I n d e x :
1. Homo Sabotage Activities and Counter Homo Sabotage Activities.
On this page, I will be publishing materials related to a project focused on the management of future events. Such management is relevant for military and political strategic objectives; for the average person, however, this project holds no practical value. Therefore, I will henceforth refer to the management of future events as "Homo sabotage activities".
Alongside "Homo sabotage activities" themselves, there are several related tasks:
1. Detecting the occurrence of "Homo sabotage activities" being conducted by others.
2. Identifying the parties conducting these activities and their point of origin.
3. Countering "Homo sabotage activities".
4. Detecting covert channels for information transmission.
5. Disrupting these channels.
These five tasks collectively constitute "counter-Homo sabotage activities".
2. Specifics of Homo Sabotage Activities.
Information transmission based on homotechnologies is of the highest level of secrecy:
1. Such messages are impossible to decrypt.
2. The very fact that such messages were transmitted cannot be proven. It is impossible to demonstrate that a meaningful text lies concealed behind a sequence of random values.
For these same reasons, homodiversionary activity is likewise highly covert:
1. It is impossible to detect or prove that a terrorist act has taken place. One cannot prove that a specific catastrophe was the result of a deliberate, targeted action rather than a coincidence of random events or a consequence of accidental human error.
2. It is impossible to identify the individual or entity that carried out the homodiversionary attack.
Possessing knowledge of the algorithms governing absolutely secure communication allows one only to surmise—with a certain degree of probability—that such an attack has indeed occurred. However, an understanding of the specific characteristics of homotechnologies makes it possible to identify the perpetrators of these acts based on circumstantial evidence.
3. Influence on Future Events.
Influence on future events is the development of a project obtaining information from the future.
If we are able to obtain information from the future—bypassing the cause-and-effect relationships of the material world—are we then able to send information into the future, likewise without utilizing those material cause-and-effect relationships?
To achieve this, we would need to reverse the method used for obtaining information from the future—shifting from a mode of receiving information to one of actively transmitting it into the future.
Formally, this is easily accomplished; one could set up experiments and obtain a positive result. The challenge, however, lies in verifying these results—in ensuring that we have indeed successfully transmitted information into the future and, in doing so, influenced future events. We must confirm that our informational influence was, in fact, the decisive factor. Could it be that the event unfolded exactly as we desired, yet did so under the influence of ordinary material causes?
The experimental apparatus currently at our disposal operates with a single bit of information. Yet, every event in the material world is subject to the influence of a vast quantity of "open" information—data derived directly from the material world itself. The addition of a single bit of information—transmitted by us into the future—would be utterly negligible when weighed against this immense volume of open information. Consequently, this method will not serve to influence ordinary physical events.
4. Where can this method be used ?
What kinds of events can our method influence? Where might a single bit of information prove decisive? Such events may include the behavior of human beings and living systems—specifically at bifurcation points, where a system's behavior hinges upon minute influences. In everyday life, our decisions are often swayed by entirely insignificant and random occurrences. Our mood may shift without any apparent cause; a word overheard by chance, or a new thought, can radically alter the choices we make.
5. Who can use these methods ?
We think that such methods will be utilized primarily by the military and politicians.
A shift in a politician's mood, a word spoken inadvertently, a news item published by a journalist, or the sentiment of stock market traders—in terms of sheer volume, all of this can be measured as a mere single bit of information. Yet, the significance of that single bit of information for the world at large can be immense.
Similarly, a single bit of information can be critically important for the military. Does the adversary possess a nuclear bomb? Yes or no? Will they launch an offensive tomorrow? Yes or no? All of this constitutes one-bit information.
6. Detecting influencenbsp on Future Events.
The application of methods designed to influence a future event can be detected by obtaining information about that event from the future.
We discovered this by chance. While engaged in stock price forecasting, we noticed that our methods occasionally suffered from severe anomalies. These abrupt stock fluctuations did not fit within the parameters of normal statistical variation—and, most importantly, our methods should have predicted them. Yet, they did not. It was in the course of attempting to refine our forecasting methods and predict these specific fluctuations that we stumbled upon this peculiar effect.
When retrieving information from the future using Shamir's three-pass protocol, we employ a matrix. The elements of this matrix consist of experimental results indicating the presence of anti-gravitational properties in specific samples—properties that are induced in those samples based on future stock price data. We generate our forecast by aggregating the experimental results row by row. This is the operational mechanism of our absolutely secure communication algorithm. However, the forecast results obtained by aggregating the data column by column should, in principle, yield the same outcome. The probability of a random error occurring here is extremely low: for a 3x3 matrix, it is less than 10%; for a 5x5 matrix, it is approximately 1%. Yet, in reality, the observed rate of such discrepancies stands at around 20%. In Table 4 (See =>) these days on which these discrepancies occurred are highlighted in lilac.
Conversely, if we are utilizing an algorithm designed to influence a future event, we must examine the experimental results column by column. Discrepant results between the row-based and column-based aggregations serve as evidence of "informational interference"—specifically, the interaction of our own informational queries with other, external informational influences. We estimate the statistical validity of this observed effect to be greater than 99%.