The Malaysian police have asked Interpol to help locate comedian Jocelyn Chia in America I guess the question is what do they want with her and is this just going too far man? Yeah, man. This is going viral I can't believe we're talking about this case again But it just keeps going viral for one reason or another long story short The Malaysian police publicly came out and said that they hit up Interpol to see if they could question Jocelyn Chia in New York Because they're thinking about charging her with an incitement and public mischief law Andrew That carries a two-year jail sentence to Malaysia So do they have a case? Absolutely not it's because Jocelyn Chia is not a Malaysian citizen And she did not tell the joke in Malaysia. So actually there's absolutely no case There's no extradition laws between US and Malaysia, but you know, they said it So did Interpol aka the international police criminal organization the people that are responsible for finding international serial killers terrorists arms dealers bad guys What did they say in response to this? Well, they said to be honest guys Nobody even contacted us, but to be honest, we probably wouldn't even take this request. All right, everybody There's a whole comment section that we're gonna go through a lot of different perspectives here This is the news. We're not here to offend anybody, but we're here to cover it So please hit that like button check out other episodes of the hot pot boys as we talk about this and what people are saying The first comment was have they want Interpol to try to track her down. I mean, she's in New York case solved I mean somebody a lot of people were just saying what the eff man the Malaysian government is making themselves a joke Somebody said I'm Malaysian myself and this is totally embarrassing for us on the world stage. I don't like her jokes I think she is lacking character, but this is way too far I think that's pretty fair like if you're offended by the joke if you think it's not good to have that joke on the internet I mean, I would even say like there's a way to get her to scrub the internet of it You know so that it's not posted I know she took it off her IG because her Instagram is down and everything like that But yeah to try to track her down even to question her about anything other than the fact that Why'd you make that joke?  It's just our government going to fall out Malaysia is a fine country I like living here. I'm Malaysian and just because the Malaysian police said that I don't know if that's necessarily a direct order from the Malaysian government I don't know if the Malaysian government is here just fake caring or do they really care I don't know somebody just said man. What is going on in Asia? They're just tripping over a joke. Why are they so sensitive and a lot of people in the West we acknowledge this in the previous video They just cannot wrap their head around this right like a lot of people in the West are just like wait What yeah, I want they did what and then now they're asking the inter poll what no No, I want to defend people who are offended by this joke for a second because I think that When you take it out of context out of the comedy seller in New York City And you place it on the international stage it does mean something different All right, it does do a little bit something there It shouldn't do a lot and it shouldn't have a big impact and it shouldn't incite rise It shouldn't incite and and and bring up some underlying beef and reignite it and it shouldn't turn into anything That is ridiculous to think it does but But people can be offended because you know they have to live in those countries Yeah, this next comments were a man if the Malaysian government doesn't like Jocelyn Chia Why are they making her so famous? She is gonna be 10 X to 100 X more successful now because they keep putting her name out there And she even how to tweet herself being like thank you guys for helping me write my new Netflix special it writes itself Yeah, I mean this is a crazy amount of drama and she is definitely more famous after this and Yeah, I don't know We'll see if if Netflix puts out her special and then if the Malaysian government blocks Netflix for that reason Right or if they don't even air on the Malaysian version of Netflix because different countries do get different content pool or black black males Netflix is like and Netflix if you want to post Jocelyn Chia special We don't want Netflix in Malaysia at all. That would be crazy to turn it into this Hey versus West thing. I don't know somebody said well, why are they trying to check Jocelyn Chia? Why don't they just track the missing flight and a lot of people were just like listen guys Malaysia has to clean up its act and then maybe people won't joke about you I mean long story short Andrew Do you think it's true that things that get joked about a lot like they give a lot of ammo to the other side? Whether it's fair or unfair. I mean a lot. We know I mean as um, you know We're Chinese American people joke a lot on China But I have to admit that China gives them a lot to work with yeah for sure man.  Oh man, it really is different over there. Yeah, and it's true you know with America's a First amendment of being able to save freedom of speech it does allow Jokes to go harder like jokes hit hard in America man. That's the type of comedy out here It's roasting you roasting the politicians roasting your moms roasting dead people You can roast anybody somebody said and this regards to Malaysia But also the recent cancelization of Uncle Roger in China Andrew Why do countries want capitalism and the good parts of Western society along with the products But then they want to keep authoritarian government systems David. Do you believe that those things are? Not mutually exclusive like you if you have capitalism and business then you have to have freedom of speech and democracy I actually think you can have a mixed system. I mean everybody just sets up their systems However, they set it up. They feel like they can the pros and cons and they have to live with it But yeah, it is interesting because with capitalism Inevitably there is a clash right because especially when you import like Western style capitalism It's gonna come with some more traits of freedom of speech, but those countries might not have that I don't know. I think there's plenty of countries that are doing well that do not have freedom It's like I'm pretty sure it's place like Dubai has plenty of capitalism Yeah, maybe it has a lot more to do with the execution than actually what you just say you do or do not allow Somebody said the government is overreacting on purpose to look like they care the Malaysian government doesn't actually care And there was a bunch of conspiracy theories actually surrounding the the downing of the plane itself to all these internal Clockwork things that obviously in America Andrew We're not thinking too much about like the internal workings of the Malaysian government But you know, there was a ton of comments about yeah Somebody said durian is an export from Malaysia. That is the true crime. That fruit is a weapon of mass destruction Long story short Andrew Jocelyn Chia also left a comment that was pulled as an excerpt from a From an interview she did where she said, you know Americans They just like harsher edgier humor and in Asia they just can't take it and I did some research Andrew There's technically four styles of humor two of them are nice and more relatable to our kind of more harsh and edgy in Asia They tend to like affiliative and self-enhancing humor in the West They like self-defeating and aggressive humor in Asia. It's probably like a 80 20 split in terms of the more like nicer styles in America It's like 70 30 more towards the meaner styles So I mean is this just like show a huge cultural difference because there's four styles of comedy But in Asia they use two of them way more than in the West. Yeah, no, I mean I think so again, you know Not every country that speaks English has the same type of humor or Tolerance for jokes guys and and that's a cultural difference. I don't blame Malaysia I don't think the entire globe has to have the American sense of humor. I think that different countries run on different Freedom of speech is not a lot of other countries not not America are way more tradition Yeah, you can't make every country like America, but I think that reaching making this an international thing is a little bit stepping too far, but anyways guys overall my takeaway is this I think a Stronger statement from the Malaysian government would just be like we are banning Jocelyn Tia from performing or entering Malaysia Like boom and then like just saying that is a cold quick way to discipline someone I'm not saying they should do that by the way I think the banning of her passport would actually still be a pretty big deal on a national stage Yeah, but I'm just saying like you just do that Don't don't make it this thing like all the Malaysian piece as the International police organization because it almost becomes like the international people and the resources versus Malaysia now where they're like I don't want to do your poll bro That's like what what Ethan Hawke from from Mission Impossible and and James Bond and all these secret agents That's who they deal with is Interpol. That's where I hear about.  I mean Long story short man. I definitely think that it's very interesting in this internet day and age You don't really know what's real outrage Fake outrage and fake outrage that gets stoked to the point because they could see some sort of incentive for it to you Know push their agendas that turns into real outrage It's all very very gray and it's very unclear. Also, Andrew Do you think the comedy's dying? So whether or not people on the left are offended by an offensive joke or somebody on the right? Like Trump is mad that SNL is roasting him all the time Does it feel like comedy has more parameters on it now than it used to? Yes and no I feel like comedy is kind of coming back. So I guess it'll be interesting I do think maybe Jocelyn wants to rethink saying that joke again ever I don't think she needs to say that joke again because I think the joke got a lot of views and made its impact already Just tweak it though. I don't think you should let that make you gun shy for the rest of your life You know in terms of by the way when I say gunshot, I'm literally just talking about jokes, right, right, right? Yeah, I don't know. I guess I guess we'll just see time will tell and Obviously, I think you know people just to take a step back, you know It was a joke, but she's not setting out to have some like International campaign against Malaysia. That's not what her career is about and that's not what she's gonna make it about I mean, these are comedians not politicians and Jocelyn Andrew was actually born in America So, I don't know guys. Let us know what you think of the comment section below It's going viral right now with a hot pot boys until next time we out. Peace


So that is what we will go discuss today, we have derived this in spin orbital form, so we will try to see how to get integrated spin integration and get an equation only in terms of spatial orbital just as we have done. So remember our Hartree-Fock equation was an Eigen value equation of the Fock operator, so this is a form that we derived and this is called the canonical Hartree-Fock equation. And the ionized potential is minus an epsilon j if an electron is ejected from chi j. Again when I say this is only a classical way of saying it means that in the n minus 1 electron determinant chi j is absent. And if you add an electron an orbital r then the electron affinity is minus epsilon r. I told you yesterday, I told you that if there are 2-3 approximations one is that the entire thing is single determinant, yeah I am saying Cookman's in terms of exact single determinant that is one. Second is that within single determinant I have assumed that the rest of the n minus on spin orbitals or the rest of the n spin orbitals are not changing. Remember I wrote down and this is valid only up to the first order. So obviously it is not exact, it is an approximation even within single determinant. So today I was supposed to show how does it move with the exact because something is missing here and of course both of them are missing correlation because of single determinant how they match up, okay. So this is our equations where the f of 1 is h of 1. I hope all of you can now by now write it.  I do not want to write this as direct notation because it is incomplete integration. So any direct notation will not actually speak correctly. On the other hand if I take epsilon i that is chi i f chi i in which case it is a complete integration because the coordinate 1 is also integrated and that could be written as so one integration over d tau 2 comes because of the definition one because of chi i f chi i, right. So this is the anti-symmetrized direct notation, yes. No in the sense that this is only over d tau 2 it is a function of 1. So I cannot write a direct notation. So that is the reason I am writing in this notation. I mean I have no notation for this chi j 1 by r 1 2 chi j or whatever only over d tau 2. I do not have a notation for this that is what I am doing. I can invent a notation but there is no standard notation but as soon as I do this then it is a number. So of course this is integrated over coordinate 1. So I get this in the first term and the second term already has integration over d tau 2 in the fork operator and when I take chi i 1 integration then the rest of them come. So you get complete integration over d tau 1, d tau 2 and because of 1-p12 I am writing together as anti-symmetrized element and we showed that the e-heart refock is not sum of the orbital energy. In fact it is equal to sum of the orbital energy minus half of the sum over j of chi i chi j sorry when I wrote e i there is a sum over j here but not sum over i that is a specific index. So when I write e heart refock then of course it is sum of the orbital energy minus this and here you have a double summation. One summation coming here and another summation because sum of the orbital energy okay. So we showed this yesterday that the actual expression has this plus half so that makes it that heart refock energy is not the sum of the orbital energy but you have to subtract and physically it means you are subtracting the double countered interactions. So with this we now want to move over to how to spin integrate for closed hand systems. Once again I have defined closed hand systems. So having obtained this now our closed hands essentially means chi 1 is phi 1 alpha, chi 2 is phi 1 beta and so on and so on. So in particular chi okay. So if I write generally up to n-1, n-1 is phi n alpha, n is phi n beta, n by 2 alpha, n by 2 beta. So then we want to look at this expression and spin integrate. So let us write first let us assume that chi i is sum phi i alpha. Note that this is a specific index that will come as a result of diagonalization and let me call it phi i alpha. So I have f of 1 phi i 1 alpha 1 is epsilon 1, epsilon i phi i 1 alpha 1. So this chi i is a specific alpha spin. Without any loss of generality you can make it beta spin as well. So I am not going to discuss the beta spin. Then note our expression for Fock operator. So what we are going to do is to now multiply this by alpha star 1 on the left. Note again alpha star 1 essentially means omega 1 because these are spin functions. They are coordinates are different from these coordinates. They are r theta phi and this is the spin coordinate and then perform the integration over p omega 1 only because we want only to integrate this spin. So just integrate this spin. So let us see what we will get.  But r 1 is a vector equal to epsilon i phi i i. Please make sure that you understand what I have done. This part is trivial because this is function of r 1. So this and this together is 1. So right hand side is trivial. The left hand side remember the f depends on spin orbitals. So I cannot take this out and integrate. So the integration must involve f because f depends on spin orbitals. However phi i of r 1 can be taken outside the integration.  So that is the only change that in the left hand side I have to take care because this operator depends on spin. So when I integrate the spin it must involve the operator itself. So I have a new eigenvalue equation. This is an operator in R because omega 1 is integrated which acts on phi i of r 1 a number times phi i of r. So I have a new eigenvalue equation which will replace that old equation. We will have to see what is the structure of this operator. So we will analyze this operator. So let us analyze this in parenthesis. So let us write the first term. I hope it is clear. I have written every term in full. So when I said Kij's term 2 I have written R 2 omega 2. D tau 2 has been expanded in full and of course you have alpha omega 1 d omega 1. The first term is clear. The second term I have only exchanged. So this has become alpha omega 2. This is r 1 omega 1.  But this remains R 2 omega 2. Is it clear? This j is over 12 because these are still spin orbital indices.  All these Kij's are either phi j R 2 alpha omega 2 or beta omega 2 because they are all spin orbitals. Whereas the Kij for which I am writing note is only alpha omega 1 that is where I started. But when I am summing over j it is over all spin orbitals. So the first term is trivial. So the first term can be trivial in return.  So now we have f of r 1 equal to h of r 1. The first term is trivial because you can always integrate alpha star alpha 1. This first term. Now let us look at the second term. I am going to write the Kij's in terms of phi j alpha or phi j beta. Which means now my summation over j will go from 1 to n by 2. That is the first change. And I am going to explicitly write this for both alpha and beta. Is it clear? So I will write this alpha omega 2 and beta omega 2 twice.  I use exactly the same here phi j r 2, alpha omega 2, alpha omega 1, dr 2, d omega 2, d omega 1. It is very easy to write. Don't worry. You just have to think. See I have nothing apart from typo errors. It is very easy to write. I am just writing monotonously. I have only ensured that now my Kij's are alpha spin. The Kij's are now alpha spin. I will also add the beta spin of course. I am going to do that for the first term. So there are two terms here. There are two terms here. When Kij's alpha, Kij's beta for both coulomb and the exchange. So I am just analyzing one of those four terms. Clearly when this is alpha, now I can integrate this spin d omega to d omega and very easily. This is 1. This is 1. So everything will survive. No problem. Plus, let me take the another term. j equal to 1 to n by 2. The same term I am now writing alpha star omega 1. However, now Kij is a beta. Beta star omega 2, 1 by r 1, 2. Again, phi j r 2, beta omega 2, alpha omega 1, dr 2, d omega 2, d omega 1. Once I can analyze, although this has become beta, there is no problem because beta star beta will still give you 1. Alpha star alpha will still give you 1. So the term will survive. So this term in terms of space orbital will survive twice. They have exactly the same value. You can quickly check. Let us do the same thing for the exchange term. So I am writing the exchange term on the top or maybe here. So minus j equal to 1 to n by 2. Now come here.  Now here is an exchange.  Once again, if I analyze this term, this and this will become 1. This will become 1. No problem. So it is going to survive. And now the final term. So let me write it down somewhere, maybe here. The last term minus, what is the last term? Same exchange but phi j is a beta spin.  Now here is again the exchange. So it becomes alpha omega 2 as usual and this becomes now phi j r 1, beta omega 1, dr 2, d omega 2, d omega 1. Now look at this integration. It is 0 because you have alpha star omega 1 and here you have got beta omega 1. Similarly, beta star omega 2, you have got alpha omega 2. When I integrate over omega 1, omega 2, alpha beta, orthogonal, it will make it 0. So for exchange, this term will survive twice. Sorry, coulomb, this term will survive twice. For the exchange, it will survive only once. So that is the moral of the story and actually I could have predicted from here right away. You can see that because it is coulomb, these two chi j's can be either alpha or beta. I do not care because they have nothing to do with this. On the other hand, because of the exchange, now chi j becomes r 1 omega 1. So this must follow the spin of the first one, the chi i. And chi i is alpha spin. So only alpha spin orbitals can contribute to the exchange. For the exchange, this must be alpha because original chi i was alpha. Once again, the same thing that we have repeatedly been telling that if chi i is alpha, exchange takes place only with another alpha spin and not with the beta spin. This is something that we have been telling in various different parlour. So again, you see the same result. Since my original chi i was alpha spin, so this was, if you remember, this is just alpha omega 1 because original was alpha spin and I have integrated with alpha star omega, these chi j's cannot be beta because when I am interchanging, it will become 0. And that is the reason the exchange comes once. If my original electron is up spin, it will have only exchange with up spin when I construct the fork operator. Whereas for the coulomb, it will have contribution from both up and down spin. And the same thing will go if my original was beta. It does not matter, chi i could have been beta spin, so only beta spin would have contributed. So with this, I can now write down the fork operator in spin integrated form. So f of r 1 equal to, first of all, H of r 1, that is trivial. Now spins are all gone. So here spins are all gone. So sum over j 1 to n by 2. I am not going to write this spin because they are all integrated out. So it starts from phi j star r 2, 1 by r 1 2, phi j r 2, d r 2, this term. Everything else goes out. So what remains is this, this and this. However, this comes twice. When chi j is beta spin, exactly same thing happens. This remains. So this will come twice. So I can say again sum over j equal to 1 to n by 2, integral phi j star r 2, 1 by r 1 2, phi j r 2, minus integral phi j star r 2, 1 by r 1 2. And now here only one term survives when this is alpha. So that case, this becomes phi j r 1. And the chi i, the special part of chi i will become r 2 now because there is a exchange p 1 2, right? So again to write it in the same form, I will bring p 1 2 and phi j r 2, that completes f of r 1, exactly in the same form. If you actually notice the f of r 1 in terms of space and spin orbitals, they are almost identical. Remember in the spin orbital, we have integral chi j star r 2, 1 by r 1 2, chi j 2, d tau 2. I have instead that phi j star r 2, 1 by r 1 2, phi j r 2. Sum is only over n by 2. The coulomb comes twice. That is the only story. And the exchange is exactly same, comes once. And sum is so, actually it is identical, looks identical except that this term comes twice. So I can write it just as I wrote there h of r 1 plus sum over j 1 to n by 2, integral phi j star r 2, sorry r 2. Now instead of 1 by r 1 2, I will write 2 by r 1 2 minus p 1 2. That is it, over. Is this everybody understands? It is just algebra. So the way I was writing 2 by r 1 2, I should have written p 1 2 by r 1 2. It does not matter. So 1 by r 1 2 can be factored out. And it becomes, so that is the only difference. The form is exactly same again. In the spin orbital, what was the thing? Everything was spin orbital. This was j equal to 1 to n. And here it was 1 because spin orbitals, I do not have a sense whether it is alpha or beta. I do not care. The form was very general. Moment I am integrating, I have taken care of the fact that the alpha spin orbitals are different from beta spin orbitals in their relation to the alpha spin orbital, electron in the alpha spin orbital. Because chi i, chi i is originally phi i alpha. I told you that is how I have started. Since I am writing it for phi alpha spin, it makes a difference. The spin of the other makes a difference whether it is alpha or beta. And accordingly this factor 2 comes. But other than that, it is a fairly straightforward relation. And I think this factor 2 just re-emphasizes what we have discussed before that the every pair of electron has a coulomb, but only parallel pairs have exchange. So when I have alpha spin to start with, this must only be alpha spin for exchange. That is why there is only factor 1. Note actual expression is far little bit more complicated because of p12. But with p12, I have brought back sanity that this remains phi jr2. Otherwise it would actually become phi jr1, which is what I showed here as you can see here. It becomes phi jr1. And then your Hartree-Fock equation becomes, the right hand side I already told is very simple. So your right hand equation now becomes this Fock operator, new Fock operator, phi i of r1 equal to epsilon i. Note that the spin integration that we did for the F of r1, this is actually for closed shells. So depending on your determinant, whether it is a closed shell or something else, this will change because I am now assumed that the alpha rn by 2, betas are also n by 2. So that will change. The summation everything will change. But the physics will remain the same. If this is alpha spin, I will have coulomb with all exchange only with alpha. So if I have more of alpha spins, then this summation will be more. For the coulomb and the exchange, the beta 1 will give a separate term for coulomb. So I cannot write it exactly in this manner in that case. I have to separate out. The number of terms contributing to coulomb and exchange would not be just half. So it is not going to just be a factor of 2 minus p1. So that is all. But the basic physics will remain the same that the parallel spins will give both coulomb and exchange. Anti-parallel spins will only give coulomb. Anti-parallel will give only coulomb, not exchange, sorry, not correct. Parallel spins as I said correctly will give both coulomb and exchange. Anti-parallels will only give coulomb. The other way of saying is that for every pair of interaction there is coulomb, only for parallel pairs there is exchange. So whichever way you want to write it. So this particular form, remember this factor 2 minus p1, 2 is only for closed cells because if I have another determinant in which let's say there are n spin orbitals or let's say 10 spin orbitals, just give you an example, but 6 of them are alpha spin, 4 of them are beta spin. The summation indices will be different. This factor 2 won't come, but that is trivial. You can always spin integrate. I mean once you understand how to do it, so we specifically did for closed cell because this is more often used. So you have to be very cautious in applying this form of F of r, but whatever is the F of r, the final equation will be just this in terms of special effects. And this is again now canonical equation because you have started from canonical Hartree-Fock equation. And now we can directly get the space orbitals, what we normally call orbitals. And the spin part is gone now. So you don't have to bother about spin. And we can directly solve this, but the F must have this form for closed cell or whatever form depending on whatever is the determinant. So this is the only part that you have to derive depending on unrestricted Hartree-Fock or restricted, why I am not going to those things. The closed cell incidentally, I must also mention is closed cell Hartree-Fock is often called the restricted Hartree-Fock determinant, RHS. I hope it is very clear why it is called restricted because we are restricting the occupation of the space orbitals. And every space orbital must have 2 electrons, 1 alpha, 1 beta. So that is the reason we are calling it restricted Hartree-Fock. Very often this is called RHS. We also have similarly unrestricted Hartree-Fock, UHF. Restricted open cell Hartree-Fock, those are little bit more complex. I will tell that later called ROHF. And RHF you will see is a special case of ROHF. UHF is really different. So we will discuss all these different forms of determinants, but right now let us try to understand only RHF, which is the closed cell case, even number of electrons, ground state, very nice doubly occupied. So many of the cases can be handled by this. I hope all of you can derive derivation is actually very easy. Those who are who can physically see this could have actually seen from here. You do not have to go through all that rigmarole. Spin is going to be integrated. Here it is trivial. Here the integration is could not be done alpha star alpha only because of these guys. But then if this is alpha, strip them either alpha or beta, they are separately integrated. So here it does not matter. Two times they will occur. In this case there is exchange. If this was alpha, kaiji has to be alpha. And then forget about spin. Write everything in terms of space orbitals. Write the coulomb twice, exchange once. Make the summation over j from 1 to n by 2. You just have the expression. You know, you really do not have to spin integrate. Do all these things. I mean if you are clever you can see it here right away. Just as I did for energy integration. So many of these spin integrations I am doing in a detail. But later on you can actually see it. On the fly you can do it. Just by seeing you should be able to write it with a little practice. In fact, if you do this you may be more confused because this is a long derivation. Somewhere you will make a mistake. Here it is much easy to see because you know quite obviously this is integrated by itself. So I do not care whether it is alpha or beta. Both will survive. This is not integrated with itself. It gets mixed up with omega 1. So if this is alpha then it has to be alpha. That is all the logic. So it is actually very simple to do in a physically understand the spin integration. Is it okay? All right. So I can now proceed. So now we have gone to an equation Hartree-Fock equation for closed shell or a restricted Hartree-Fock case. Which is very useful. And we will like to solve this equation of course. Note that the variation method was applied in a very general form in spin orbit. So there is no problem with that. And then eventually we took down the closed shell part. Now I will not go into tremendous details about solving this equation except to mention. Of course let me also mention that the Kupman's approximation everything remains the same. Interpretation of epsilon i remains the same. The negative orbital energy everything remains the same. This was solved for atoms almost exactly. Almost in a numerical manner. Something that is actually so this is called the numerical solution and they are very very exact. In fact in physics this is taught quite well because physicists are interested in atoms. So they can be exactly solved in a numerical manner. So numerical solution essentially means you get a give a guess for the orbitals at every point value convert that into value and then construct the f of r1 at every point. Then try to find a phi i at that r1 which satisfies this equation for all r1. Eigen value equation. And then again change. So it is a very detailed calculation but they are all playing with numbers. Numerical solution essentially means that you start with the values of phi of at all r2 because remember first I have to get f of r1 from phi j of r2. So all these r2 values you take guess. This is basically all self consistent field procedure. Any solution you have to have a guess. Then construct f of r1 at all r1. You have a map. Then try to find out that is a numerical Eigen value procedure how to get these Eigen values at each point r1.  Epsilon i is constant. So there is a trick to do that. And then you get f phi again at different points all the phi's. From there you reconstruct f of r again at different point and keep doing it. So there is a lot of computations but they are all numbers. Now of course numerical computations can be also in error depending on how many points you are taking. So that is why they call grid. In mathematics they use what is called the numerical grid. If you have a mesh which is very very tightly, grids are very very small. These are the good number and you can make it as exact as possible by making a tight grid, heavy computer, fast computer. So all that has been done. In fact the two people who did very good work are Clementi and Roeti. Many of you may actually refer to the Clementi Roeti table for atomic heart reform. They have a table of heart reform. For example lithium or let us say beryllium. They will actually give you phi 1 of r1, phi 2 of r2 or phi 2 of r1 whatever at different r1. That is all the table will give you at the end because for beryllium atom you have only two special orbitals.  All you require is the values of those functions at different r1. So that is the final is what is output. And these r1s will be as tightly as I said meshed as possible. So Clementi and Roeti have a table. So to understand beryllium atom you have to read through the table at what value, at what point what is the value of 1s, what is the value of 2s. So this is numerical. I mean it is boring actually after a point where you have just too much data. But I mean this can be done very nicely. Unfortunately the point that I am trying to say is that when people came to doing the same solution for molecules the error became too large because for molecule in the AF operator there is a H which includes the electron nuclear exchange, electron nuclear attraction. And this is now a multi nuclear unlike an atom. So when it becomes multi nuclear for molecules then the errors in the numerical procedure become much larger. So actually people never use this procedure for calculation in molecules. So you will never find for molecule a numerical solution. Now this is a little bit technical thing I will not bother. What we will do is what is actually practice for molecules. How do I solve for molecules? I cannot solve it numerically because of this term the multi nuclear attraction of electron with several nucleus not a question of number of electrons. The problem is because they have number of nuclei. As long as this one nuclei this the potential is ferrically symmetric. So it is much easier to handle but if it is not ferrically symmetric the results the numerical integration becomes very very difficult. Because there is a lot of integration which are eventually involved you have to integrate. When I construct for cooperate I remember integral dr2. So they are numerical integration. So that becomes very cumbersome and if you are interested I can refer you to the text to read you know why for molecule it is more difficult than in atoms to do that. But I think at the end what I am trying to say that this cannot be solved numerically and hence it cannot be solved exactly. I have to find some other way of solving this. So again I note that the Hartree-Fock is an approximation that is that you should not forget. Some of you are forgetting in the very first place and I will remind you when I tell why Koopman's works better. When I say works better it is compared to the exact not compared to Hartree-Fock. So Hartree-Fock is an approximation. Now we have a Hartree-Fock equation which will be solved for molecules and when you solve this we will bring in another level of approximation and I will just tell you what this because today time oh maybe you have some more time. So I bring in some more approximations and this is what is called expansion in basis set. Many of you have heard what basis set and so I will tell you what is the basis set and why there is an approximation. So for molecules even the Hartree-Fock I am not solving exactly that is a very important part to understand. So there is nothing called unique Hartree-Fock. So you have to tell me Hartree-Fock under what approximation what is that approximation that is the basis set. I will tell you what the basis set comes what is done in molecule.


One of the most common questions I get asked is, you know, how do I start day trading? So what me and my mentor about it for our viewers on YouTube is create a free mentorship course that reveals our 12 secrets that every single brand new day trader should know before they get started. But please take note that there is limited seating every single week. So please reserve your spot at myinvestingclub.co. The link is in the description. Welcome to another weekend mentoring. I guess this is going to be for today. And yeah, let's get started. So this is kind of again just the the actual chart for the for the context. LHDX kind of have this like bit of a pre-market run sold off, rallied and then came back down. This is the actual just TOS chart for everyone who's kind of wondering. And this is kind of how this member traded it. So again, I don't I don't really hate these trades. I just for me on the short side, I don't see a ton of of meat on them. And I guess you just went short after the stuff, which is this is acceptable. I mean, going short after the stuff move, that's okay. We come back again, test view app go lower. Now this is where we start getting into the territory of like, okay, like how much meat is really on the bone here. And also, like, we're getting into like the third and fourth tests of this kind of view app area after we test like three or four times. I mean, we're going to break eventually, right? At some point, the odds are going to kind of go lower. And we're going to eventually break higher. And so I love these trades where it's like, okay, I'm going to short the first pop after the stuff move, and then I'm going to cover lower. I like that. We're going to short the first test of view app and then cover lower. I like that. I, you know, I don't see anything wrong with that. I don't even really see anything wrong with shorting kind of in this area after we see this big stuff move as well. But again, it's kind of like this first pop, this first test of view app. But when we get to the second and the third tests, that's when the kind of edge starts diminishing kind of over and over and over again. And I mean, for me, I just personally kind of, in my opinion, I think as we get the more times this kind of area on this kind of line is tested, then kind of we have those odds to break higher. He took this short up here. I don't necessarily hate it. I just think it's one that you need to be super cautious on because if we do break higher, you need to be ready to stop out over highs. In this kind of scenario, I think we just squeeze a lot of shorts and then they just dropped it way lower and that was kind of the rest of the trade.   But yeah, that's kind of my thoughts on this one. Anyone else? I've been talking to like a couple of weeks ago, I was talking to Amin because we have seen in small caps this same pattern over and over again that it goes between it goes to zombie between 10, 10, 15 to 11 a.m. It's zombie and then it does like a double pop and then it fails. Like it has been dropping a lot of people. But now that if you look at other small cap, if you're going to see the same pattern over and over and over again. So it's the same thing 10, 30, you verify that line that that didn't pre-market. And once it hit, you could do the same thing over again with a stop loss above 750, I would have assumed because 730 still, I don't know how you guys play it because I'm starting to short now because if long swing is not trading, I'm going to join the dark side soon. We also have Tosh here, so welcome. He has to unmute him so we can hear him. What's up dudes? First thing, I want to talk about some today, but I'll review this chart real quick. Whose chart is this? All right, so here's what's happening. This is a short, right? I hate these TZ charts, but all right, so here's the thing. You know what this is actually for charting? I don't, what is this? I don't even know what platform this is for charting. I have no idea what this is, but here's the thing. Outer lines are death candles, right? Outer lines are death candles. I don't like the shorts of VWAP. It's just, it's very much chasing. You're chasing after what appears to be a death candle, but again, when it's this early in the day, just be careful, man. Just be careful. So you want to wait for outer lines. The 7 to the 730 area is the first short. If you don't like that and you want to wait for the stuff move, wait for the death candle right after, then you can hit pops securely. That's the safest. I mean, if you guys shorting a VWAP, it's very dangerous. So again, there's, there's ways to get squeezed and there's ways not to, you know? So I like outer lines or death candles. It's as simple as that. It's always going to be the safest big stuff moves, things like that. Yeah. Yeah. No, 100%. I think like shorting something like the first VWAP test, like that's okay. But when we're getting into like the third and the fourth and the whatever, it's like, at some point, this isn't going to work, you know? Well, and I'm with you on that here.  It's just, it's not one of those ones where Joe and I talked about where it's so bloody under VWAP. It's like the ocean floor, right? So when it comes back to the surface, dude, there's no chance. It's a sunken ship. This is just kind of one that's been really kind of close to VWAP all more. And I don't like those. Yeah, true. Another thing that I just noticed some member put it straight for a living. Instead of going 30% of his size over VWAP, he like he did it all the other way around. Like you should be trading under 30% of your original size if you're shorting over VWAP because you're playing with fire. Once it gets under VWAP, then you play with your size, you know? That's what the MIC teaches. And correct me if I'm wrong. Josh, Ari. No, you're spot on. All right. Austin, you want to add anything or on to the next? Not much.  Like you have a nice line there, but it's as if you were, you know, like this is like classed, right? You should, you should kind of be fearless when you've got that under VWAP safety. And then, you know, Hey guys, my name is Josh Bradley. I'm one of the head mentors of moderators at my investing club. If you have any questions about getting started in trading, getting started in the MIC, MIC in general, text me at<PHONE_NUMBER>. This is not a robot. It was me directly on the other end of my business line. And we'll get you in the club. We also have special promotions going on that I can get to you depending on your trading needs. Hit me up. Back to the video. And then just cut it if you need to.  Now I'm going to go twice as big on the second trade. Kind of looks like that a little bit. Yeah, also the first trade is the one where he sized only a hundred shares. Yeah, that's when you need to be going big. Yeah, that's what first we love. Yeah. That first we love push up there. There's no shorts there. But anyway, that's just, it looks like the cut happened. So and the retry. So I mean, it's okay. Yeah, a hundred percent. All right. So before we go to the next chart, let me let me say something real quick. The reason why I jumped in today is I actually don't have time to do this is I want to talk about ego and I want to talk about why it's holding you back and you're trading in your life.  And when the majority vote says that you are the problem, you're going to be and a lot of people don't understand this. This is why they do so terrible in their trading. So you can look at all areas of your life. You can see how it adds up. But when we get back to trading guys, you have to understand the worst thing that you're ever going to fumble in is ego. Thinking small is ego. Thinking you need to have all the attention, have all the recognition. I need to post it. Do you know I don't post charts or anything on Twitter anymore? I did for seven years straight. I got so much cloud. I don't even know how I raised to 9,000 members before MIC.  It's ego. I got to a point one day right before MIC.  I'm literally an attention whore. I need everybody to see me. I need everybody to hear me. And guess what?  That's the whole point. And then I traded way better. So within this, for the people that are able to take losses, that's ego. For the people that are able to sustain the revenge trading, that's ego. If you're an attention whore, that's ego.  This is why people don't want this. This is why you lose money. Everything boils back down to ego. There's no biases. There's nothing else beyond that.   Any type of ego is going to floor you guys in your trading. And I had a couple of members recently just reach out to me recently and, you know, really want me to go over ego and how to sustain it and how to go back to it. And look, man, in MIC, I am a democratic island in MIC. I'm Switzerland. I don't care if you're long, short, biased in any form, price action. I want to see you guys do good. And I see so much ego floating around there by many members. And I'm here to curb it as much as I can, man. You are getting in your own way because you need attention and you have an ego problem. If you don't have those, dude, your trading is going to skyrocket.  I can't stand it because I used to be one of those people. And I had to have the nuts kicked out of me to get it out of my system. So it's a little bit of a rant today, but I want you guys to know that think big, get out of your own way, stop blaming other people, stop blaming charts. You're the reason you're getting in your own way. If there's any hurdle, if there's any speed bump in the parking lot where you're trying to rev your Hellcat, guess what, dude, go to a track and get out where there's speed bumps, you know what I mean? You're getting in your own way. So hopefully that helps somebody and hopefully somebody needed to hear it, but that's how I feel about that. We can book in that and let's get back to charts for a second because I got about 10 more minutes. All right. I mean, I love that because like also I used to be one of those people on Twitter as well.    Alex, anybody, dude, worry about your own life, man. This is the full chart on BNTC. I always post them for context. Obviously we didn't have like that much going on after hours. We had this kind of spike up here, but pretty illiquid, not much volume. Then we kind of spiked and then dropped. This, this member just kind of took a short into, I guess, like a very tiny pop after we kind of pulled back here. I would have rather like this, this member taking this trade like here because he didn't cover like this was his short and this was his cover right at break even. And what I think he should have done is just waited for a pop in towards the app, shorted that pop in towards view app and then covered the weakness instead of shorting a tiny pop where he doesn't have that much conviction and then ends up stopping out at break even. It's just better off to short a pop. Like instead of just shorting the weakness out of FOMO after you see a red candle, it's better to short a pop. Like if the stock's trading right here, you're wanting a bit over view app, you know, right here in this kind of area, you want to see a pop and then a drop lower. You don't, you don't just want to short immediately because you see a red candle. That's like longing after you see green candle, you know, so you might as well just wait for that pop to view app and then cover, cover, cover down here. That's my thoughts on this one. Harry, can you zoom out of this one back to the main focus was that the, yeah, thank you buddy. So number one guys, we always talk about this, something that is a liquid pre-market like this, like tick, tick, tick, and then there's spaces between this will go to outer lines because someone's going to pump this, it'll get squeezed. You cannot short anything outside of the ultimate top outer lines.  They can because it's a liquid. If a pumper can pump something, he will pump something. If he cannot pump something, he may or may not do to the fact that, you know, there's nothing running that day. If it's a slower day, I don't remember how many runners this was on this specific day, but say this was the only runner in a liquid, you're going to get, this would have broken pre-market highs or after hours highs or new high. So you guys got to be careful about the liquid nature because it's like what I say about range. If something has range, it'll use it. If a pumper can pump, he'll pump it. Yeah. Yeah, 100%. Yeah, I completely agree. And in just this kind of like, now that we're looking at this kind of chart, like he ended up taking a short rate here and then it went all the way lower and then he ended up covering up here for breakeven. But if he had have just waited for this pop towards VWAP, I mean, he would have been in the green for the rest of the, for the rest of the entire day, right?  Well, on something like this, I already know where Bow would have been all over this. He would have absolutely been, wait, oh, hold on, let me move my zoom thing was blocking the prices. Bow would have already, I know for 100%, would have been at 560, 580, probably up to $6. He would have covered on that wash under VWAP break right there at 541. He would have covered a little bit right there. And then guess what? When it goes down another three candles under VWAP, he already instantly knows this thing is totally put in the top. Guess where Bow is going to be next, right at that VWAP pop where Harry just talked about.  I don't even attempt that anymore. Bow is just a freaking rock star. Guys, just wait for the top. Wait for this thing to caress under VWAP after putting an outer line, a reject, then go way under VWAP and then, dude, hit hard on that pop if you want to, it's broken now. Thank you so much for watching our video. If you want to see more of our videos, please subscribe to our YouTube channel by clicking the button here. We do our best to post a new video every single day. If you have any questions about MIC or any general training questions, please text Tosh using the number here. Also, stay up to date by watching some of our most recent videos right over here.


Good afternoon everyone. My name is Darren Walker and along with Neil Strandberg will be chairing this session. Cure and inclusive cities. Is the idea of a secure and inclusive city just an ideal or is it possible? Do any of us know of examples of secure and inclusive cities in the world? Is it possible to think about an urban environment where there is shared prosperity, where there is a collective sense of a collective future and an interconnected and highly dependent world? Today we are going to talk about the idea of a secure and inclusive city and I'll just make a very brief remark and that is as an American here in Sao Paulo for the first time I'm actually quite struck by this extraordinary city. My own urban sensibility is informed by my own American experience and the urban experience in America in many ways can be summarized on the idea of the New York and Los Angeles axis. The idea that you've got a global city that is highly urban, highly dense and is the center of business and at the other extreme you have a global city that is highly dispersed that seems to go on forever and ever and ever and for which the idea of governance a coherent governance is a very very difficult challenge but here in Sao Paulo you seem to have achieved both of those. You seem to be a city that is quite dispersed and in many ways seems to go on forever and ever and ever but you are clearly the business capital of this country and in many ways of this entire continent so I think we have a lot to learn from Sao Paulo and we have a lot to learn today from a very distinguished group of panelists who will be introduced momentarily. Nils I want to give you an opportunity to say a word and then we'll get going. Thank you. I'm one of the owners of a magazine called America Economia and we every year publish a ranking of the best cities to do business in the region. One of the major points for ranking those cities is security. At a moment like this where the economies of the world are in turmoil most likely security will take an added weight. It will become a major issue in most of the cities of Latin America. If you look at historical circumstances so I look forward to this conversation and I'm very pleased to be here.


Well, ta is just 2l over c. So if we pull a term out like that, we get this and we can simplify this like this Where I've defined this number gamma. It's so important. I am going to give it a box Gamma will be coming up all over the place in lots of formulas throughout special relativity


This is Erik Roskemabing and this is the service design show. So one way of framing experience prototyping is keep it very small, keep it at first, keep it tangible, keep it in the form of how can we interact better and role play it and see what happens. And we just built the thing, we tested it for a day, we had I think 50 client interviews and all of them. With MPS and MPS was raised by a number of digits and it was just simple stuff but it was very clear that this was helping people.


Protection of various phone tumors and is extended by MRIs, I trust Dr. Shreya Bontarka, a third year resident of Surat Municipal Institute of Medical Education and Research Center. Special thanks to my co-authors, Dr. Mona Shastri, Dr. Ekta Desai, Dr. Nehal Devanji, and Dr. Nehra Kadwani. Introduction. Phone lesions are very diverse in nature, growth and histological features, and this diversity makes it very critical to diagnose for tumors correctly, Surat patient not only survives but also maintains optimal function of the affected body parts. In the present study, imaging of phone tumors and role of MRI is seen in diagnosis, management, treatment, and follow-up. We all know it extracts preliminary and it shows the lesion characterization, whether it is latex, serotex, location, matrix, zone of transition, type of destruction and soft tissue component. But why MRI is essential? MRI is essential for lesion characterization, marrow edema, extent of tumor into soft tissues and medullary canal, killer acetylobondary involvement, schedule of tumors, complications, treatment planning and follow-up. Femes and objectives. Determination of a suspected bone tumor or tumor-like conditions on X-ray, characterization of lesion on its extent on MRI, and to study relative incidents of various tumors and tumor-like conditions. Materials and methods. An observational study was conducted about 32 consecutive patients who studied who had bone complex. MRI was performed using 1.5 tesla pilis, machine and various sequences like C1, C2, PDN, serovatation. Few of the patients also underwent CTs. Then correlating extra findings with other ideological modalities to know the role of MRI in planning management of 42 patients for studies. Approach to diagnosis. Now, whenever there is a lesion on claim data, there is an approach based upon whether the lesion is light or clear object, then based upon the age of the patient. Location of the lesion and other miscellaneous characteristics like periosteal reaction, cortical distraction, observation on results. Maximum age group which was affected was 11 to 20 years. Males were more affected than females. In bone involvement, most of the bone involvement was monostatic. And excellent appendicitis skeleton were equally involved. Location within the tumours. Now, most of the tumour locations were in metaphyseal region followed by diaphysis. And most of the tumours were malignant. Even there were tumour mimics, 7 cases per of tumour mimics. Now, the patient came with pain and respiration of movement. The x-ray showed a lytic lesion with multiple separations. Anzyl T1 weighted image showed a heterogeneous hypointense lesion with separations. So, there is an anzyl T2 and Td weighted images showed. The hyperintense lesion has multiple fluid fluid levels, which depicts the degrees of Cambridge in aneurysm of bone cysts. It is not a phenomenon of aneurysm of bone cysts, but it is very commonly seen. Simple bone cysts. Now, coronal T1 weighted image showed a well-defined hypointense lesion-like exact bone. It was hypointense on T1 and hyperintense on T2. It was an incidental finding or simple bone cyst, and the patient had no complaints. This patient presented to us with night pain, which was gradually increasing, and it was relieved the end phase. The diaphyl T1 weighted image showed a focal hypointense neidus with adjacent sclerosis. Agile T2 and coronal Td images showed heterogeneous intramedular neidus in upper diaphyl just with surrounding sclerosis and edema. So, I am very useful to see the edema pattern, whether it is intramedulary or not. And edema is well seen on MLT. This is the bone destruction along with new bone formation in a sundry pattern at the upper end of tumor. And there was lifting of periosteum causing cord band triangle. Coronal Td images and Agile T2 both images showed the tumor had both intra and extorsion extent. And it had not reached the adiphyl plate. In the second image of Agile T2 weighted, it showed heterogeneous tumor mass, which had reached the cortex and extended into soft tissue component and contour mass. It was an incidental finding. Coronal T1 images showed an intramedulary diaphyl just with surrounding hypointense neidus. Coronal and Agile T2 and CD weighted images showed it appeared hyper intense, bringing in a type of characterization which appears as internal low signal on T1 and T2 was seen. It represents convoid mantis or piochondroma. The patient presented with localized swelling without restriction of movement. T1 weighted image showed a well-defined bony outgrowth, which was arising from proximal fibula, which was directed away from the joint. Now, PD and societal image showed the T2 hyper intense catalyzed cap, which was less than 15 mm. It is very important. MRI is very important to look for catalyzed cap for malignant transformation. If the catalyzed cap exceeds more than 15 mm in others and more than 30 mm in this, it goes towards malignant transformation most commonly called the sarcoma. And this patient also had concomitant features of herbal cycle. Giant cell genus. X-ray showed an expansal eccentric lytic lesion in proximal lateral radial condyles, the margins of the lesion were largely non-ceurotic. T2 weighted image showed heterogeneously high signals with internal low signals, which represented fibrosis or hemocytolins. PD was also done, and last region was seen with marked thinning of the cortex. This patient presented with localized swelling and pain. T1 weighted images showed there was a well-defined hypo intense lesion. PD, coronal and societal images showed the lesion was hyper intense and was causing expansion and destruction of adjacent cortex. This pathology proved it to be a giant cell genus. Metatarsis. Radiograph fit in T, there is a destruction of left pedicol of T11 and inferior end plate. These are axial T1 weighted images, societal T1 and societal T2 weighted images. How this patient presented to us with lower left pain and swelling, the patient had no complaints of fever, there was restriction of movement. Exeter of the patient showed a well-defined osteolytic region in epimetaphysiological region. It was thought to be a bone tumor. When MRI was done, it showed hypo intense lesion on T1, hyper intense on T2, and it showed decision restriction. It turned out to be an infectious etiology and biopsy. It was pro-deseptic. So it was a tumor minion. So, summary and confusion. Out of 32 patients, higher male pre-converting was there. Highest incidence was in 2nd and 6th decades. Axial and appendicular skeleton were commonly equally involved. Metaphyzine region was more commonly involved. Tumor went more towards malignant site. And MRI was more sensitive for lesion detection, because it was essential for lesion characterization, marrow edema, and it was actually a bundle of involvement, staging, treatment planning, and follow-up. Thank you.


High tumor mutational burden, TMB, is an emerging biomarker of sensitivity to immune checkpoint inhibitors. The distribution of TMB and subset of patients with high TMB has not been well characterized in the majority of cancer types. TMB increases significantly with age, showing a 2.4 fold difference between age 10 and age 90 years. This article was authored by Zachary Archalmers, Caitlyn F Connolly, David Fabrizio, and others.


My name is Richard Calland. I'm a professor of Law and University of Cape Town and also a fellow of the Cambridge Institute for Sustainability Leadership And I've been asked over the past year or so to develop a new strategy for our engagement with boards Our point of view is that boards matter. They've always mattered But as the legal and corporate governance Landscape shifts so the risks and opportunities for companies But especially for boards and the directors who sit on boards is really changing seems to me there's a step change required of board members and that they need to look out of the window see that opportunity Recognize the risks involved and then to begin to rethink how they direct Oversea and are accountable for the organizations that they have the buck really does stop with them now We have engaged a number of people in an advisory group and some of those people are going to be the Interviewees that I will discuss and explore these various issues with over the course of the coming months


The leadership of the Mandarin Labour Congress, NLC and the Trade Union Congress, TUC, have declared a total nationwide strike effective next Tuesday, November 14, 2023. The leadership of the two unions reached the resolution after an extraordinary National Executive Council meeting on Tuesday in Abuja. The two major labour unions had nationwide mobilisation of members and allies had begun immediately, and the action by the organised labour followed the brutalisation of NLC National President Joe Agere last week in Imou State. For both Congresses, frowned at what happened in Imou. We frowned completely at it. Issues don't have happened. For the president of the Nigerian Labour Congress, leading workers to examine and protest the non-payment of salaries of some of the workers in Imou to protest the declaration of go-to-workers when these people actively go to work every day, and several issues that have bedeviled workers in Imou State. He went there without gun. He went there without a single machete, but only to protest the neck of both Congresses frowned at what happened in Imou and resolved as follows. From 12 midnight today, that we are going to carry out a national action that is going to zero in on Imou State. There has to be effective 12 midnight today, then on Tuesday next week there is going to be a total nationwide strike effective Tuesday next week because as a last week we issued a directive, and in that directive we had some series of actions that are stated during and none of them as of today have been made.


People here are having trouble to choose. We would do a tight break now and I want you to make us understandable what's the difference between both of you. The financing of what he talks calls a Green New Deal and what I call a Green New Deal is different. And his financing is based on the idea the European Central Bank buys bonds from the European Investment Bank. In Germany, maybe I can introduce my policy and then you criticize it. If you introduce my policy, then what is my job? You can do it as well. You can turn it around afterwards. But what I want to say is, in the German public debate, even if I agree that European Central Banks can be used in order to finance common goods, in the German debate, this is absolutely toxic. If we do this, we would have not a smaller but a much larger RFD. And this is why the German Greens and the European Greens asked for ending the tax competition game and use the money from a common company taxation to finance the Green New Deal. Was it unfair, Janusz? Incomplete. What we're saying is to begin with, it's important first to work out what is the minimum funding that a genuine green transition requires. How much money do we need to spend on a green transition? We have to work it out. Because you know, the Fridays for future people, when the adults are behaving like children, the children grow up to look at us as adults and point the finger at us and say, you are not doing enough and they are right. What is enough, the minimum of enough, is 5% of European GDP. That's 500 eurozone GDP, let's say. That's about 500 billion every year. That's a minimum that we need to spend to have a genuine green transition in energy, transport, industry and of course agriculture. Where does the money come from? Will it come from taxation, from harmonizing taxes, which are of course we are completely in agreement with. We need to do that. But the most you are going to get over a period of 3, 4, 5 years, by the time you do that, is about 50 billion over 3, 4, 5 years. Really not enough. By the time you harmonize it and you start collecting the taxes. Now let me complete my story and then you can rebut it. What we are saying is, as we speak now, there is something between 2.5 and 3 trillion euros in the financial circuits of the European Union that is doing nothing but harm. It is beating up house prices in Berlin and Hamburg. It is beating up equities, share values because companies borrow it in order to buy back their own shares. It's doing nothing productive and nothing green. What we are suggesting is that the European investment bank, which belongs to all of us, issues bonds of 500 billion every year and the European central bank makes an announcement, effectively reminds us of what it is already doing when this is not a new idea. That it will buy them if there is a need to prop up their price, if there is a need. By making that announcement it will not have to buy them. Suddenly we have 500 billion every year to invest in the green energy union to stop Germany relying on lignite and so on and so forth. With one stroke you have a substantial amount of money, money that can be mobilized and pressed into the service of the environment and good quality jobs in Germany, in Greece, in Portugal, tomorrow morning, within the rules and within the treaties. That is our green union. The problem is, after I read your programme, of course I asked progressive lawyers, is this legal in the treaty what you are proposing? The view of progressive lawyers is if politicians demand and states demand from the central bank in the framework of now a legislation or in the framework of an election campaign to commit on a five-year buying programme announcement, this would be illegal and would be seen as breaking European law. We need economic programmes which allow investments in the green transition to happen. We don't need a new financing programme, there is lots of money in the market, but we need to allow a policy which makes finally environmental destruction unprofitable and green investments profitable. The proposal that we put forward is entirely legal and let me tell you how I know it. I didn't ask any lawyer when I was a governor of the European Investment Bank back in 2015 and that proposal I put to the board of governors of the European Investment Bank and I can tell you there wasn't a single voice in the board of directors of governors of the European Investment Bank who said that it is illegal. Indeed, Werner Hoyer, the president, was very much in favour of it, but the European Investment Bank cannot do it on its own. It needs the green light from the European Union Council. Now, you are quite right. If we have a formal directive to the European Central Bank by those bonds, then you violate the independence pretence of the European Central Bank. But what I'm telling you is that the European Central Bank is already buying those bonds and Mario Draghi, Benoit Carré and everybody else would love to have more EIB bonds to buy. Look at what they did a month ago. Because they have nothing to buy, they don't have good quality green bonds to purchase.  You know, folks back in diesel bonds, not green bonds. They would love to be able to buy green bonds if they were any, but there aren't any. Thank you so much. Now we have a much better idea about the differences. Please choose your favourite now. We have the first winner, Janos Baropakis. Big applause for the first winner and our second winner is...