Lest you believe the MAGA movement is unique, it’s happening in Venezuela, too.
Is there hope for Venezuela as Maduro clings to power?From the 08/15/24 Sun SentinelWill Freeman, Los Angeles Times
MADURO
The Latin American left has a decision to make about Venezuela: Oppose Nicolás Maduro’s totalitarian bid to remain in power indefinitely or enable it.
Efforts to constrain Maduro may not succeed.
According to an Associated Press review of about 80% of Venezuelan voting machines’ paper tallies provided by the opposition, Maduro lost the July 28 election to opposition coalition candidate Edmundo González Urrutia by a more than 2-to-1 margin.
Rather than acknowledge it, however, Maduro simply announced that he had won and blamed an unsubstantiated cyberattack by Elon Musk for his inability to prove it.
Maduro’s blatant steal marks a dark new chapter in Venezuela. Until July 28, the country was authoritarian with a patina of democracy, holding periodic unfree, unfair elections.
Now that Maduro knows he lacks the popular support to win even on a tilted playing field, he is scrapping the facade and going full totalitarian, exceeding even his previous crackdowns.
Trump lost the popular vote by a vast 7 million-vote margin.
He also lost the electoral vote despite it being slanted to favor the smaller red states.
The right-wing Supreme Court he installed didn’t save him, and his own Vice President didn’t save him.
His attack on Congress didn’t save him, even when he waited 3 hours before calling it off, hoping that somehow the mob would succeed.
His attempts to cheat by installing fake electors didn’t save him.
He lost all 60+ lawsuits in the states he had lost electorally when he falsely claimed he had been cheated.
And when none of that worked, he simply declared he had won. He tried every dirty trick he could think of.
His followers are still being prosecuted for their role in his illegal coup attempt. Now, he wants to be President again, and when he loses again, he will claim he won.
Maduro’s government has arrested more than 2,000 people without trial since election day; deployed Russian Wagner group mercenaries, Cuban secret police and other forces; and promised to send critics to “reeducation camps.” At least 24 people have been killed since election day.
TRUMP
Venezuela’s descent into authoritarianism and a coinciding economic collapse in the 2010s pushed about 8 million Venezuelans into exile abroad, more than half a million of whom came to the United States.
The lurch toward full-fledged totalitarianism could prove even more destabilizing. Preelection polls suggested about 3.7 million additional people planned to migrate if Maduro remained entrenched.
Can anything hold Maduro back? Barring an improbable uprising within his security forces, further mass protests seem unlikely to rein him in. The United States could tighten its sanctions, but Maduro and his inner circle already know how to live under them, having forged ties with other pariah states.
Fortunately, Trump does not control America’s security forces.
That all could change should he become President.
Trump promised that, as President, he would deport 15-20 million undocumented immigrants.
He falsely claims they are causing increased crime in America. As usual, the facts say otherwise.
The research does not support the view that immigrants commit crime or are incarcerated at higher rates than native-born Americans.
In fact, immigrants might have less law enforcement contact compared to nonimmigrants.
Focusing on the facts is imperative, especially given that immigration has become a top issue for voters ahead of the election.Substantial research hasassessedthe relationship between immigration and crime.
Numerous studies show that immigration is not linked to higher levels of crime, but rather the opposite.
Studies have alsoexaminedthe impact of the concentration of immigrants in a community on crime patterns, finding that immigration is associated with lower crime ratesand an increase in structural factors — such as social connectionandeconomic opportunity— that are linked to neighborhood safety.
When looking specifically at the relationship between undocumented immigrants and crime, researchers come to similar conclusions.
Numerous studies show that undocumented immigration does not increase violent crime; research examining crime rates in so-called sanctuary cities also found no discernable difference when compared to similarly situated cities without sanctuary policies.
One study found that undocumented immigrants are33 percent less likelyto be incarcerated than people born in the United States. Indications of a negative relationship between immigration and crime also emerge when looking at conviction rates.
In recent years immigrants were 60 percent less likely to be incarcerated than U.S.-born citizens.
Thus, disappear Trump’s excuses for destroying the lives of millions of hard-working, tax-paying people, as well as destroying the U.S. economy that relies on those people.
“It would,” Trump said, adding, he would “have no problem using the military, per se,” although he thinks the National Guard would suffice.
He does not think that laws meant to prevent the use of the military against civilians inside the US without congressional approval would apply to his effort.
“These aren’t civilians,” Trump said of migrants. “These are people that aren’t legally in our country. This is an invasion of our country.”
Fear-mongering Trump invents his new definition of a “civilian.” The normal definition is: “a person not in the armed services or the police force.”
Because Trump does not even consider undocumented foreigners to be people, no wonder he claims they are not civilians.
He also repeated the conspiracy theory, for which there is no evidence, that “fighting age” males from China are somehow embedding themselves in the US.
He continues to invent idiocy to justify his craziness.
What about massive migrant camps?Trump tried to downplay the idea that there would be massive camps of detained migrants like those described to The New York Times by his immigration policy mastermind Stephen Miller, since, according to Trump, he would be deporting people so fast.
“We’re not leaving them in the country. We’re bringing them out,” he said. When asked under what authority he would make all of this happen, Trump suggested he would use federal money to pressure local police.
To where would these 15-20 million men, women and children be deported and how would he get them there? That hasn’t exactly been figured out. Presumably he would use the Nazi final solution of boxcars. Even Trump’s cruel advisors bear an uncanny resemblance to Hitler’s.
Finally, when Trump’s favorite lickspittle, flatterer, sycophant suckup softballed him with the easiest possible question, “Will you be a dictator,” Trump could simply have answered, “No.”
Instead, he answered, “Only for a day.” Would he do it. Would he violate the U.S. Constitution?
Although I might not remember what I had for dinner a week ago, I can remember some things from 85-90 years ago.
I remember kindergarten. We each had a blanket we stored in a cupboard. Every morning, at about 10:30, we would take out our blankets, unroll them, lay them on the floor, and nap. I loved naps then and still do.
A possible ASMR experience.
I also remember my first experience with ASMR in third grade. It may have been earlier, but I distinctly remember the experience itself. It was that pleasant.
I was sitting at my desk writing something. It may have been arithmetic.
I remember my teacher, a lady, coming up the aisle and squatting just behind me and to my right.
She touched my shoulder and said softly, “That’s good, Rodger.”
I especially remember my ASMR (Autonomous Sensory Meridian Response), which I almost can feel now.
It’s a very enjoyable tingly feeling in the scalp that runs from my forehead, up the top of my head, and down my neck.
Over the years, I have periodically experienced ASMR, though less frequently recently.
It always arrives the same way.
I am sitting and doing some small-muscle activity that requires some focus, usually writing. A female comes up behind me, touches my right shoulder, and says something softly.
It has to be a female, and it has to be my right shoulder. Don’t ask.
And that’s it. That’s what the ASMR community calls a “trigger.”
Apparently, everyone has a different trigger. It can be a touch or a sound, and you have to be in a quiet, receptive moment.
For the past 80 years, I thought it was exclusive to me, so I never discussed it with anyone. Now, 80+ years later, I just discovered it’s a real thing, far more common than I could have guessed. You can look it up here.
There even are websites devoted to ASMR. Hereare several.
They primarily consist of people, usually women, doing mundane things like slowly painting or giving a soft massage, all while whispering. This is an example.
Sadly, I found them useless, almost embarrassing. I would call it “ASMR porn.” I assume others have different responses.
I don’t know why it exists. As infants, most of us were softly stroked and whispered to by our mothers, and this pleasant experience may be the origin of ASMR, though I cannot say why it manifests in that tingly feeling on the scalp.
Whenever I visited my wife in the hospital, she liked me to touch her hair very softly, just the whisps, not even touching her scalp. I don’t know whether she was experiencing ASMR, but her outward reaction was indicative.
Not only is ASMR more widely felt than I imagined, but it may also not be exclusive to humans. Grooming is common among mammals, though I don’t know whether they experience ASMR the way we do.
My friend has a dog that can sit patiently while being softly petted, and when I stop, she uses her front paws to move my hands back in place.
In short, if you have not experienced ASMR, you may not be able to imagine what I’m talking about, but if you have, you may have been like me, thinking you were the only one.
And now you know there is a name for this quite pleasant, fleeting experience.
Maybe one of you intelligent readers can explain it better:
RM:
1. Bob lives 10 light years from me, and 10 years ago, I sent him 3 entangled particles (one from each of 3 entangled pairs).
2. Bob and I have a prior agreement that if he receives an entangled particle from me that is UP, he will fly to planet “X”, but if the entangled particle is DOWN, he will fly to planet “Y.”
3. If he receives a second particle that is UP, he will go to the north pole of the planet he flew to, or if the second particle is DOWN he will go to the south pole of that planet.
4. If he receives a 3rd particle that is DOWN, he will dig a deep hole and shelter there, but if the 3rd particle is UP he will build a high tower and live on top.
It will take Bob a month to accomplish his 3 instructions, at which time he will radio me that he has arrived at his new location and what it is.
I know what the 3 particles tell Bob to do, because they are the opposite of my particles. When he does those three things, I know where Bob is, well before his radio message arrives.
Have I accomplished FTL communication?
Copilot: This is a fascinating thought experiment! Let’s break it down:Entanglement and Instantaneous Correlation: When you and Bob measure your respective entangled particles, the outcomes are correlated. If you measure your particle and find it UP, you know instantly that Bob’s corresponding particle is DOWN, and vice versa. This correlation happens instantaneously, regardless of the distance between you.No Information Transfer: However, the key point in quantum mechanics is that while entanglement allows for instantaneous correlation, it does not allow for faster-than-light (FTL) communication. This is because the outcome of each measurement is random. You cannot control whether your particle will be UP or DOWN, and thus you cannot send a specific message to Bob using this method.Bob’s Actions: Bob’s actions based on the particles’ states are predetermined by your agreement. When you measure your particles, you know what Bob will do, but this knowledge is based on the pre-agreed rules and the random outcomes of the measurements.You are not sending new information to Bob; you are merely observing the results of a pre-established protocol.Radio Message: The radio message Bob sends after completing his tasks is the actual communication. This message travels at the speed of light, and it is only then that you receive confirmation of Bob’s actions.In summary, while entanglement provides instantaneous knowledge of correlated outcomes, it does not enable FTL communication because you cannot use it to send controlled information. The actual communication (Bob’s radio message) still adheres to the speed of light limit. Therefore, you have not accomplished FTL communication.
RM: Interesting. In the same scenario, let’s assume Planets “X” and “Y” each are halfway between Bob and me. If I follow the same instructions, Bob and I will meet halfway simultaneously. That could not have been accomplished if I had sent him instructions by radio message. And yet, this is not considered information?
Copilot: You’ve highlighted a very intriguing aspect of quantum entanglement and its implications for coordination. Let’s delve into this:
Simultaneous Actions: By following the same set of instructions based on the entangled particles, both you and Bob can coordinate your actions to meet at a specific location (Planets “X” or “Y”) at the same time. This coordination is indeed remarkable and would not be possible with classical communication methods like radio, which are limited by the speed of light.
Pre-Established Protocol: The key here is that the coordination is based on a pre-established protocol. Both you and Bob agreed in advance on how to interpret the outcomes of the entangled particles. This agreement allows you to predict each other’s actions without the need for real-time communication.
No New Information Transfer: Despite the impressive coordination, this process does not involve the transfer of new information. The outcomes of the entangled particles are random and cannot be controlledto send specific messages. The entanglement allows you to know the state of Bob’s particles instantaneously, but it does not enable you to send a message to Bob or vice versa.
Quantum Correlation vs. Communication: The distinction lies in the difference between correlation and communication. Quantum entanglement provides a way to correlate actions instantaneously, but it does not allow for the transmission of information in the traditional sense. Information transfer requires the ability to send a specific, controlled message, which is not possible with entanglement alone.
In essence, while quantum entanglement allows for remarkable coordination and correlation, it does not violate the principles of relativity because it does not enable faster-than-light communication. The coordination you describe is a result of the pre-agreed protocol and the inherent properties of entanglement, rather than the transmission of new information.
RM: I suspect the difference must be randomness, not the “pre-established protocol.” After all, English is a “pre-established protocol.” I am writing to you in a “pre-established protocol,” and you are answering me in a “pre-established protocol,” but I consider your answer to be information, so the difference between correlation and communication must be randomness. True?
Copilot: You’re absolutely right! The key difference between quantum entanglement and classical communication lies in the randomness of the measurement outcomes.
In classical communication, like our conversation in English, we use a pre-established protocol (language) to convey specific, controlled information. Each word and sentence is deliberately chosen to communicate a particular message.
In the case of quantum entanglement:
Random Outcomes: When you measure an entangled particle, the result (UP or DOWN) is inherently random. You cannot control the outcome to send a specific message. This randomness is fundamental to quantum mechanics.
Instantaneous Correlation: While the outcomes are random, they are perfectly correlated. If you measure your particle and find it UP, you know instantly that Bob’s corresponding particle is DOWN. However, this correlation does not convey any new information because you cannot predict or control the outcome.
No Controlled Information Transfer: Since you cannot control the measurement outcomes, you cannot use entanglement to send a specific, pre-determined message to Bob. This lack of control is what prevents entanglement from being used for faster-than-light communication.
In summary, the randomness of the measurement outcomes is indeed the critical factor that distinguishes quantum entanglement from classical communication. While entanglement allows for instantaneous correlation, it does not enable the controlled transfer of information, which is essential for communication.
RM: I’m going to flip a coin. If it lands on “heads,” I’ll tell you, and you type the word “heads.” If the coin lands on tails, I’ll tell you and you type the word “tails.” I have no control over this. It’s random. OK, I just flipped the coin. It’s heads. Do your thing.
Copilot: Heads.
RM: Did I communicate information to you?
Copilot: Yes, you did communicate information to me. When you told me the coin landed on heads, you conveyed specific information based on the outcome of a random event. Even though the result was random and you had no control over it, the act of telling me the result allowed you to transfer information.
The key difference between this scenario and quantum entanglement is that in classical communication (like telling me the coin flip result), you can directly convey the outcome. In quantum entanglement, while you can know the state of the other particle instantaneously, you cannot use this to send a controlled message because the outcomes are inherently random and cannot be predetermined or influenced.
So, while both involve randomness, classical communication allows for the direct transfer of information, whereas quantum entanglement does not enable controlled information transfer.
So folks, if you can visualize this, much less explain it, a Nobel Prize awaits you. Meanwhile, I will return to Monetary Sovereignty, tail between my legs.
Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary SovereigntyTwitter: @rodgermitchellSearch #monetarysovereigntyFacebook: Rodger Malcolm Mitchell;MUCK RACK: https://muckrack.com/rodger-malcolm-mitchell; https://www.academia.edu/
……………………………………………………………………..
The Sole Purpose of Government Is to Improve and Protect the Lives of the People.
The previous post involved a discussion with Artificial Intelligence, “Copilot,” in which I suggested using entanglement (Einstein’s “spooky action at a distance”) for faster-than-light communication.
Copilot responded, “While quantum entanglement does involve instantaneous correlations between entangled particles,it cannot be used for faster-than-light communication.
This is because the process of measuring one of the entangled particles does not transmit any usable information on its own.
I disagreed, and wouldn’t you know, today I read the following article (excerpts) in New Scientist Magazine, August 17th.
Existing quantum devices could be used to disrupt the stock market
Commercially available quantum technology could let stock traders coordinate decisions to buy or sell nearly instantaneously using a technique called “quantum telepathy” By Karmela Padavic-Callaghan,8 August 2024
Quantum technology could shake up the stock market. Traders working at distant stock exchanges could coordinate decisions to buy or sell nearly instantaneously by using entanglement to create a phenomenon called “quantum telepathy” – and all the quantum devices they would need to implement this scheme already exist.
This takes advantage of a counterintuitive phenomenon in which two quantum particles can influence each other instantaneously across large distances.
Now, independent researchers Dawei Ding and Liang Jiang at the University of Chicago in Illinois argue that this kind of quantum entanglement can be used to gain advantages in the stock market, using only devices that are already commercially available.
He and Jiang considered high-frequency trading where trades happen in as little as millionths of a second. In their mathematical model, a high-frequency stock trader named Zhuo operates on the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) and NASDAQ. The data centres of these stock exchanges are 56.3 kilometres apart. Zhuo has a physical server at each data centre, each of which modifies its selling and buying decisions only based on local information it receives at that exchange.
For the two servers to coordinate decisions, however, one must contact the other. The fastest that information can travel between them is at the speed of light, which would take 188 microseconds, or enough time for dozens of trades to be made.
Ding says this delay could be minimised to just the time it takes to detect a particle’s state if the two servers coordinated through what he and Jiang have called quantum telepathy – it is also known as quantum pseudotelepathy, a term coined a few decades ago by physicist Alain Tapp, as there is no actual telepathy occurring.
The new scheme relies on a pair of entangled quantum particles, such as particles of light, with one at each server.
The quantum state of the two would be prepared so that interacting with one changes the other, as with everyday entanglement. The difference here is that the second particle’s resulting change of state maps onto a set of pre-programmed trading decisions.
For instance, if Zhuo wanted to hedge his bets, the entanglement could be prepared such that if a measurement of the particle at the NYSE returns a state that correlates with “buy”, a measurement at the NASDAQ server would find its pair particle in a state that means “sell”.
Ning Bao at Northeastern University in Massachusetts says the first company to use quantum telepathy for high-frequency trading could destabilize the market, which, in his view, raises the question of governmental regulation.
“I think if you wanted to make a company to do this, you could do it within a year,” he says. “It has the potential to circumvent the spirit of the law without circumventing the letter of the law.”
While Ding is excited by how immediately technologically feasible this research is, he says that mathematical work remains to develop efficient algorithms to determine optimal quantum telepathy schemes for trading situations beyond the simple hedging example.
He hopes to work with real-world trading data and collaborate with researchers who specialize in related experiments to make quantum telepathy on the stock market a reality.
Yes, there is a law in physics that says information cannot be communicated faster than light speed.
Entanglement is not considered “information communication” because it begins randomly.
When you examine one particle, the other particle will instantly be affected.
So if particle “A” is UP, particle B instantly will be DOWN, no matter how far apart they are.
The problem is that you have no control over whether particle “A” is UP or DOWN. It’s random.
The workaround for this is to create a set of agreed-upon prior instructions (algorithms).
The above article’s instruction seems to have been, “If my particle is UP, I’ll buy and you sell. You’ll know to do this because your particle instantly will be DOWN.”
Ding is talking about algorithms, which I call “dictionaries” because that is exactly how language is developed.
When you read the letters “s,” “e,” “l,” and “l,” you have been trained that those letters together mean “sell,” and your dictionary tells you what that word means.
Now, let’s take a situation where time is a huge issue — space exploration.
A radio signal between Earth and Mars takes between 4 minutes and 24 minutes, depending on where the planets are in their orbits.
If you think a Martian rover is about to fall over a cliff, your message telling it to stop will take light speed to get there — 4 to 24 minutes.
By that time, the rover could be at the bottom of a chasm.
What if you loaded a few trillion, trillion entangled particles — half into the rover and half into the home base on Earth — with these instructions:
If you are going or stopped, and we want you to do the opposite, we’ll queue you with one entangled particle.
If we want you to turn left, we’ll queue you with two entangled particles sent within one second of each other.
Turn right, is three entangled particles within one second.
See the pattern?
To communicate full messages, use entangled Morse code for rovers.
Telegraphers had the same problem when trying to communicate via wire. Any one click had no meaning in itself, but the context of clicks and pauses communicated meaning.
We can use the clicks and pauses that already exist in Morse code as our instant message to Mars or anywhere else in the universe.
In that way, we would communicate faster than light, which is exactly what the stock traders propose to do.
Now, what do we do about messages into the past and future?
Here’s the problem: The speed of light is the ultimate speed limit in the universe. This limit ensures that cause precedes effect, maintaining a consistent order of events.
If FTL communication were possible, it could lead to scenarios where an effect could precede its cause. This could create paradoxes, such as receiving a message before it was sent.
Thus, FTL communication implies some form of time travel.
For instance, if you could send a message faster than light, it might be received in the past, leading to potential paradoxes like the “grandfather paradox,” where actions taken in the past could prevent the sender from ever sending the message in the first place.
FTL communication could create causal loops, where an event is both the cause and effect of itself.
This could lead to situations where information or objects exist without a clear origin, challenging our understanding of causality and the flow of time.
Since entanglement has existed for billions of years, have we already been living with time travel and not realizing it?
#Monetary Sovereignty - Mitchell 