So, what I will talk today is really about basically application of our effort a little bit and I'll try to keep it short and simple. I will not go into deep of the data, so feel free to ask me questions. So basically really using genomics and bioinformatics to really create a high-triple data sets and then use informatic approaches to really mine in a hypothesis-free manner the data sets and really try to come and find some things about human brain development. I will divide my presentation in three parts. First I will tell you why we are using this approach. Secondly, I will tell you about the data set we created and in third part I will show you a vignette, really several vignettes of examples of how we mine the data set and what kind of the data and some new interesting and even hypothesis that can be generated based on the data set. So do I need to turn this on? Okay. Okay, I'll start. So there are basically four problems one faces when one study human brain development. The first couple of problems are really related to the nature of human brain as biological tissue. That's first when it's complex and many of my colleagues actually showed you examples of how that complexity is both in development. And the second one which I really would like to emphasize is a very productive process and to illustrate it I'm going to show you this slide. So if you put time on a logarithmic scale, so this is basically prenatal development. This is postnatal development. You can divide it into phases such embryonic, fetal development, infancy childhood, adolescence and adulthood. And now we're just looking at the really structural development of human brain. You can see that basically takes several, seven months and your brain is still smooth. And then when you are born you have most of your primary sanitary gyroscope, even some tertiary one.   So that tells you how. And if you look at the some of the major cellular events such as neurogenesis migrations in optogenesis and axonal growth and manipulation you can see that they are spread across the time. So basically it takes several months, around five months, to create the entire repertoire of neurons in the human cerebral cortex. That's five months basically. It will take seven days to do that all in mice. So that tells you what is the really complexity, it's not just the number. Another interesting thing about human development, if you take a mouse everything is compacted within several weeks. So once, as Tomomi showed, when you are creating layer four, telomocortical fibers are already in the cortex. Well, they are not actually in human brain, you already create layer four. They weigh there, sit there. And so this is why human brain came up with some of the really specialization such as a huge supply zone where the axons are waiting that the entire component of the cerebral cortex is generated. And I think that this is a really unexplored aspects of human development because if you take the, you know, it's called principle of heterochrome, if you take the same events and you stretch them or you compact them, you can come up with some different variations and species specific. The other two sets of problems, actually major problems are related to basically ethical and take, you know, limitations that human brain basically you cannot do experimentation. And the last problem is really, even if you want to do it, it's actually really not hard. It's hard to collect high quality tissue due to many reasons that I explained. So several years ago, actually almost a decade, I stayed the same place and I really was a great time. And I think in my opinion, technology is the major force that drives science. That's just my opinion. I think ideas are becoming cheap and what really changes science is technology. When I started my lab, like, here comes high throughput genomics. And I said, wow, I can combine these two, you know, my love and passion for human brain are really with that. And was fortunate that actually there were really people who knew what they need to do at Yale and really helped me to build that. And in the last several years, that became grew into something. And there is a consortium now of several universities listed here. And it's called the Brain Span. So you can go there. And there is an Atlas, Atlas is maintained by Alan Institute for Brain Research. And you can, there are many other things in addition to things that I will talk today. And so the first thing I did is we collected a large collection of a human brain, post-mortem human brains, that covered the entire aspect of the development of prenatal and post-mortem lifespan. So basically from five weeks of post-conception all the way to over 80 years. So we have around 200 brains. And as you can see, there are really dramatic changes in how that looks. We divided the development into 15 periods just for an adult with just for purpose of really trying to obtain multiple specimens, males and females. And so part of our part of this entire consortium and some previous work was to really profile 16 areas or regions of the human brain. Of course, you can immediately come to conclusion that my favorite part of the brain is the neocortex. So we sampled 11 neocortical areas. We were guided by two principles, functional importance. So there are four areas of the prefrontal cortex, all major sensory areas, and some of the areas involved in association temporal parietal. And also we are guided by ability to dissect this. So these were all dissected from post-mortem human brain that were collected from clinically unremarkable donors. In addition, hippocampus, amygdala striatum, medidorsal nucleus of the talums, and the cerebrocortex. In addition to looking at the gene expression or transcriptome, dynamics, my lab and several other groups have looked at many other aspects of human brain development, including reference atlas, histology, epigenome, genome, and you can all get most of these brain-span atlas. So I will specifically tell you a little bit about what we have learned and looking at the gene expression. And I'll try to keep it simple and short. So basically, the data said that we have been really focused on creating is basically around 58 clinically unremarkable specimens. The 58 were based on covering all 15 periods. In each period, we had multiple males and females. And we also tried to, we have very rigorous QC protocol to really includes they were all neuropathologically examined by trained neuropathologists. We dissected around over 1,300 samples from these brains. Half males have females. Most of are European, some African-American, Hispanic Asians, and in many cases, it's mixed. So we applied three types of analysis. One is genome. So all of them were snipped genotype using a high-density SNP arrays. And recently, we have also done whole genome sequencing using a brain cerebellum-derived DNA. We have also looked at major histomodification marks and DNA methylation, so this way, we can look at some of the epigenetic changes. And transcriptome, we used two, basically, platform. One is exon, microarrays, which primarily looks at protein-coding genes. And also, we did RNA-seq, which was done on slightly half of the samples. And the reason it's half, because in exon arrays, we look at the left and right side. And in RNA-seq, we look only on one side. And it will be clear why at the end of the talk. So that's the data set. And then what I will show in my last part is just several vignettes of type of data we have derived. And many cases, I think, will illustrate complexity of the human brain development and some new ideas about what could be happening in human brain and some species differences. So this is a multidimensional scaling plot in which we plot 1,350 dots. Each dot represents one sample. And so what we are looking at is the relationship of the transcriptome. This is not individual gene. This is a protein-coding gene. In this case, it's 17,000, because that's how many were on exon arrays. And we slightly get more on RNA-seq. Not all genes are expressed. And this is a basically plot. And then we can paint it using periods. Remember, period one is an early embryonic period, while period 15 is late adulthood. And you can see that basically what we are looking is how related are each dots to each other, looking at the whole transcriptome as a comparison. And you can see that basically you can plot it by period. And you can see that major dimensional variance is actually related to time. So basically, and you can also paint it by regions. We compressed all 11 neocortical areas into one color. Otherwise, it's impossible to see the colors. So these are multiple neocortical areas. And you can see beautiful segregation. Neocortex is here. Cerebellum is here. And you can see that. But if you look at compare these two graphs, you can see that actually major variance in this dimension is time. And what is surprising is this. This is period seven is light green samples. These are all different areas. Now they are painted by time. And in this corner, they are painted by regions. And actually two-thirds of the variance actually can be explained as prenatal development. So first, basically 10 months of your life are the Muslim enemy. And then comes the infancy. And this is 20 years to 80. It's all compressed. So that tells you basically that gene expression changes less during prenatal development, changes during postnatal development, and the least during adulthood. The most of the differences happens during prenatal development. And that is the problem, because actually this is the least what we know about the prenatal development. Due to many reasons, one of them is really collecting high quality tissue. So in addition, actually to time region, you can do this using sex and individual variances. But the major actually global difference is time, then comes region and sex and individual. So one of the tools that we have been using to really mine this data in an unbiased manner was really using a gene co-expression network. And specifically weighted gene co-expression network, which is pioneered by Steve Horvath in 2005 at UCLA and used by many colleagues, including Dengeshwin and myself and many others and people at Allen Institute. And so basically what we are looking at, spatial temporal variance. You know, we are trying to collect and see whether there is an organization of gene expression dynamics using a variance across time and regions. And basically, depending on what parameters you use, you can come up with hundreds of these networks or modules and what they are contained of genes that have same behavior. It's basically that's how Google makes money. They know that I like guitar and red wine, and my wife likes shoes. And so basically similar principle, you probably know more than me about it. And so basically you can now organize these genes into large or small modules. Modules come in two basically. They are either very large, and here are two largest one in the human developmental brain transcriptome. M means module two is just an arbitrary number that we give it. So M two is a large over 3,000 genes, and they all behave pretty much the same. And so this is a basic PC one. You can even create their eigen gene. And so all they do is that they are expressed low in during fetal development. They go up, reach plateau around childhood, early childhood, and they stay pretty much the same in all neocortical and all regions of the brain that we have analyzed. You can actually even find another large, which is M 20, it's a very large developmentally regulated, but this network is around also 3,000 genes, slightly less, I think. And what it does is basically all of these genes are basically being down-regulated across the entire. And so the second thing we can do with this type of analysis, we can then do functional notation. So we know what is the list of the genes. We can rank them by basically how close is their dynamics to eigen gene or PC one. And basically then we can look at also enrichment of gene ontologies using David and other similar databases.  On the other hand, genes that are up-regulated when you are creating neurons are mainly genes related to zinc-finger transcription factor and SOC transcription factor. My other work that I'm not going to talk today has shown that many of these are important for specifying neuronal identities. So you can clearly see that these are not just meaningless networks or modules, that there are really some meaningless. And in addition to this large one that you know, you can also create or get many that are small, handful of genes that are really going up or down, depending on the time or region. And in specific, and I'll show you an example later on. So now the other interesting thing, which was one of my most disappointing things, and this is why I like hypothesis-free. So the reason we did this whole entire study, my primary motivation was find left and right asymmetry.  I mean functionally, structurally, comparing to other species. And so we decided, okay, let's do left and right.  And so here are two types of analysis we have done to tell you that sometimes hypothesis-free is probably the best. So what you see here is each region that we have analyzed. So these are, in this case, I'm just showing you neocortical areas. So this is a medial prefrontal cortex, orbital, those are lateral. This is Broca. This corresponds to primary auditory, which you all know that's highly, and this is a superior temporal gyrus, which would correspond to vernicare language areas. And you can see that we have covered really areas that are highly functionally, as well as structurally asymmetric. And so this is a heat map, basically showing fall differences, and you can see that majority of the gene basically fall within, you know. We see a lot of variations, left and right in individual brains, but at the population level, nothing passes even the most relaxed statistical criteria. So one thing in mind that we are looking at the population and we are grounding the tissue, so that's also another thing that you have to keep in mind. And secondly, we do see variation, but unfortunately nothing is consistent at the population level, using even same ethnicity, same periods and stuff like that. Another, as many of you probably know, there have been a lot of literature showing, okay, maybe one other model of left and right asymmetries that left and right hemispheres mature differently. That has been shown using functional studies, so here is a plot of left and right. So what we are looking at, individual neocortical areas transcriptomes, okay? We can do this based on individual genes or whole transcriptomes, so in this case, just to show you global data. So the left trajectories of individual areas are shown either in dashed or full line, and you can see that they all basically behave the same and there is no statistical difference in maturation trajectories. So what we are showing here is that at the population level, if you look at individual areas, there is no anything statistically significant and that their maturation trajectories are similar left and right. Now, there are many, many consequences of this finding and we are happy to discuss if you are interested. So another thing that really we're interested in doing this is, and Tomomi really beautifully, I mean, I'm actually very happy that she gave talk before me because I will say in a couple of minutes explaining. She showed you also examples that we actually have around 20,000 protein coding genes. I mean, we share them all with platypus. I mean, there are very few genes that are really unique to human brain and I'm not sure that they are even meaningful. Okay, that's my honest, just opinion, just the number. And we see tremendous variety and variations in morphological development. We see the cognitive development and basically it has been long known from Wilson and King in 1975 that basically what probably creates all of this is a spatial temporal variations in gene expression. And that was another reason where we were motivated to do this. And Tomomi showed you the same gene that basically is slightly differently expressed in different species and I think this is something very important. And so human cortex as you probably know, probably has more areas than other species that are commonly used in laboratories such as non-human primates or rodents. And so we are motivated to look at what's happening in dynamic of this aerial expression pattern. And so if you cluster this area, so this is a clustering of 11 neocortical areas, hierarchical clustering unsupervised based on their whole transcriptome. And you can see that we can cluster them by lobes as well. So for example, this is a prefrontal cortex. This is a motor primary, motor primary sensor. They are next to each other anatomically. But what's really also exciting is that you can also cluster areas that belong to different, in addition to topographic nearest neighbor, you can also cluster them based on whether they are functionally more related because ITC is part of the temporal cortex, but here we see clustering of angular gyrus, primary auditory and superior temporal, which are basically all important for functional posterior language areas and speech and labor. So the first thing we look actually, the number of genes expressed actually is slightly less as you mature, but it's not really big difference. But what was really surprising to us when we look at how much of difference do you see between areas?  So, yeah, exactly. You can see that it's actually highly enriched in sensory areas, but there are variations across the species, but also there are variations and that's how she fished out the gene across the development. So we look at how different are neocortical areas across the entire development. And surprising this has not been done with any mouse or any other species, but our dataset allows us to do that. And so basically what we are now plotting is how many genes are differentially expressed between two neocortical areas. Keep in mind that the number of expressed genes really, it's slightly less in mature brain, but it's basically pretty much similar, okay? And this is what happens. On average, there are basically almost 1000, little bit less than 1000 genes that are differentially expressed, okay? But when it comes to early development, postnatal infants in childhood that drops dramatically and then goes up again in adolescence and adulthood. And so basically the shape is not that it goes more fetal and progressively less, it's actually does this U-shape curve, okay? What suggests that actually, and it's consistent with previous data I showed you, that most of the difference are present postnatally, but what happens that has this big dip and then again goes up and basically has this temporal hourglass pattern. And this is a Manhattan plot and basically it's a tachy test basically looking at how many combinations are of these genes between two different areas.  And you can see that actually that some areas have more differential expressed genes and here is the example. So medial prefrontal, okay? Ventralata, this is a corresponding to frontal opericum, it should be prospective Broca language area or premotor. And look at this visual, primary visual and temporal cortex. Those are basically areas that are driving mostly differential expression in the fetal development. And then suddenly the drop does not happen at birth. That was second surprising finding. The drop does not happen actually. I don't know exactly when it happens because unfortunately we don't have tissue between 24 and 35 is just impossible to collect it for reasons of heroic medicine in the United States. But we predict that drop happens in between 24 weeks of post conception and 35.  So this drop does not happen. It happens before birth, okay? And then this drop stays actually relatively constant, okay? So there are still genes that are differentially expressed and consistent especially between primary sensory areas. And then a gong goes up and not all areas are actually going up equally. Again, it's mainly driven by media prefrontal cortex and primary visual cortex. So now what are the genes that are driving this temporal hourglass? And so basically we look at, again, use the network analysis and to find. And so basically we can again cluster genes. And basically, so these are the modules. Don't worry about the numbers. But what we observed is actually exactly what I was showing you. That many of these modules are sometimes hands, a handful of genes, sometimes a few dozen of genes. Really actually they are all co-regulated in the same regions, but also what we observed are dependent on the time. This is period three, which corresponds to early fetal development. So this is a set of genes that is highly upregulated in lateral parts of the prefrontal cortex. And they are all down in non-prefrontal areas. We can find a set of genes that are actually doing this in the temporal areas. We can see that only doing in primary visual areas or medial areas and on and on and on, okay? Another feature, which I'll show you just one example later, that most of these are temporary regulated, as you would expect. Because remember that temporal hourglass shape is actually almost completely disappeared. And here is an example of one module M91. So it's a set of genes that are all highly expressed in the prefrontal area. So this is a clustering. And then basically somewhere in between six and period seven that this pattern is completely turned on. So they are all probably somehow co-regulated, either by some transcriptional makers and gene regulatory network or activity. We don't know what it is. On the other hand, many of the genes that are temporary regulated and spatially regulated in prenatal development actually turn on in all areas. So there is like a gradient. So that's basically two basic flavors. Another important thing, I'm not going to show you any data just for the sake of time. When we did the same analysis for postnatal development, especially adolescents, we actually had no gradients. Majority of gene expression modules were either related to sensory versus non-sensory areas or were expressed across the entire cortex and related to either sex differences or some other difference. So why is this interesting? Well, it's interesting because you can also do one other thing. You can give me a piece of prenatal tissue and I can tell you exactly how old is the brain and what is the part of the brain using six, 11 areas. Because each of them have a very unique transcriptional signature and it's actually changing across the time and you can divide. And at that time, it's very hard to find that there are no anatomical borders. Brain is completely smooth, I mean cortex. And what is really important that many of these genes, and Tomomi showed you some of them, are actually have been linked to major psychiatric disorders and some of them we have actually also studied in our human genetic studies. When we look at the transcave variants, I mean all genes that if you have two axon, you will be spliced at some point in development. And also, I'm not going to show you any data, except one slide. We have also compared this data with non-human primates and many of them have differential expression differences in species differences. To show you how you can really find and Tomomi stole this slide because she showed the same thing. So I was, it was too late to remove it. But, so here is an example of two genes. So this is a cerebellion two. It's a gene that was discovered in the cerebellum, was called cerebellion two. But actually what is really interesting has a really specific prefrontal gradient and you can see beautifully labeled prefrontal areas, labels all neurons. And if you look at the mouse, you can see the same thing in the mouse. However, here is an important thing. If you look at the human, it labels all layers equally. Basically this is the bottom of the cortical plate or the top, but in the mouse, it's really highly expressed in the upper layers. And this is a work from colleagues at Allen Brain Institute. And here is another gene that really was, I was so excited when I get this in situ, but, and then, so here is a gene, MP5. You all know MP5, it labels interneurons. It's one of the most commonly used markers of interneurons and you can see interneurons. But also heavily labels a visual and some temporary areas. And these are probably layer four neurons. I think they are actually, what does MP5 do that? We don't know that. If you look at the mouse, it's actually not expressed in the primary visual cortex, pyramidal cells or layer four cells. So here is a simple species difference for a very commonly studied genes. And I, to me, made the same point and I wanted to finish with this slide. And so a couple of points that I wanted to show. So basically 90% of protein coding genes are expressed in the human brain. That is going up. You have to keep one thing in mind, that this number that is a shooting and moving target, the problem is that we are grounding the tissue.  So basically if gene has two axons, will be spliced for sure. So basically 90% of genes are somehow differentially regulated, either splicing or expression.  I did not talk about it. Transcriptome is organized into either small or large networks of temporary, especially, co-expressed genes. We think that they are somehow co-regulated. Prenatal development is most dynamic. I think it was neocortical transcriptome is globally symmetric and it's globally symmetric and exhibits temporal hourglass pattern. What drives that pattern? That pattern happens before birth. What happens that all those gradients are globally turned down and disappear? I don't know what the mechanisms. I can speculate on it. And also some developmentally regulated genes showed differences across species. So, this work was done primarily by these colleagues here. I'm not going to list them individually for sake of time. I would like to my colleagues and brain span. Many colleagues at Yale that basically introduced me to genomics and helped me do this. And I mean, I'm really grateful to all of them and funding, thank you. We have time for some questions. Go. Given that you're mushing the brain, it's not surprising you don't find a symmetry. And the neuronal type differences in gene expression are washed away. So, the odds of finding slight changes are going to be covered by the majority of the cells in the region, astrocytes and excitatory neurons. Yeah, so that's simple, straightforward criticism. But there have been previous reports showing left and right differences this. We actually don't see any of it. And one of the problems is also sample size. The more you add, it washes out because you also see inter-individual variations. And it's impossible to do this. It's really, and even at the levels of neurons, I've been, this really changed my thinking because I was somebody who believed in genes, but I've been really more and more activity dependent. I mean, look at the mom's work. I mean, you know, it's a gene is expressed, but it really can change the dendrites and is expressed in multiple areas. So there are two possibilities. One is what you said, which I think is likely. Our study was not designed to fish for those and detect them. So that's one caveat. But it also shows that these differences are going to be minute. They are not going to be across the entire neocortical areas. And finally, I also do think that there will be a lot of effect of activity dependent mechanisms.   And I have two hemispheres and cannot get rid of my accent.  And almost, you know, I'm incredibly intelligent. They go to college, and you would not recognize them. I have seen one. And I have accent, and I have two hemispheres. But it's really interesting how environment can change your brain. And I've been thinking more and more about it in the context of these problems. One possibility would be to do nuclear RNA and isolate. Yes, we are doing that, sir. We are on the same. Thank you. Beautiful talk, Nenet. And probably it's really related to your question. And I don't know anything about these things. But for the asymmetric AC, are there any possibility that Salamis is also controlling this asymmetric functioning?  I mean, one of my favorite papers was, I forget the name. It was Japanese group 1982, remember? And they'd lesion the future position of the battle cortex in the mouse. And battle cortex move completely to auditory and develop completely. So your work is also showing, I mean, if you mess up the gradients, you can have two battlefields. So it's remarkably plastic. So it's not, I mean, the only thing this tells you is not going to be simple. So that's basically what it tells you. And I was naive thinking that it would be that easy. And also guided by some previous work. Then we close this session. I would like to thank Nenet again for great work.


Now those students has work of the following problem. It says the sixth term of an arithmetic progression that is AP is minus 10 and the tenth term is minus 26. Determine the fifteenth term of the AP. So let's now move on to the solution. To find the fifteenth term we should know the journal formula for finding the nth term of the AP. So the nth term of the AP that is arithmetic progression is given by a n which is equal to a plus n minus 1 into d where a is the first term of the AP and d is the common difference. Whenever you do such problems you need to write what is a what is d and that is very important. Now we are given that the sixth term the arithmetic progression that is AP is minus 10 that is a6 is equal to a plus 6 minus 1 into d. Now a6 is minus 10 so this implies a plus 6 minus 1 that is 5 into d is minus 10. Let's call this as equation 1. Now we are given that the nth term of AP is minus 26. So again using this formula we have minus 26 is equal to a plus 10 minus 1 d that is plus 9 d is equal to minus 26. Let's name this as 2 and here you can also write that nth term is 8n which is given by a plus 10 minus 1 into d and 8n is minus 26. Now we will solve these two equations for a and d because to find the 15th term we need to know the first term and the common difference. So we subtract equation 2 from equation 1 like this a plus 5 d is equal to minus 10 and a plus 9 d is equal to minus 26. Now subtracting whenever we subtract sign changes so plus a gets cancelled with minus a plus 5 d minus 9 d is minus 4 d and 26 minus 10 is 16. So this implies d is equal to 16 upon minus 4 and this implies d is equal to minus 4. Now we will substitute the value of d in any one of the two equations to get the value of a. So we have from equation 1 we have a plus 5 d which is minus 4 is equal to minus 10. So this implies a minus 20 is equal to minus 10 and this implies a is equal to minus 10 plus 20 and this implies a is equal to 10. So the first term is 10. Now since we have obtained the first term and the common difference of the arithmetic progression we can easily find out the 15th term and the 15th term a15 is given by a plus 15 minus 1 into d. Now substitute the values of a and d here. So a15 is equal to 10 plus 14 into minus 4. So this is equal to minus 46. So the 15th term of the arithmetic progression is minus 46. So this completes the question and the session. Bye for now. Take care. Have a very nice day.


Welcome to dealing with materials data. This is course on collection analysis and interpretation of data from material science and engineering. We are in module 5 which is on fitting and graphical handling of data. In this session I am going to be talking primarily about graphical handling but we will also do a little bit of fitting along the way. We have seen that if you have a set of data you can calculate the average and distribution of the data and from which you can estimate the mean and standard deviation and if you know something about the probability distribution from which this data is sampled you can even get properties of that probability distribution by looking at the data but those are very simple things that we have done. So, either parameter estimation as a point estimate or as an interval to say that okay this is the probability that the true mean will lie in this range and things like that. Now what we are interested is in a slightly more detailed analysis because when we do experiments typically we vary some independent parameter and make some measurement. For example you can say that okay I will change the grain size and I will look at the strength or you can say I will change the composition I will look at the lattice parameter or you can say I will change the temperature and I will look at the thermal expansion coefficient. So these are the kind of things that we do and the composition or temperature or grain size then becomes an independent parameter and the measurement that you make in terms of strength or lattice parameter or the thermal expansion coefficient then becomes the dependent variable. So here is an example so determine strength of pure copper you can do that by varying temperature grain size alloying addition or percentage cold working. Now our interest is typically in knowing how strength is related to these parameters but we cannot directly read it off from the data because the data consists of statistical errors. In some cases for example between strength and grain size you might think that okay I know what is the relationship, hall patch is the relationship. In some cases we might not know how does it change with temperature or composition or percentage cold work maybe we have no idea or somebody says that the relationship is hall patch I am doing the experiment to actually test whether it is hall patch. So in all these cases we have to establish a relationship between independent parameter and the measurement that we are making and there are several scenarios where the relationship is known or where you are trying to test that relationship or where you are just exploring and trying to find if there is a relationship and so on and so forth. So we want to do this quantitatively as well as qualitatively so you can do it graphically and analytically or computationally and from NIST monograph 177 properties of copper and copper alloys at cryogenic temperatures there is a whole bunch of data on all these aspects which we will be using in this session extensively and to describe what is it that we are trying to do so there are independent variables X i and we are making measurement Y i and Y i is related to X i but there might also be other unknown parameters that go into this expression and so we need to estimate this and we need to establish this relationship so that is what we are trying to do. So the first thing to do is always to plot the data and just looking at the data it is possible to identify trends and if the error bars are available you should always plot with error bars because without error bars sometimes you might read off wrong trends. Once you see the trend then you can fit and every time you do fitting it is always a good idea to plot the data and the fit together and it is also a good idea to analyze the residuals. What is a residual? So if you have made a fit and if you have data how far are these data points from your fit is a good thing to look at and if it is proper fit because the residual is an error it should be a random error which means it should show the characteristics of being a random variable. Now before we go into the copper database we are going to do some very simple analysis just to show how plotting is a good idea and after plotting how do we go about fitting the data in in R. So I am going to use two data sets one is variation of density and lattice parameter with composition in silicon germanium alloys. This is because we know that with composition the lattice parameter will change linearly and this is known as Weger's law. So we are going to check that and get the Weger's law coefficients and that is this exercise. The second one is a variation of linear thermal expansion with temperature in boron nitride in a given temperature in 77 to 1289 Kelvin. This is also a data taken from the literature and in this case we are going to do a little bit more exploratory than this because in this case it is known that lattice parameter and composition should be straight line. So if you plot and you see that it is a straight line then you can go ahead fit and get the parameters but here let us say that we do not know what the relationship is and we are going to explore and find out how it is done. So these are the two exercises that we are going to do. So let us start R and let us do the first thing. So we are going to first read the data silicon germanium lattice parameter and density and in composition I am going to store the mole percent of silicon and in the variable A I am going to store the lattice constant and let us say plot C and A. So let us do this as the first exercise. So we have plotted and you can see that as composition changes the lattice parameter changes and from the plot it is clear that it is a straight line. So then we can ask a straight line fit to be made and that is done using the command. So that is done using the command fit. We want of linear fit between A and C and we are going to plot a line using the fit coefficients. So these two I am going to not do right now. So let us do this. So we fit it and so it is as simple as that just say fit and you can look at the coefficients of the fitted line and then draw a line and you can see that we have a nice line running through the points and you can see that the error is random the points lie on either side but quite close to the data and so that is what is done. You can say that you can plot the fit residuals right. So this is the error you can see about 0 on either side the data is scattered very nicely and you can also plot the QQ norm of the residuals to know whether that is normal or not. Remember this is another way of knowing if your data is distributed normally. So if it is more or less a straight line you know that the error is normally distributed. So this is a rather straightforward exercise. Let us go now to the next one which is to get the thermal expansion coefficient of boron nitride. So in this case again we read the data BN linear thermal expansion and we store temperature as T and we store the linear thermal expansion as alpha and in this case there is also error that is given standard deviation. So we store that as standard deviation then we plot the data and then we put the error bars and that is what is done using this. So let us do this and it is telling that 0 length arrow that is because one of the data points is the reference with respect to which everything is taken so it has no error bar or error bar is 0 that is what it is telling. Now by looking at this data one can see that this could be a straight line and this could be a straight line. So there could be two straight lines for this data. So if we do not do that if we just fit let us do that. So you can see that you can fit a straight line but the straight line is not looking like a very good fit for this data and it would be easier or better if we can fit a straight line here and if we can fit a straight line here. So this is also clear if you look at the fit residuals. So residuals actually show a trend and you can also do the QQ norm of the residuals and you can see that that also is not quite a straight line. So one thing to do is that let us take the data points. Let us leave out the first four and take the remaining data points and do a fit at first. So what we have done is we take the same data now we leave out the first four data points and then for the rest of them we try to fit a linear curve and you can see that it fits very nicely and here the data is above and below and probably normally distributed. You can do a similar thing for the first four data points. How do we do that? So we can so you can leave out from 5 to 12 and then do the plot and of course also do the fitting and so you can see that it also fits for these two data points and of course we can do the other thing namely that we can take the data do both the fits. So what is it that we are doing? We are reading the data and we are leaving out the first four data points we are making one fit. We are leaving out the fifth to 12 data points we are making the second fit. We are going to plot the data and we are going to plot both the fit lines. So you can see that so this is fit for a straight line and this fit is for a straight line. So you can say that there are two regimes below 600 for example you can fit it with one linear curve and above 600 you can fit it with another linear curve. But if you just look at the data it is also possible that the data looks like a parabolic curve. You might think that oh this might fit a nice parabola. Is that true? Well one can check and that is what the last exercise now is. So we have the data and now let us do the we are going to do the so I am going to take t squared and I am going to fit alpha versus t squared and this is how I have plotted the data. You can already see that this is becoming more or less a straight line. So it will fit a nice straight line. And of course you can look at the fit residuals and confirm that they are you can see that about 0 on either side they are there and they are randomly scattered and you can also look at the okay so this is like a straight line again indicating that we have got a better fit. So the purpose of this exercise is that whenever you get data you should always plot it and see and most of the times by I you can do a very good fit. In the first case it was linear so it was not surprising that we thought okay it is linear fit. In the second case one could clearly discern that it cannot be fit for a single straight line then there are several different ways of fitting and we saw two one is to fit for two different straight lines so that you will get most of the data follow the trend. The other one is to see if you can make a higher order fit and in that case we just took the square of the temperature and we saw that actually it does follow a nice straight line if that is the case. So and you can do the analysis after doing the fit and it is always a good idea to plot the data along with the fit to see that it is nice and this again gives you an idea that okay the errors are all random and it passes through closes to most of the points so this might be a very good fit. So in this case we found that it is actually parabola that fits it better. So in many cases in material science and engineering you might already know what is the expected trend is for example sometimes it is a Arrhenius type. So we know that if you take one by temperature and logarithm of one quantity it should show a straight line and so on. So in cases where it is not a straight line there are sometimes methods to convert it into straight line and even if it is some generic power law logarithm always makes it into a straight line for example. So there are also other ways of exploring data so one should always plot and see and if you do not know the if you know the functional relationship you can try to exactly plot that and see and if you do not know then you can explore and by looking at the plot most of the times you will be able to get the fit correctly or estimate the fit correctly and or at least if you make a fit and if you plot it and see you will know whether it is good or not just by eye and then there are other ways of checking that your fit is good by doing the analysis on the data. This is just a starting so we will continue doing more of the fitting and linear regression and analyzing the regression results and so on and so forth. But this is just a starting point of some linear fitting and some non-linear fitting quadratic fitting a parabolic fit that we saw and we also see that somebody might as well fit it as two different straight lines for two different regimes and the data fit. So one cannot say whether one fit is better than the other except if you have physical reasons to believe that this is the right fit or if there are changes in mechanism that you do expect a linear fit in different regions and a slope change between these two regions. So these are things sometimes known from your knowledge of material science and engineering and if you do not know then you can do exploratory in which case you can try different things and whatever serves your purpose you can pick that. So we will continue doing more fitting in the sessions to come in this module. Thank you.


This is Anabaptist Perspectives, and we are here today to talk about money. Steve Russell is with us today, and we're going to talk about money in pre-modern Catholicism. Steve is not a stranger to Anabaptist Perspectives. He has been with us on numerous previous episodes, and he is the author of Overcoming Evil God's Way. He teaches history and theology at Faith Builders Educational Programs. In preparation for this conversation, I try to orient myself somewhat to the issues involved, because much of this is new to me, and so I have a lot to learn here. But I found this article in Crisis Magazine, it's a lay Catholic publication. The article was written by Jeffrey Tucker, and he says this. One of the earliest statements against interest comes from the Council of Icya, which sought to crack down on abaricious practices among the clergy, among which was lending money at a profit. The Council condemned this and other attempts at, this is in quotes, dishonorable gain. It was surely a wise teaching necessary to stop corruption, but there was a slight problem. The Council broadened its mandate beyond the priesthood and implied that the practice was universally wrong. It added scriptural proof from the psalmist that interest itself was immoral. He that hath not put out his money to usury, nor taken bribes against the innocent, he that doth these things shall not be moved forever. So how did the Catholic Church view money and economics prior to and leading up to the Reformation? Did this statement in the Council of Icya become the dominant position in the Church? I believe the statement in Icya was directed specifically at the clergy, but over time that was broadened out, as was suggested here in the quote that you read, to everyone. The reason for that is they looked back at the Old Testament which says to the Jewish people that they may not lend money to their own brothers at interest. They should give or loan money, but not at interest. They can loan it to a stranger or a non-Jew at interest, and the early Christians took that and made it their own. So if there was a Christian who needed money, we should give, but we shouldn't ask for usury or interest, which back in the early days would have been seen as identical. Nowadays when you talk about usury, people mean excessive interest, but back here it would have meant any interest. So it got broadened out to the Christians in general, which is one of the reasons over time Jews became the main money lenders in Europe, because it was all right for them to lend money at interest to Christians. They couldn't lend it to their own people at interest, but they could lend it to Christians, and Christians weren't supposed to lend money to each other at interest. Over time this did change in the, I don't know, probably high middle ages. The Christians started to develop banks, and banks handle money, but they also have to make money through using money. One of the things that the early Christians would have said is that it's wrong for money to engender money. There was a real emphasis on work. You should work with your hands to produce profit, produce money. It was seen as immoral for money to make money, but once you start having a banking system, you're into a little bit more of a problem. I don't know all the details, but the banks started to come up with ways that they could use money and charge for the use of the money, and therefore they could actually be a legitimate business that made money with money, I guess you could say. One of the things that the church said was necessary was if you're going to have a banking system, then there has to be risk on both ends, the person who's borrowing and the person who's lending the money. I guess that was seen as somehow making it more proper if I'm at danger of losing some money, and you are also at danger, one of us lending to the other. All the way up until the 1800s, a Catholic priest, if he felt that there was a reason to ask in the confession booth, one of his parishioners, if he was lending money out of interest, that was a legitimate question for the priest to ask. Are you lending money? Are you getting interest on it? That only changed in the, I think it would have been the early 1800s, and part of the reason for that is by that point the Catholics started to see that there might be some kind of legitimacy in lending money out at a rate of interest that wasn't too high so that somebody could start a business or somebody could buy a farm. As our economic system changed, the church's position in the 1800s started to shift as well. You've briefly mentioned some of the thinking behind this. You mentioned the Old Testament, you mentioned the resistance to money being made just by virtue of having money, but I'm curious if you could talk more about the ideas or the thoughts that motivated this strong resistance to usury or interest. I think one part of it is that there was actually an emphasis on being productive, actually making something, going out and farming or becoming a skilled tradesman who could make something with his hands. The emphasis was on that, that we should be producers. When it seemed to the Catholics that this was at least a questionable way of making a livelihood, where you were using money to produce more money, they felt that it was more proper and more fitting with what we are as humans who are made in the image of God to actually produce something. The emphasis was on production and if you could make a living without the production that would be a threat to what they believed related to be happening when somebody was making an income. Yes, I think so. So how did the Protestant reformers engage with this? Because we've been talking about this as a Catholic position, but those in the Reformation who left the church. I'm curious, was it something that they often also wanted to reform or did they accept the Catholic position? I would say Luther was probably the one who most closely stayed with the Catholic position. Calvin saw the possibility of using money to make money and to become more productive. And so Calvin was much more open to this, although he also saw the dangers of usury or he thought it was legitimate that it could be legitimate for someone to borrow money to start a business, let's say. But he also saw the danger of seeing a significant part of my income is going to come out of the money that I lent to you and that you're going to be paying me back with interest. Calvin saw that as at least potentially dangerous, but he thought we needed to be willing to help a brother who was either had an idea about starting a business or maybe was just in need. Now that, I think Calvin would have agreed with the Catholics that if it's a brother in need, he's had some kind of financial setback and really needs money to keep on going. I think that Calvin would have said you should give it to him without interest, which would have been the Catholic position. One thing that Calvin is very clear about is that even though it might be legitimate for me to lend you some money and charge interest if you've got this business that you want to do, nobody should make that his way of making his money. Nobody should be a user only. I might have enough money that I can lend you some money, but I shouldn't make my livelihood that way. This concept too of risk, the Catholics, the medieval Catholics had that and I think the Protestants, I don't know if they would have focused on that, but it's out of this concept that I think, I don't know as much about the economics as I should, but I think it's where the joint stock company came out where people would put money together, they would fit out ships and send them out to Asia to get spices or something like that. We're all risking this, our money together. I think that was seen as a legitimate way to invest and maybe make a lot of money out of that investment. It's not from Calvin, but later on the Calvinist started shifting. Calvin was very careful about the legitimacy of lending out money, but later on the whole thing about borrowing and lending out money and growing a company that becomes successful because I borrowed money, that starts to be seen among Calvinists as a sign that you're probably one of the elect if you can be a successful businessman. Calvin actually would have been a little bit hesitant about that. If you were a successful businessman, it might be because you were avaricious to use the word that you had quoted earlier. It's a kind of a mixed picture, but over time as it became clear that borrowing money could benefit people, even the poor, both the Protestants, the Protestants first accepted it and used it a lot and then the Catholics kind of followed along and saw it as potentially good. Well, that's very interesting. I think many in our audience will be curious what the Anabaptist, the first Anabaptist how to say about this, but I think we'll leave that for another episode, which we can hopefully get to later today. But I'm curious what you think. We're talking about what the early Catholics thought, we're talking about what the Protestant reformers thought, but as an Anabaptist yourself and a reader of the Bible, I'm curious what your take on these questions is. One of my favorite classes to teach at Faith Builders is Old Testament Survey. I don't consider myself a businessman, I'm not a businessman, and I don't consider myself someone who necessarily has a lot of deep insight about economics, but I was over time, I probably taught the class about 20 times. I started to notice all of the concern in the Old Testament for the person who's down on his luck, so to speak. I also noticed that in Deuteronomy, it says that the land I'm taking you into is a prosperous land, it's a fruitful land and there should not be any poor among you. Then just a few verses after that it says, but if there are poor among you, and then it gives programs to help these people and let's face it, some people are better businessmen, some people are better farmers, some people are better managers, there are going to be some people who have trouble, but the Old Testament is concerned about that, it cares for human flourishing. We no longer live in an agrarian society like they did, and most of the history of the Catholic Church and even the early Protestant Church, most of the people were farmers, so it was an agrarian society, and that kind of society can take care of the poor a little bit differently than a society that has become urban and industrialized, and I guess maybe post-industrialized now for us, but I think that the care that is shown in the Old Testament is something that we have to look at and ask ourselves, so in our setting what do we do? It doesn't mean exactly what's in the Old Testament anymore, it just wouldn't work. One of the beautiful things in the Old Testament is almost everyone lived on a farm, and so if I was a bad manager and I lost my farm, and I might even have to sell my children into slavery, well depending on when the Jubilee year comes along, either my own children, maybe even myself, I might get a new start when the Jubilee year comes because the Jubilee was the time when all debts were forgiven, and the land that originally belonged to my family would be given back, so if I didn't get the second chance, maybe my son would, or maybe my grandson would, there was built into the system ways to help people not be burdened by the problems that dad or granddad had, and I think modern Christians have to be inventive. How can we help each other? Well that sounds like wisdom to me, so thank you for sharing your thoughts and orienting us a bit to the history. This is part of a larger series that we're doing about economics, so this will provide some helpful framing I think for some of the episodes that are coming up next where we talk about distributism and hopefully an Anabaptist perspective on this also. Okay so thank you. Thank you for joining us for this episode and thanks to our donors and partners for making this possible. To learn more about this ministry, view our About Us video linked below. You can also subscribe to our supporters update at anabaptistperspectives.org


Good morning, everybody. We're going to get started. Good morning. Thank you all so much for coming here. What a beautiful day. It's a beautiful day today to fight for the future of NYCHA. I'm Jessica Katz. I'm the city's chief housing officer, and I'm so excited to be here with our residents and our partners to send a clear message. It's time to pass the NYCHA Preservation Trust now. We cannot wait and hope for a windfall of billions of dollars that has been promised for decades without coming. Our neighbors who live in NYCHA buildings have waited long enough, and they deserve better. The trust will bring the money, the repairs, and the rights that every New Yorker's home should have. And even more, this legislation guarantees that these apartments will remain permanently affordable for future generations. It is on us to fight for that future, and the trust is how we will get there. Albany has the opportunity to deliver the biggest windfall to NYCHA residents since it was created 85 years ago. And this is about the residents, which is why today I am excited to hand it over to one of the many resident advocates who tirelessly fights for her tenants, Barbara McFadden, the TA of No-Stream Houses. Today is a glorious day with that being said. Cup cheer for Brooklyn South and resident leader for Sheep Sabay No-Stream Housing. May I have the opportunity to stand side by side with you, one of my greatest mentors, who always inspired me to do my best. In these, when you were a police officer, you saved my brother's life. At this New York City public housing trust is the best option in moving forward. New York City Housing Authority. I'm very confident that public housing trust needs to create a new start, or shall I say, a new change in New York City housing. I came far, and I'm not leaving without that bill. Legislation and our governor, we urge all elected officials to support public housing trust. Together, we can create a far-reaching party. Thank you so much, Ms. McFadden. We really appreciate your passion and your leadership and your willingness to fight for the future of your tenants. When we envision the public housing trust, we wanted to make sure to absolutely protect the tenant rights that everybody in NYCHA currently enjoys under public housing in Section 9. So we really made sure that the bill encoded those rights within the bill itself. But you don't have to take my word for it. I want to introduce from the Legal Aid Society, Adrian Holder, to speak a little bit about their vision for the trust.  It is the New York City public housing preservation trust. It's about preserving some of the most important, most impactful housing we have here in New York City. Not only does it house some of our most valued and committed residents who helped to make this city great, but public housing has been proven in stabilizing those households so that it's good healthcare, it is good education policy, it is good employment policy. We need to preserve our public housing, and the preservation trust will do that. It is obscene and demoralizing to have $40 billion, $40 billion of needed capital repairs to this vital housing stock would not have been permissible in any other circumstances except we saw extreme divestment of the federal and the state government. And it is important that now the state do the right thing and pass this trust and keep public housing public. Public housing needs to remain public, and it needs to have a voice with the residents taking the lead. And I'm so pleased and honored to have so many of you all here with us today. So it is about getting this done at the state level. Can we hear? We want the housing, public housing preservation trust here to be passed. This is the moment to do otherwise is just to make a decision that we are going to allow the loss of this vital and important housing stock for New York. Thank you so much for having me here, and I look forward to speaking with everyone and continuing to work together. All of us on getting this to happen. Thank you very much. Trust the Trust. Next up we have Community Service Society, who's one of the most dedicated organizations supporting NYCHA, and I'm proud to welcome CSS's Emerita Torres. Thanks so much. Trust the Trust. Trust the Trust. It's great to be here. I represent the Community Service Society of New York where for 175 years we've been working to power a more equitable city and state that includes for NYCHA residents. We have advocated for decades for better living conditions, for better policies, and for public housing residents, all of you today, to have a decision to have a role at the decision-making table for you to have a voice. And that's what this trust is about. This includes that fight. What we see today in public housing is deplorable. I don't have to say that it's a critical time because it's always been a critical time. It's always been critical. My grandmother helped raise me in public housing. This is personal for me. My father still lives in public housing in Soundview. So I come here with a policy perspective, but I also come here with this personal. It's very personal. The NYCHA Preservation Trust is the solution. It represents a comprehensive strategy for the preservation of public housing. This will assure the future of NYCHA and all of you, all of its residents, even if Washington doesn't come to the rescue. We don't think it will. I have serious doubts. It has the potential to address the full $40 billion capital backlog and restore decent conditions at every development while keeping our public housing public and empowering residents by giving them, giving all of you an unprecedented voice in decision-making. When it comes to what developments go through the process, which ones don't, how the process moves forward, you will have a decision-making role in that process, and that is critical. With the mayor and the state and everyone here, I want to say loudly and proudly the Community Service Society supports the trust. We are behind you, and we're going to do everything we can to see it succeed. Thank you. So next we have the honor of hearing from Bishop Taylor from Urban Upbound, who has worked with NYCHA Residents for years. Bishop Taylor. Good job. Thank you so much, everyone. Good morning. Good morning. Good morning. Good morning. I want to thank all of you for joining us on today as we amplify this very auspicious time that so many people have worked so hard to bring us to. Glad to see so many of our legislators here, my good friend Brad Lander, and all of the people that make the things that we need in our communities possible. I want to applaud Chair Russ, the executive team, Mayor Adams, and all the many advocates of the trust, especially those who work tirelessly to explain its purpose and its extraordinary benefits to the residents of public housing. The preservation of public housing should be the public objective number one, public objective number one. The trust will create this vehicle, a vehicle that can drive this objective to success. This is a great day for residents of public housing. I want to thank the mayor for his promise not to forget public housing. His presence here today puts an explanation point on his ongoing commitment to make public housing a place where people can call home and feel good about it. I'm standing here today because I have a PhD and people often ask me, where did you get your PhD? What was your body of concentration, your body of work, Marsha? And I tell him I have a public housing degree. And I grew up in Queensbridge Houses and I'm a proud public housing resident. And I'm proud to say that we built an organization not from the outside in, but from the inside out, not from the top down, but from the bottom up. And over 20 years ago, I worked with Brad Lander and the Pratt Institute of Community Development. And here it is now 20 years later, urban upbound is breaking cycles of poverty across the city of New York. And so I'm standing with the trust on today. I'm standing with those that trust the trust and I'm trusting the process that this will be a vehicle that can help us meet our objective of preserving public housing in New York City. Thank you so much. Thank you so much, Bishop Taylor. The NYCHA needs $40 billion in investment. And we've been promised that from Washington year after year and decade after decade. And it's time honestly to take matters into our own hands and make some decisions. There is no silver bullet for NYCHA, but this is as close as we're going to get. The public housing trust provides the resources, the procurement relief and the resident rights and the resident decision making to opt into the trust as you see fit. So we're really optimistic that this is going to put NYCHA on a new track moving forward. My next speaker that I want to introduce is a housing wonk turned elected official. So we're really excited to have folks on the advocacy community come into practical leadership. And it's lovely to see a housing nerd in the halls of government with me. Thank you so much, Jessica. It really is an honor to be here with some other housing nerds. It's an honor to be with many amazing advocates. Thank you to my friends from Legal Aid Society and Community Service Society and Urban Upbound. Most important, it's an honor to be here with Ms. McFadden and this amazing set of public housing resident leaders. I'm going to get to trust in just a minute, but I want to start with the following point. Like, we cannot wait any longer to do right by our neighbors in public housing and by the buildings of the New York City Housing Authority. We just can't wait any more and that's for a few different reasons. I mean, it hasn't been right for a long time to leave our neighbors in the conditions that they have been in for years. We got a lot of folks here who live it and I see a lot of reporters who I know have themselves been inside with some of these folks inside the buildings, but most New Yorkers don't go inside public housing. It's by itself one of the largest cities in America, so we got a lot of our neighbors there, one in 16 New Yorkers. So it's a lot of folks, but most of the other New Yorkers aren't inside public housing, so they don't see conditions that they just would not tolerate for their neighbors, for other New Yorkers, for people whose families have every much right as yours and mine to live in solid living conditions. And in this case, it is the city that promised those living conditions in partnership with the federal government and has failed for years, for decades, to deliver on the basic promise of a decent place to live. So it is way past time, but there's other reasons why we just can't wait any longer. One is that in so many cases, the buildings themselves are beginning to be in jeopardy, right? So it's not only that we're leaving people in appalling conditions, it's that if we don't fix the roofs and fix the systems and modernize the buildings, there will come a time and it will not be that long from now when the buildings themselves simply cannot be saved and renovated. And if we get past that point, we will be in an impossible situation with half a million of our fellow New Yorkers. We can't wait any longer. Third, sadly, the federal government has shown itself unable to deliver on the resources that are necessary. I wish that were not the case. I fought so hard for Build Back Better. I fought so hard for a federal government that could deliver. I will keep fighting, but we can't wait for it because it is just not on the horizon as much as we're going to keep working for it as much as we might wish it. It is not that close and we can't wait for the federal government. And that means we have to act now in Albany. And that's why it's great to have our Mayor, Eric Adams, prioritizing the Knights of Preservation Trust because with this united group, we can get the Knights of Preservation Trust legislation passed in Albany this session before the session expires and moves forward. Now that the Mayor is here, it won't take too much longer. But I do just want to say this because, you know, trust is hard to come by. It gets lost and compromised pretty easily. So I sure understand why Knights of Residence don't have a lot of trust. Why they're skeptical when leaders say we got a new solution. Why they're anxious about a whole lot of things, including this. And I don't blame anybody. I'm with the folks who trust the trust, but I just want to say I don't blame anybody who doesn't. Well, trust has been burned and it's hard to get back. But that's why this legislation is so good and it's important to get down into the details. This keeps public housing public. It preserves tenant rights and it is the most significant legislation I have ever seen for giving resident leadership, resident involvement in choice and decision making about the future. And for those of you that haven't followed this step-by-step, the most significant set of changes that have been made to this legislation are to say resident voices first and foremost, developments will only go into the trust if their residents choose it. And that is a profound and important step that really strengthened the preservation trust is what took me across the finish line from somebody who was supportive but not coming out there and saying let's get it done to someone who's saying we must do it right now. The legislation needs to pass in Albany. The things that could give us that trust are strengthened. There's a role for oversight by residents. The controller's office will actually have power to audit the trust just like we do NYCHA. We commit to do that together with residents. We'll have an audit committee of resident leaders to help make sure. And that is why I believe we cannot wait any longer. The trust-building measures that are in this legislation are clear. It is time to pass the NYCHA preservation trust and bring renovations to tens of thousands of units in our fellow New Yorkers. Thank you, Mayor, for leading on this. Thank you to Jessica for building our team on it. Let's get it done! Thank you so much, Brad. So in the process of crisscrossing the city, speaking to public housing residents, I'm always struck by how much time you all devote to just the bare basics of upkeep of your housing. I really want to thank you all for coming here today and taking your sunny morning that you could have been doing anything and coming here and advocating for this. And also for all the other expertise that you share, you've all had to become experts in property management and plumbing problems and asbestos abatement.  So I want to thank you for all the tireless volunteer hours that you all put in. And that's why we really wanted to make sure that those strong resident voices were incorporated into the trust and that resident decision-making was baked into the very legislation right from the beginning. And a wonderful example of our tenant leaders who are going to help get this across the finish line is our next speaker, Rangel Houses TA President Bernadette McNear. Bernadette! Good morning. Good morning. Welcome, Honorable Mayor Adam. Right. Distinguished guests.  Okay. Welcome to Uptown Harlem. My name, my name is Bernadette McNear and I'm a resident association president of the Rangel Houses right there. All right. Here we go. Well, Rangel Houses and Polar Ground Towers is a home to more than 7,000 residents. I have been a NYCHA resident for approximately 50 years. I have been in NYCHA, I'm sorry, I'm just nervous. I have been a NYCHA resident for approximately 50 years. Over the course of these years, I have heard seeing many issues that have affected the quality of life for those living in the development. The complaints from residents have now transitioned to voices of despair. All we want is a decent place to live and call home. But they have been shouting matches, marches, all in efforts to getting someone to hear and acknowledge our plight. Over the course of years, NYCHA administrations have changed and NYCHA properties have worsened. We need action. Mayor Adams is that someone. He not only hears and sees NYCHA problems, but he is also a mayor that is solution driven. We say yes to the trust. These funds will help make our homes livable. We believe help has finally arrived. Mayor Adams, I look forward to the day that we as NYCHA residents can stop complaining and start enjoying our homes. More importantly, the following generations will have an opportunity to have a home that is clean, safe and without hazards. So without further delay, let me introduce to you our friend. The Mayor. The Honorable Eric Adams. Welcome sir. It doesn't have to be long. Trust to trust. Look at that t-shirt. And to all of you, Bishop Taylor and the years out in Queens, Brookline, here in Harlem, the large numbers of housing residents, a city within a city. And this doesn't have to be long and I'm not going to be long.  Everyone tried to just be philosophical while people were living in a destructive environment. And as I walked through, not only campaigning, but my days as bar president and state senator, looking at all of these bills coming to Albany. Everyone stayed in year after year after year on the campaign trail of what we ought to do, what we need to do, but no one was doing. No one was doing. So we went to the residents and asked, some of the residents said, hey, we want this model, then let's do that as we saw in Brooklyn last week. Other residents said we want this model, the trust. So why can't they have a menu of items that they would like to see on their facility? Why can't they have their options? And so we shouldn't take these options off the table. Let them decide what options they want to use. One thing that's clear, we need to stop playing with this. We're not getting money from the federal government this year. They're not. They already told us we are not concerned with NYCHA residents. They did not pass that $35 billion that we needed. So we must do it on our own. Here's a way to do it. The trust. Let's get the trust passed. And I want to thank my colleagues in Albany. They're those in Albany who support this. They believe it's the right thing to do.  You heard me say over and over again at all of these problems that we're facing in our city. There are many rivers that feed the dysfunctionality that we have in our cities. We need to damn each one. But this time we have a real stream of resources that can come through the trust. Let's make this happen. And here's three reasons, as Brad stated, that I'm 100% on board. Number one, you can vote in and out. If you don't want it, then don't do it. Don't do it. You know, there's nothing better than options. Number two, participating in the vendor selection. You're participating in the vendor selection. You know, far too often you have no say so in these vendors who come in, do shoddy work, and then they're able to continue to go from one facility to the next facility. They have been eating off of the dysfunctionality of NYCHA. Now you participate. Three, serve on quality assurance committees to look at the repairs, to make sure the repairs that they are stating were done are actually done. Now, when you add that into what we're going to roll out a real dashboard, my chief technology officer is putting together a real dashboard so they can see in real time what is happening. They should be signing off. Tennis should be signing off on tickets. They should say, yes, I agree that the job was done. We're going to align the repairs so that you will have one person that will align if the carpenter, if the painter, if the plumber should come in. You should have to be home over and over again to get people coming in a disjointed system. This is so disjointed. And so, listen, listen, all I can tell you is that I hurt you. And I know we can do a better job. Because if you were living in a luxury condominium somewhere, you wouldn't have these conditions. And I'll never forget this one story. When I was a lieutenant in Brooklyn, an 88 precinct, we went into one of the houses and I had a rookie officer that I was training. And we were responding to a job in one of the facilities. And there was urine in the elevator. And the rookie cop said, you see this, a lieutenant, you see this urine? These people don't deserve anything. This is what they do. And I said to him, listen, one person pissed in that elevator. One person. One person. And the people who live in this building are just as upset as everyone else. But if you judge the entire residents of these buildings based on the action of one person, then you demonize and you're not going to give them the professionalism that you're supposed to give them.  So let's not judge nature by the numerical minority that don't understand. And many people who are abusive in your housing don't even come from your housing. They don't even come. So when the police respond and treat you like the person who urinated in the elevator, when the carpenter respond and treat you like the person that urinated in the elevator, when the painter respond and treat you as the person that lives in the elevator, when elected officials treat you like the people who pissed in the elevator, then you get a response from people who don't respect the overwhelming number of nights of resident, but they treat you like the person who did something that was inappropriate. As your mayor, I'm treating you as the people who have held down this city for years and not like the person who did something wrong. That is where we are at right now. So ignore all the noise. Ignore all the distractions. We've heard it all before. You have a mayor that has your back and we're going to get this done. Let's get this done. GSD, get stuff done. Thank you. They go on top is why I do my photo. As you can. This is just me and the mayor. The mayor's playing the 50 shots. The mayor's playing the 50 shots. The mayor's playing the 50 shots. The mayor's playing the 50 shots. Trust the trust. Trust the trust. Trust the trust. Yes. Yes. There you go, Beth. There you go, sister. Don't sound that. A couple of things. One, it's not only the process, right? Trust is who's doing it because you could have a great system, but if you have the wrong people implementing it, then you have a bad system. And so it's about what I've always stated. No matter what it is, give the residents the options. I'm always, I'm clear on that. Give the residents the option. Now, people criticize our strategy in Albany. I was a former state senator. So we were successful in earning income tax credit. Successful in the childcare. Successful in doing what was the impossible by many people of getting crime issues placed. Do we want more? Yes. But we're able to move the needle where people say it was impossible. We had a successful record in Albany, yet people say we didn't have the right strategy. I always thought good strategies mean you get wins. I got wins. And I know Albany. The last week is when stuff gets done up there. And we're at the point now where people have deliberated and now they're looking at these last few items including mayoral accountability. So you can say that we haven't been up there. We've met with over a hundred lawmakers. We had a great strategy because I know how to process and navigate the complexities of Albany. And my team did a great, did a great job. Did a great job. I'm just going to jump in on this real quickly to add. First, I think it's important to note that the changes that empower residents and give them real choice in the trust are very recent. They were amendments made as the bill was moving through the assembly committees and they're quite recent. So just for myself, I'm much more ready to come out publicly and say we got to have it because of those amendments. Second, obviously the deadline of the end of session is critical. Not everything that people are talking about is going to get done. There's some other things the mayor and I don't even, don't totally agree on. But this one has a chance at the deadline. And finally, I would just say obviously there's a lot of politics. And obviously, but like this, you know, and I have a lot of respect for the mayor, but the trust is not about the mayor. The trust is about these residents here. And so we need our legislators to get past the, the kind of micro politics of who's winning and losing and see the big picture that we're out of time to make real progress on public housing. Well said, well said, well said. Of course, Courtney, where you been? I've been seeing you on a good little while. I'll start with the, with the technical piece. The creation of the preservation trust, it creates a nonprofit public benefit corporation that is public, where the, where the, that will continue to own the properties and that will allow HUD to provide what's called a tenant protection voucher to these units, which is a substantially higher income than what the current public housing revenue stream is. So it creates a new not for profit corporation that's wholly publicly controlled that also creates a new income stream. And as well, it comes with a set of procurement changes that allows nitrous to spend the money more, more nimbly than it does currently. The second big issue with the public housing trust has been creating this menu of options for people. So making sure that folks who want to go down a certain path are able to, and that is now encoded in the legislation itself. The tenants will be able, not just the TA presidents, but the tenants themselves will be able to take a vote and decide which type of program they would like to select in order to make their development, improve their development. Good stuff. Good stuff. And, and, and, and, and, and Tenet, let me tell you something. We have to really give it up for Jessica. She is, you know, she is so authentic about moving the needle. Her work, we're going to roll out our housing plan, but she is just unbelievable when it comes down to fighting on behalf and having the right plan for a NYCHA residence. And so really appreciate you one of the, one of the most important pieces of our amazing administration on how we move this leadership forward. Thank you so much for what you're, what you're doing. Now, now traditionally, we have people, when I'm doing these off topics, you know, we have asked people to leave, but I don't want you all to leave.  Y'all can get on them. You know, if they try to come at me, y'all can get on it. They got my back. So just hang right in here with me. Go ahead. Yes.  Imagine flying a plane and there's no cockpits to see how you're moving. We've been running this complicated piece of machinery called NYCHA in New York City without a cockpit. We don't have any dashboards. We don't know what we're doing. And people have benefited on the fact that we're not analyzing in real time what is happening in our city. So while we get the resources through this trust, we also have my CTO building out these dashboards so we can see what is happening in our cities. How long does it take to do a repair? Where's the money coming into NYCHA? Where's the, the contractors that we're using? How long the boilers have been online? We have to start analyzing this stuff in real time. And that is the difference. If you, listen, if you don't inspect what you expect is suspect. That is what I've been saying over and over again. So we have to monitor those dollars when they come in. I think, uh, mismanagement, waste of money, and in some cases it may be even fraud. And we have to be able to identify that. Right now. Yes. I'll also add that all the while for the last many decades that there's been such severe disinvestment in public housing, we've seen a very stable income stream for the Section 8 program. So that has been a very well-funded stable process of funding through the federal government. And that's where this funding stream comes from. We also have the support of HUD for the trust who's written a letter of support. And we had the regional HUD administrator, also in Albany with us, helping to fight for the trust. So we feel confident that there will be a much more substantial increase in resources that comes from this legislation. Yes. How does this or does it unlock the 40 billion in federal funds? How do you access that? Does the trust work with that? Will it do that? Right. So what happens is that the current income stream will be converted to Section 8 tenant protection vouchers. And that will allow you to receive your income stream, which would allow the housing authority to receive debt. So NYCHA is the only property owner in the world that can't take on a mortgage to fund the repairs that they need. And this will allow them to do that. How are you, Marsha? Good, how are you, Mr. Mayor? Good to see you. So I have two questions having to do with the latest subway shooting. Number one, the sister of the person who was killed by two people, I wonder what your reaction to that was. But secondly, given the fact that it's six months, six weeks rather, from the Sunset Park incident and there's another subway shooting, does it give more urgency to your desire to buy new technology that will detect guns that are coming onto the subway system? Because that's the whole thing you've got to keep the guns on. First, let me respond to the family. There's nothing more horrific than a loved one to a violent act. I've knocked on doors as a police officer, a sergeant, lieutenant, and I've had people when I notified them that they loved ones were the victims of violence. I've had people curse at me, yell at me, scream at me, say it's your fault if you would have done your job as a cop, as a sergeant or a lieutenant. I know that pain. That pain is real. I have witnessed that pain throughout my career. It is my responsibility to keep New Yorkers safe. My heart goes out to that family. I am sorry that they lost their loved one. We have to continue to make sure that we are not losing loved ones. And no one knows that better than the residents here. You know, the gun violence that's pervasive in our city. We need people on the side of the good people of the city. I keep saying that over and over again.  We need people on the side of the good people of the city. And that family is one of the good people of the city. And I spoke with the head of Goldman Sachs David yesterday and gave him my condolences into the Goldman Sachs family. And so I understand that pain and I have to make sure the city is safe and I want that obligation. I thank you for that. I want to thank you for that right now and not those that don't understand the urgency of this moment. The necessity to find some program to get the guns off the subway. I mean, you've been testing it at City Hall. Isn't it time to install it in the subway? Yes. And that's so important what you said, what you stated. Because I want to bring technology not metal detectors but technology systems so that we can identify guns. Now, what's interesting is that all those people who are complaining that I want to use technology to identify guns. It appears as though that we're living in an alternate reality. I'm trying to figure out why all the good people saying Eric do this but the loudest that I live in safe are saying don't use technology. Don't give police officers who are part of my anti-gun unit who took 2800 guns off the street. Everything that we're doing to stop the violence, there's this small number of well oiled Twitter users that are attacking everything we do to keep our city safe. That's noise. As soon as we get the product at the level that we know we can do the job because there's a lot of vendors we're looking at we're going to implement it. We're going to implement it. We've got to get it right. We have to get it right. It has to go through a testing period. It has to make sure it passes the constitutional muster. We have to make sure that it's right because we don't want to put it out there and take it back. One thing is for clear, I'm going to use the technology to keep New York kids safe. There you go. There you are. What about better checks? Come back to me. You know you and Marcia how I feel about the two of you. First let's deal with the baby formula because me running for president is another baby idea that people keep playing with. The baby formula the women's caucus sent out a letter and we're trying to find out, number one we're going after price gouges is the price gouging. I did this during the COVID, the start of COVID when people were price gouging other items. We want to stop that so we're going to send testers out there to make sure people are not price gouging and then whatever we can do on the city level we're going to sit down with our doulas and others to tell us what can we do on the city level. It's a real crisis for mothers and we want to make sure we're doing that. And we have not figured that out on what we can do. The women's caucus called for us to implement some things. We want to sit down with the women caucus and tell us how do we partner together because not about pointing a finger it's about lending a hand for these mothers that need the baby formula. I've said this over and over again about Eric is running for president. I've already was the president. I was the president of Brooklyn. I was the president and I'm in support of Biden being my president. And lastly, listen, you can run the country from New York. New York is the place to be. I'm happy being mayor getting crime under control, improving our schools, improving nature, getting my economy back in operating. I notice you know you get a lot of clicks online when you keep writing the story about me doing things. Got it, got it. So if people got to write those stories I'm okay with that. Everybody has a job in New York, doing my job here in New York and I'm looking forward to doing it for the next three years and six months. Come on. Okay, Mr. Mayor, I want to actually follow up on what this resident said. Yes. Would you consider reviving or bringing back the subway and also people are describing what happened yesterday as like their worst nightmare on the subway. How do you deal with that perception?  I use the subways a lot. I'm in the system a lot and it's unimaginable.  A person walks up to you and shoots you for no reason. Not a dispute, which is horrific to do it when it's a dispute, but that is the worst nightmare and that is why I have been so dogmatic about one getting the illegal guns off the street, but then getting the shooters. So once you take the gun off and the person who had the gun you have to have that person who had the gun placed in jail, make sure he goes through or she goes through the criminal justice system. All of that has eroded. It appears as though the citizens of New York and the police department were on one side and everyone else is on the other side. We need everyone to be on our side. And the bag checks, we're already doing spot bag checks. We're trying now to negotiate with the port authority to allow us to place scanners at the bus terminals because many of these guns are coming from the south into our city so we have to stop the flow of these guns and so we're still doing spot bag checks and we want to extend that to our port authority bus terminals because we think we can stop the flow or deter people from coming in bringing these guns, especially in Georgia and in the south they're coming up through I-95 right into our city. Where are the spot checks taking place? They're random. They're advertised where they are because then people will know I'm not going to the station to go to another so they're random. To clarify on your vision for the gun detection technology, you know there are thousands of entrances and exits in the subway system. Would that also be kind of a random procedure to put that device at random points of entry? Yes, great question because what we're doing is what was Rachel's? Rachel here? Can you have somebody grab my glasses? I want that Obama look. Right now. So what we're doing that's why it's taking so long with these devices because we want the mobile ones. We want to be able to just pop up at a station someplace people don't know is there and be able to as people go through. Similar to what we do when we do car check points. So we're working on all the legality because in car check points if you try to go in a different direction when you're in that checkpoint that's reasonable suspicion and so our goal is to move it around you know I'll think those who are you know have a criminal mind and it's just a small number that's a lot of people don't realize there's a small number of people who are violent in the city. The fact is is that we are not putting them through the court system we're not making sure they don't return back to our streets so they're able to do violence over and over again. We zero in on those small number of people you'll see a difference in crime in our city. If I could follow up on a separate topic a new report from New York Focus on the officers who took Neighborhood Safety Team training found 13 percent have at least five complaints 70 percent have at least one complaint you said those officers would be squeaky clean in your words looks like they aren't why is that? Okay now see there's a difference between complaint and substantiated actions hold on one moment let me transform myself you know trying to find that so there's a difference between complaints and substantiated complaints so let's drill into those complaints because what I have noticed during my days of policing that if someone if an officer is someone that's committed to a facility or house or block and they are aggressively doing their job not allowing tenants to be harassed not allowing people to sell drugs on corners the bad guys have figured out let's just call in the complaint on them so if it's if it's substantiated that's one thing if it's just a complaint that's another thing no there was there was not a police officer on that car and we're going to look and see if one was assigned to that car because we're looking at constantly evolving and let's be clear you know the goal is to make sure we have that omnipresent in our subway system you know there's nothing more comforting than seeing that police officer on that phone in the car walking through the car and that is what we are going to do similar to what I did as a transit police officer we need more visible presence of our police officers the actions of this is the type of employee I want to get back to work yes does this send a chilling impact on that yes I'm going to meet with all of my corporate leaders and tell them that you know we need to forge ahead we're going to do our job and continually transform how we're patrolling identifying these problem spots dealing with the housing issue dealing with all the disorder that we are experiencing but yes you know the call is to come back to work and the subway system being safe is a major driver to doing that and when you have an incident like this it sends a chilling impact there's no getting around that and we're going to make sure our subway system is safe in the process just coming as a direct result of this shooting with the police commissioner last night we're going to be meeting this week to evaluate our deployment I'm a big deployment guys got a person we need to make sure we're deploying our personnel properly and we're going to do an analysis to see where did we miss what did we miss it will become easier if we are able to use some of this technology that we're looking for and to make sure that we zero in on those areas that we miss and that's the goal and we're going to continue we're going to get it right now shooters are decreasing murders are decreasing during the month of April compared to last year you know the neighborhood safety teams are doing their job we are going up against bad guys who have figured out the loopholes and systems those who are unwilling to stop violence they've made it clear by the actions that they're going to continue to be violating our city and they're going to attempt to hurt innocent new yorkers and we have to meet that challenge with the same level of determination that they are determined to hurt innocent new yorkers I speak with the police commissioner or her team every morning and we communicated she had a she had a conflict in our schedule today we're going to be talking later on today we communicated via text this morning but we don't have any new updates on the shooters we're looking at a few leads and once we're able to release something we're going to do that yes yes thank you can bernard police come to the nightstand I mean to the microphone you're in demand