You're not the only one. I wish more authors would put some thought into their graphs. In particular, I find it helpful when the legend is in some sort of order that corresponds to the graph. At least then I can correlate labels by position.

Hence the reason it will never be "proven". I guess I was too subtle.

Would this indicate new physics if proven?

Maybe, but it would really shake up the scientific method...

The video zoomed in on the crane, so it's hard to tell, but I wonder if the recovery chute inflated and yanked it off the crane. That, or it deployed after the initial failure, but it becomes visible and semi-inflated later. At the least, I'd guess it was the chute that did the dragging rather than the balloon itself.

TFA is confused. Later on, they refer to state bans of hand-held phones. (Yeah, I broke down and RTFA for that one).

It is an interesting attack, and IANAL, but I'd be curious about the legal ramifications. If I slip a carbon (ah... the way-back machine) in a stack of papers and ask someone to sign the top one without thus informing them, I think my stealth probably invalidates the additional document(s).

You could argue that there's a noticeable difference between pen and carbon -- making the copy hard to enforce -- but I'd argue the digital version is even easier: at least in the PS example, both "copies" of the document need to be present to preserve the hash.

In normal (pen/paper) signature situations, I get a copy of what I signed. The same ought to apply to digital sigs, resulting in a simple legal challenge to the validity of the document.