HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_025180.jpg
1.73 MB
Extraction Summary
5
People
2
Organizations
0
Locations
1
Events
3
Relationships
4
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Email thread
File Size:
1.73 MB
Summary
This document is an email thread from January 20, 2017, between Jeffrey Epstein (using the alias 'jeffrey E.' and email jeevacation@gmail.com) and David Grosof. The conversation is highly intellectual, discussing concepts of physics such as gravity, centrifugal force, inertial reference frames, and probability statistics. Grosof also mentions meeting scientists Watson (James Watson) and Crick (Francis Crick) and asks if Epstein knows Watson well.
People (5)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Jeffrey E. (Jeffrey Epstein) | Sender/Recipient |
Participating in a philosophical/scientific discussion via email address jeevacation@gmail.com.
|
| David Grosof | Sender/Recipient |
Correspondent discussing physics, probability, and scientists with Epstein.
|
| Watson | Scientist (Mentioned) |
Likely James Watson. Grosof describes him as 'wild and fun' and mentions seeing him on a book tour at Google. Epstein...
|
| Crick | Scientist (Mentioned) |
Likely Francis Crick. Grosof mentions meeting him.
|
| Gunther Stent | Scientist (Mentioned) |
Grosof met Watson through Gunther Stent.
|
Timeline (1 events)
Approx. 2013
David Grosof saw Watson talk on a book tour at Google (~4 years prior to the email date of 2017).
Google
Relationships (3)
Engaging in detailed email correspondence about physics and philosophy.
Grosof mentions meeting him once through Gunther Stent.
Grosof mentions meeting him.
Key Quotes (4)
"god s reference frame :)"Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_025180.jpg
Quote #1
"probablity and statistics gets its strengh from the law of large numbers . centrifigal force is a pseudo force but not distinguishable in the right frame."Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_025180.jpg
Quote #2
"Watson's pretty wild and fun, if overconfident about some ideas about autism when I saw him talk ~4 years ago on book tour @Google."Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_025180.jpg
Quote #3
"i think gravity might be just that"Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_025180.jpg
Quote #4
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (2,598 characters)
From: jeffrey E. [jeevacation@gmail.com]
Sent: 1/20/2017 1:03:10 PM
To: David Grosof [REDACTED]
Subject: Re: Your Special Day
Sent: 1/20/2017 1:03:10 PM
To: David Grosof [REDACTED]
Subject: Re: Your Special Day
Importance: High
god s reference frame :)
On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 7:44 AM, David Grosof <[REDACTED]> wrote:
Is there something for central tendency that is like an inertial reference frame, from which a different abstract
understanding of probability develops, one that's better for showing the kloodgey, apparent force nature to
which you point?
Is there something for central tendency that is like an inertial reference frame, from which a different abstract
understanding of probability develops, one that's better for showing the kloodgey, apparent force nature to
which you point?
Please forgive typos. Sent from Android Nexus 6 phone.
On Jan 20, 2017 4:32 AM, "jeffrey E." wrote:
yes , now assume that there i a balancing force. and gravity is merely the result of paticles being pushed
together . etc
yes , now assume that there i a balancing force. and gravity is merely the result of paticles being pushed
together . etc
On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 7:26 AM, David Grosof <[REDACTED]> wrote:
http://xkcd.com/123/ can't resist!
http://xkcd.com/123/ can't resist!
Please forgive typos. Sent from Android Nexus 6 phone.
On Jan 20, 2017 4:14 AM, "jeffrey E." wrote:
probablity and statistics gets its strengh from the law of large numbers . centrifigal force is a pseudo
force but not distinguishable in the right frame. . like gravity. lets assume that there is a force pushing
heads and tails towards a 50 50 distribution. . not merely recording it. regression to the
mean. etc. would . could be a force similar to the EM one.
probablity and statistics gets its strengh from the law of large numbers . centrifigal force is a pseudo
force but not distinguishable in the right frame. . like gravity. lets assume that there is a force pushing
heads and tails towards a 50 50 distribution. . not merely recording it. regression to the
mean. etc. would . could be a force similar to the EM one.
On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 7:11 AM, David Grosof <[REDACTED]> wrote:
Cool. And the former question, of clarification?
Cool. And the former question, of clarification?
Please forgive typos. Sent from Android Nexus 6 phone.
On Jan 20, 2017 4:10 AM, "jeffrey E." wrote:
pretty well
pretty well
On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 7:02 AM, David Grosof <[REDACTED]> wrote:
Probability as a force rather than a what?
Didn't suss out the next word...
Watson's pretty wild and fun, if overconfident about some ideas about autism when I saw him talk ~4
years ago on book tour @Google. I met him once through Gunther Stent, as well as Crick on another
occasion. Know him well?
D.
Probability as a force rather than a what?
Didn't suss out the next word...
Watson's pretty wild and fun, if overconfident about some ideas about autism when I saw him talk ~4
years ago on book tour @Google. I met him once through Gunther Stent, as well as Crick on another
occasion. Know him well?
D.
Please forgive typos. Sent from Android Nexus 6 phone.
On Jan 20, 2017 2:47 AM, "jeffrey E." wrote:
1. is probability a force rather than a markter. if you look at a bell curve from scratch, it looks as if
it under a force pushing things towards the center. i think gravity might be just that . 2. all signals
1. is probability a force rather than a markter. if you look at a bell curve from scratch, it looks as if
it under a force pushing things towards the center. i think gravity might be just that . 2. all signals
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_025180
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document