vector is not changing. The formula that describes the invariant rest mass in terms of energy and momentum is: [math](mc^2)^2 = E^2 - (pc)^2[/math] ........................................ [math](m_{\text{rest}}\ c^2)^2 = E^2 - (pc)^2 \\ E = m_{\text{relativistic}}\ c^2 \\ p = m_{\text{relativistic}}\ v \\ (m_{\text{rest}}\ c^2)^2 = (m_{\text{relativistic}}\ c^2)^2 - (m_{\text{relativistic}}\ \dfrac{v}{c}\ c^2)^2 \\ m_{\text{rest}}^2 = m_{\text{relativistic}}^2\ \left(1 - \dfrac{v^2}{c^2}\right) \\ m_{\text{rest}} = m_{\text{relativistic}}\ \sqrt{1 - \dfrac{v^2}{c^2}} \\ m_{\text{relativistic}} = \dfrac{m_{\text{rest}}}{\sqrt{1 - \dfrac{v^2}{c^2}}} [/math]

The assumption is that the Falcon 2 is getting its power to accelerate from an external source, and that the rest mass of the Falcon 2 is not changing.

No. If an object is at rest relative to the Falcon 2, then its mass in the frame of reference of the Falcon 2 will be the rest mass of the object. Note also that in the frame of reference of the Falcon 2, the mass of the Falcon 2 will be the rest mass of the Falcon 2. Also, in the frame of reference of the Falcon 2, the mass of the earth, which is moving at 99.99%c relative to the Falcon 2, will be approaching infinite.

It's worth noting that if the shift in frequency is directly proportional to the frequency (if the ratio of frequencies is independent of the frequency), then the redshift is a time dilation. If the shift in frequency is directly proportional to the frequency, then any amplitude modulation of the signal will also have its frequency shifted in direct proportion to its frequency, and therefore the rate of any mechanical clock will appear to be similarly altered. By contrast, if the redshift is due to an energy loss without time dilation (e.g., Compton scattering), then the shift in frequency will not be directly proportional to the frequency.

It's worth noting that it is possible in principle to measure the value of c by performing the Fizeau experiment and applying the relativistic velocity-addition formula.

Actually, such numbers don't have to be prime, it is sufficient that they are not divisible by either 2 or 3. Also, 1 or 5 (mod 6) implies 1 or 2 (mod 3).

There is no Nobel Prize in Mathematics.

This is a big question. I don't think there are any general answers, with the answer depending on the particular situation. For example, let the two systems be two different points in some abstract space. Then does the measure of difference between the two points depend on the path between them? In thermodynamics, functions of state such as entropy are defined explicitly such that the differences are independent of the path between the initial and final states in state space. By contrast, distances between points in ordinary space or spacetime do depend on the path between them.

As an Australian living in Australia, I watch an Australian TV program called "Planet America", which provides a somewhat humorous view of US politics, though it isn't a comedy. In that show recently, I saw an advertisement from the Democrats appealing to women with Republican husbands to secretly vote for Kamala Harris.

And I will add that it is irrational to be concerned about trace amounts of methanol from the normal consumption of aspartame.

When I was in Year 2 at a regular public school, we were taught matrices, including matrix multiplication. They didn't seem at all useful to a seven-year-old. I didn't encounter them again until senior high school, when their use was revealed. I do not remember when I learnt about negative numbers.