I think we have done the non catalytic reactions and we started with that performance equation diagram now again I am going to draw the same diagram this is reactor I think this diagram will come even in your dreams I think output kinetics interacting then we have here chemical physical batch continuous and here we have in continuous P of M of and the performance equation is given as output as a function of input kinetics contacting so this is the equation when you are discussing about non catalytic reactions this equation has been beautifully used I do not know whether you appreciated or not I appreciate myself because there is information that is required from kinetics that one we have seen for single particles and contacting mainly comes through RTD in fact okay yeah ET either ideal or non ideal so that means we have a broad framework for all reactor design right now let us see in catalytic reactions what is that that is required input again is definitely required because that determines the plant capacity and kinetics we need now a rate expression and we also had a rate expression for non catalytic reactions okay that is mainly in terms of X B and time here we will have in catalytic reactions the rate equation will be in terms of minus R A and as a function of you know the partial pressures or concentrations again you need a rate expression but what form it will be we will now see okay then contacting anyway it will come if it is a packed bed if you have a rate expression packed bed catalytic reactor where the solid particles are catalysts now and the difference between non catalytic and catalytic is in non catalytic reactions the solid will finally be converted into a product right so and it may even disappear like in coal combustion or coal gasification whereas in catalytic reactions the solid will not change the size is same and if you assume that activation deactivation is not there so then lifelong you can use this catalyst as a catalyst particle okay so under those conditions somewhat it is easier than non catalytic reactions because the solid here is a inert as far as reaction is concerned but only it is increasing the rate of reaction inside the particle when the molecules go but it is not participating directly in the reaction okay so it is easy for us that means when I put a packed bed let us say 1 centimeter particles I pack and then if there is no deactivation till I day I can use of course now I have only short span but even if you also start till your end you can always use packed bed okay so like that even fluidized bed moving bed again all the reactors that is why I have been appreciating chemical engineering so much because you have the contacting patterns any reactor you bring you can bring you can break into only 2 ideal reactors so that is why in one sense you do not have to learn much as far as the contacting pattern is concerned only you have to learn is mathematics analysis depending on the complications right so I mean even non catalytic reactions also I have done only simple things and one of the simplest thing what we have done is only single particle and change is only in the particle there is no gas change that means there is no concentration change in the gas phase okay normally we can maintain that in industry by sending large amounts of gas particularly when the gas is not very costly like air you just compress and then blow over the coal particles and you do not have to recover anything with that but whereas hydrogen and all that when you use definitely we have to take that also into account but concepts are same only mathematical analysis will be a little bit difficult that is all and that is the reason why you know we are giving you 6 or 7 courses mathematics you know in B Tech 4 5 you I think some of you will have done 6 and in M Tech also you have mathematical methods in chemical engineering and I think and every transport phenomena is nothing but it again mathematical course if you do not appreciate the physical phenomena of the processes so everywhere you see mathematics in chemical engineering because the process are complicated right so now let us see how we develop this kinetic expression as I have been telling you this we know only 2 reactors and batch that is all 2 continuous and 1 batch and this also I know the job we will give to MBA people they will go to market and then say that so much you have to produce okay so then we will know our production then this is where we have to concentrate most of the time depending on what kind of heterogeneous system you have we had gas solid non catalytic reactions liquid solid also same except that when you have that pseudo steady state assumption that is no more valid so again mathematically complicated that is all other than that you do not have to learn anything new there for example gas liquid systems same procedures all the time develop a rate expression go to contacting pattern and you know the input and substitute this kinetics in terms of rate in the contacting pattern equation and then you have to integrate good okay so in the kinetics of catalytic reactions most of the time we know that we have only solid catalyst we also have liquid catalyst but I think you know that is that is called homogeneous catalysis okay for example biodiesel is one of the examples they use liquid biodiesel from seeds and all that they are doing now jethropa and all that so there the catalyst also is in the form of liquid but the liquid catalyst should be dissolved in one of the liquid phases you cannot really identify whether there is a catalyst or not only through reactions only you can see because it is completely dissolving which you cannot see that okay so but we are talking about gas solid catalytic reactions because that kind of reactions are many many in industry can you give me examples gas solid FCC FCC what is the catalyst? zeolite zeolite okay one more example hydrogenation reaction is there hydrogenation reaction is there I am asking gas solid I think very simple example my favourite example all the time Kavya ammonia ammonia what is the catalyst? iron catalyst I think you know the simplest one what I have been telling all the time is sulfuric acid sulfuric acid okay in one step you have to use catalytic reaction what is that SO2 SO3 SO2 SO3 and what is the catalyst? so like that of course many many many catalyst are used in industry because just to increase the rate of reaction and it is heterogeneous system so what we imagine again here is one single particle right so I may have a particle okay something like this again beautiful spherical particle we are trying to draw and then we have here the film and because most of the time we use porous particles we have to also show that pores so this may be something like this or okay it may be whatever way you want to draw you can draw it okay so here also may have so this may be solid this may be solid so something like this you will have the solid particle and now if we the gas will be flowing like this this is gas reactant gas now as usual we can imagine what are the number of steps that are required for the reaction to take place step one will be okay so step one is yeah mass transfer of okay let me also say that we have a reaction something like for simplicity again A going to R this is catalyst A going to R that is catalyst so now this is actually gas A then step one is mass transfer of reactant to the surface correct yeah step two yeah where yeah so unless it goes it does that it cannot so this is adsorption or diffusion we will say not adsorption diffusion of A through the pores yeah and step three adsorption of adsorption of A through the surface step four yeah reaction on the surface that is step four and step five desorption of product from the surface step six diffusion of product gas through the pores and step seven is again mass transfer of products through the film through the film to bulk gas seven steps seven commandments yeah so all of them are they are you know series steps parallel steps or series parallel all of them are series okay so if I take one molecule the molecule has to first go through the film then diffuse through the pores then get adsorbed and our imagination is after getting adsorbed and an active site active site then that will dissociate into some kind of intermediate and then the reaction takes place okay and after the reaction the product is formed at the same site but now product has to leave the site why you can happily sit there catalyst yeah but why you should leave yeah concentration gradient because outside you have less concentration of product and inside you have more concentration of product because of the generation there because this is converted reactant converted to product so that is why it has to leave so because of the concentration gradient it comes out and then again the diffusion through the pores and diffusion through the film and then comes out okay good out of this how many are mass transfer steps and how many are reaction steps which is the one step four but what about desorption and adsorption what do you tell them is it mass transfer step or reaction step yeah so we call them 4 5 and 6 sorry 3 4 5 are the generally reaction steps which contains you know adsorption desorption and surface reaction okay adsorption surface reaction and desorption all 3 so that is why all 3 first we take because that is where the reaction taking place the remaining 4 are mass transfer steps right and through the film we already have the equation same frosting equation again same range and marshal correlation here also why I have the film surrounding that I have the I mean I have the particle surrounding that I have the film then reactant has to go through that and at steady state when the continuous process is going on we also have the products coming out so now you have again assuming that equivalent or counter diffusion right so products are coming out reactants are going in so a kind of dynamic equilibrium is established there steady state again okay steady state so that mass transfer coefficient I can find out through correlations and always mass transfer depends on hydrodynamics I do not know whether anytime you realize that first of all you should know what is hydrodynamics okay hydrodynamics means it is the fluid mechanics around the particle are inside the reactor okay so mass transfer coefficients and heat transfer coefficients always depend on hydrodynamics are in general fluid mechanics that is why first fluid mechanics we teach before going to heat transfer and then mass transfer okay why why it should depend because if the particle is stationary and the gas is moving around that or fluid is moving around that we will have a kind of relationship between the particle and then the fluid this is in the packing if I use the same particle in fluidized bed again the relationship between the gas how it moves and then you know the solid how it moves is totally different so here in a fluidized bed the particle vibrates particle hits other particles and all kinds of things will happen okay it may temporarily jump and then again fall down all kinds of things so the mass transfer process or heat transfer process surrounding this will be different when compared to a packed bed where the particle once you put there it is there all the time it is not changing but the same thing again if I put in a moving bed moving bed that means now packed bed is no more packing then the entire bed is slowly sliding down then again how the hydrodynamics what we call or fluid mechanics around the particle again different right same thing and now you can put the same particle in rotary kill again mass transfer will be heat and mass transfer will be different so that is why heat and mass transfer coefficients or the process depends on what kind of hydrodynamic conditions what you have that is what actually my research area for long you know so many years I am always trying to find out in a reactor before the reaction starts what kind of hydrodynamics are established and not only this particularly heterogeneous systems packed bed for example we say wide age of or wide fraction of solids and wide fraction of next phase liquid or fluid in general okay it can be liquid or it can be gas then how do I know that because it is packing here and is not moving I know because I can find out exactly what is the wide age but the moment I go to fluidized bed where particles are moving how do I know that what is the wide age the fractions again wide age means the fractions okay fraction of solids and fraction of gas how do I know and depending on my velocity in the fluidized bed the bed may expand because normally in a fluidized bed it is open okay there is no top distributor whereas in packed bed between two distributors it is tightly packed so that is why even though you use velocities much higher than terminal velocities of the particles still particles will not go still it is packed only because you are not allowing it to move at all it is tightly packed so that kind of situation will not be there in fluidized bed so the particles will expand the bed will expand so naturally the fractions of gas and also solids will be different now just imagine for three phase you have two continuous phases gas is continuously going liquid is continuously coming then you have the solid okay and again many varieties are there like you heard of trickle beds catalytic reactors where do they use I mean in a sense we do not know the oil hydrogen desulfurization desulfurization of you know oils sulfur is removed using zinc oxide catalyst or so so there you have hydrogen and also oil as well as the solid catalyst but you know trickle bed is a packed bed but the other two phase are moving gas and liquid but again your fraction of gas and fraction of solid liquid depends on again what kind of flow rates we have so that is why hydrodynamics are very very important and many people in industry never bother about that and this because the establishment of volume fractions depend on the flow rates at a particular flow rate automatically the phases will have certain fractions that is established due to steady state conditions at that particular flow rates if I change the flow rate again gas volume may change solid volume may change solid volume is constant generally when it is not when it is catalyst when it is not reacting in the reactor but most of the time catalyst but gas and liquid will change because even in a fluidized bed you have the solid particles and you are not allowing them to go because even if they are going out like you know FCC there is a lot of solid particles which are going out I mean old FCC process not recent one okay so then you collect them and again send back now the recent one is first fluidized bed anyway they are going out let me allow to go out they are going out and again collecting in a cyclone because of deactivation again regenerate and then we will send it back okay so but the old process only normal not first fluidized bed normal fluidized bed when they use that means the velocities are much lower then they will put a cyclone and then try to collect not only of course FCC in any other catalytic process you know catalyst should be as porous as possible the moment you have as porous as possible what will happen to the mechanical strength of the particle decreases so when mechanical strength decreases because of attrition you will have lot of fines going out so that you have to collect in the cyclone and if it is possible again you have to recycle back otherwise you have to take them away and then again make similar particles and then send it back so that is why any these mass transfer steps in any reactor will be different depending on its own hydrodynamic conditions that is why mass transfer even though we say that you know we have understood it is very difficult for a totally new reactor now I do not know whether you heard of platinum mesh type of reactors mesh you have seen mesh no where they see in your house also I think nowadays no housewife also is doing to separate that rice good rice and bad rice you may have very fine powder rice not very fine powder small small pieces okay and you will have normal rice so to separate them in houses villages they use to see that kind of sieves are used as packed bed one sieve above one sieve above one sieve it is the production of hydro production of nitric acid in one of the steps there because the hydrodynamic conditions are different mass transfer coefficients like you know range and marshal correlation will not be useful you have to develop on your own another correlation so and you know the of course we drive cars and then we use cars but we do not know there is a catalytic reaction okay in exhaust pipe and that is monolith entire catalyst is only one particle that particle is simply put into the exhaust pipe okay and it is not solid again you know it is a porous one it is a wonderful design where you will have this is the cylinder like this then you have different plates arranged like this and gases go through this and still good engineers will try to put this one as like this what is the advantage some more surface area always chemical is always how to get more surface area whatever you do okay that is why I think you know by the time you come to extraction you are tied in mass transfer and maximum amount of time we spend only on distillation everyone knows that afterwards we do not know many operations okay next maximum is only absorption but in extraction if you go you know what kind of equipment they use mixture settlers of course again packed beds cu plates in all that this hydrodynamics is very very very difficult in liquid-liquid extraction why do you think so I mean at least try to think in liquid-liquid extraction it is not that easy to maintain flows through these columns why do you think so in absorption where you have gas-liquid system it is easy to do that it is not that difficult as liquid-liquid just can you try to expand your brain why it can be solubility is fixed actually in liquid-liquid extraction what we will not solve in the other okay only one of the components in one phase will only try to go to the other phase these two are supposed to be immisible okay we are now right now facing also we have liquid-solid system but still you know it is like a moving bed type where we want to use that one for of course it can be used as a bio-chemical reactor or it can also be used as adsorber to remove colour and all that because it gives a beautiful efficiency as far as adsorption is concerned because it is a steady state process normally all adsorbers are unsteady state process because we put the adsorbent as batch here we are trying to make this one as continuous and when you have the continuous solid is continuously coming steady state liquid is continuously going so whatever the pollution control boat tells us that okay you should have 10 ppm in the outlet we can design for that whereas in the other system where the solids are in batch condition initially you will get zero because large amount of adsorbent and the same concentration right so you will get zero very pure water then after some time slowly the concentration in the outlet goes on increasing and then finally it will reach your original concentration in the inlet so this pollution control boat people will not allow you that so they will say that yes always fixed only 10 ppm example okay ya you are not answered me why do you think that why you have to expand I say you have to even if it is wrong answer tell me no problem try to think diffusion who told you such a diffusion of what gas into the how the two phase are flowing flowing in the reactor or in liquid-liquid extractor of course we have liquid-liquid reactions also they are also again hydrodynamics come what is the driving force we have two liquids what is the driving force if I am not pumping them how they flow ya it is only the density difference for liquid-liquid systems most of the time the density difference is not that much so that is why it is very difficult to make them flow the way you want and the separation also takes place lot of time because particularly when you have very close densities whereas if I have gas and solid solid will have normally you know 1000 kg per meter cube and gas will have only 1 kg per meter cube so then separation is so fast that is why gas solid fluidized beds are very easy to design whereas liquid solid fluidized beds are again not easy that is what the right now we are facing my research student you are not able to separate the solids from liquid when he is conducting the experiments on hydrodynamics okay so that is why mass transfer and hydrodynamics are very well related okay and one has to remember that for every system you have a different correlation it is not universal the way I was telling you always range and marshal correlation range and marshal correlation is only for one particular particle and around that you have ya gas going like that even in a packed bed you have a different correlation range and marshal correlation is not valid only place it may be valid slightly easier fluidized bed why because in fluidized bed particles are supposed to ya move around independently so the gas may be going around each and every particle so if no correlation is available for a actual fluidized bed then range and marshal correlation is generally used that is single particle correlation generally used okay good so now what we do is we take step 3, 4, 5 and combine them as reaction step and this is where what you get is that Langmuir Hinshelwood kinetics okay what we do is we take first these 3 steps and then we develop a rate expression you will get minus r a equal to in terms of you know k a k b k c you have I think I also told in the beginning of the course what kind of rate expressions you get for catalytic reactions okay minus r a equal to p a minus p b by k divided by you have adsorption desorption constants okay so that is the kind of equations what we are going to develop if you take steps 4 steps 3, 4, 5 and then once I have that rate expression that means it is totally not affected by these 2 steps these 2 steps what is the meaning mass transfer is not controlling the rate of the reaction okay so then once you have this understanding of these 3, 4, 5 steps then you can have how to combine this diffusion and may be you know diffusion is may be rate controlling most of the time depending on the pore size of your catalyst so that means the catalyst particle is able to react because of large surface area that is available in the particle or exothermic reaction the temperature may be high in the particle so rate of reaction may be fast but you do not have mass transfer coming through the sufficient mass transfer through the pores sufficient reactant coming through the pores for the reaction so then how do we combine that reaction as well as diffusion and we have a general thumb rule whenever you have this kind of porous particle the pores through the particle right and when I have film which will be controlling generally diffusion through the pores are controlling I mean these are the things which you have to remember there is no choice and if you have a good decent interview these are the questions that will be asked Lousy interview is asking how many mothers how many fathers how many sisters how many brothers so this is very good very well answered so take the job and then you end up in IT okay that is the kind of jobs beautifully they give you right but here whenever you have this kind of interviews in chemical engineering these are the things only asked I mean do you have any thumb rule like you know what step you can neglect and you know there are questions I mean there are interviews where what are the possible steps in any catalytic reaction I myself asked many times but I think even PHD interviews also we used to ask what is the difference between homogeneous reaction and heterogeneous reaction okay that they will say oh that answer straight forward comes what is that one phase are more than one phase that is excellent then we ask okay so what I think if there is more than one phase what will happen what is the extra information you require for the design okay so that is why all these things are very important for us also to remember and I am not saying that you know these are very difficult this is very very simple things to remember provided you imagine the process that is why always I say always in my teaching I try to ask you to imagine what is happening in the process automatically mathematics come easily the moment you imagine the process okay most of the time we start with mathematics and we forget about the actual process good so let us take this steps 3 4 5 and then develop the equations for that I think you have to take some continuity notes yeah we call them as surface reaction models we call them as surface reaction models which involve adsorption reaction and desorption all 3 good here also we will try you know all 7 all 7 may be rate controlling loziest situation possible but I think you know it is possible then we will derive one equation that will give you a wonderful idea okay please take this physical mass transfer steps are not rate controlling when surface reaction models are developed okay or in other words these steps are very fast compared to surface reaction okay I think slightly I found out words we will use here in the bracket you can write that is interface and interface transport processes are faster these are slightly I found out words people who want to impress they say always interface interface okay because again you know our subroutines have to work you know what is interface the moment I said interface interface nela like this so that means you know trying to get all of us do that nothing wrong okay so interface is what interface is what by the way yeah interface is this and this interface is yeah through the pores okay so those 2 okay good and isothermal condition is assumed good next one you write surface reaction rates can be expressed in 2 ways one langmuir hinshelwood formulation one is langmuir hinshelwood formulation please write here in this just below that in this the rate is expressed in terms of in this the rate is expressed in terms of surface coverage theta surface coverage theta, and then employing the langmuir isotherm to relate to relate theta to fluid concentrations second one is Watson approach Haugen Watson approach that is second one just write below that Haugen and Watson derived rate equations in terms of surface concentrations of absorbed species and free sites and then expressed these concentrations in terms of langmuir isotherm I think in your physical chemistry book that theta approach you could have seen when you are deriving langmuir isotherm langmuir isotherm okay but you have seen Haugen Watson book you have used I think 8 meters you would have never used I think you do not even know know there are 3 volumes volume 1, volume 2, volume 3 volume 1 is material balance okay energy material balance volume 2 is thermodynamics volume 3 is kinetics there is no heat transfer you are talking about Coles and Richardson only these 3 in volume 3 you have lots of catalytic reaction formulations kinetics and catalysis I think that is the title of volume 3 remember correctly okay volume 2 is thermodynamics and volume 1 is material and energy balances and those are almost the first books in chemical engineering and what a wonderful books you know all the books because directly the data from industry were used at that time most of the I think Shankar was asking me he wanted to give some reactor problems for I think that optimization course or so so he wanted to have good kinetic data then I told him just go and see catalysis that book by Haugen and Watson they have wonderful data given actual experiment on the industrial data afterwards anyway we went very far from industry and industry also ran away from us and now again we are trying to come together because now industry I do not know whether you have observed industry has now intellectual people not the I am talking about percentage one because of the computation they have taken the best people that are possible international computation so that is why their processes must be totally new and updated and always they have to be one step ahead when compared to their competitors so that is why even though 100 percent basic theory they have not understood wonderful information from chemical engineering has been used to develop these processes okay and also their techniques are academic institutions nowhere can come because of course they have lot of money so they can use those techniques and techniques means I am talking about analytical instruments for the analysis and all that because I told you know small 500 ml medicine also may be costing 1 lakh 2 lakh rupees so that is why they have to be very very that is why industry has now excellent talent now they want to come and then of course now the again you know always life is cyclized you know in the beginning they were together in between separated that is also most of the time happens you know first love you come very close together get married fight every day then go away then general will come again come together for the sake of children everywhere any process you take the cyclic things may happen okay so that is why industry nowadays you know we have how much money that is coming to IIT from either industry or other research laboratories private laboratories or government laboratories tremendous amount okay anyway so that is why I think this history also sometimes I think you require you know Hogan Watson or the people and what is the third name it is not only 2 that is why when I was HOD I used to push you know these B Tech boys to have quizzes chemical engineering quiz and some of us used to give all those questions now they will also run away the moment you say chemical engineering you tell me MBA quiz they will run yeah run towards that not chemical engineering yeah what is the third name no one remembers okay I think very nice you know I think you do not remember even our basic books no idea at all trying to recall all files are searching in the mind Rangan's R A G A T Z yeah now you remember no one remembers yeah these 3 people you know because of this and another 3 people also wrote wonderful book who are the 3 McCabe and Smith is only 2 I say Harriet is I think recently yesterday he was born the original one Harriet I think you know Smith and van is only 2 again 3 BSL Bud Stewart Lightfoot of course there are 4 others mass transfer book I do not know whether you remember that or not those are 3 these are 3 Faust Faust there is a book you know that is what you know we are even going away because of the computers we are going away from the text books also because all your information is only google no if you want mass transfer correlation you first google only right or e-transfer correlation only google I think the beauty is going but anyway again it will come back definitely please remember everything will come back to the books again yeah good okay so yeah take this one even though there is not much difference next paragraph you can write even though there is not much difference between these models Hogan and Watson models are easy to handle in which surface deactivation can be incorporated surface deactivation can be incorporated full stop to do justice to both these schools that means Hogan Watson school and Langmuir Hinshelwood school to do justice to both these schools let us refer them as Langmuir Hinshelwood Langmuir Hinshelwood Hogan Watson Hogan Watson formulations we call LHHW equations LHHW kinetics LHHW models all these things LHHW means Langmuir Hinshelwood Hogan Watson models okay this is what one of the questions I gave also in the zero test where what information you get from LHHW models what information you get you get a kinetic expression for catalytic reactions okay good let us first derive Langmuir Hinshelwood Hogan Watson what are the assumptions of Langmuir Hinshelwood Hogan Watson very good monolayer coverage okay uniform surface conditions that means I think all surface behaves in the exactly same way isothermal conditions these are all assumptions okay Sukumar last monolayer coverage uniform surface activity thermal conditions these are the assumptions in LHHW next one you can write the surface may be divided into Theta and 1 minus Theta where Theta is fraction of surface covered by Theta is fraction of surface covered by adsorbed molecules and 1 minus Theta is bare surface 1 minus Theta is bare surface that means the surface is free of any adsorption so rate of adsorption rate of adsorption we call minus rA equal to k into p the partial pressure of certain gas into 1 minus Theta okay rate of desorption equal to minus rD equal to minus also minus you do not have to put can I tell this one yeah some okay see Theta is the surface that is covered with the molecules now rate of desorption depends on how many molecules you have in the surface more coverage means more desorption and the other one is the rate of adsorption depends on what is the free surface because it is only monolayer only one molecule can sit there okay at one particular site so that is why this is proportional to the surface area that is available that is 1 minus Theta and that is also proportional to the concentration of that is I think PA by RT is concentration partial pressure okay the pressure on the surface of a particular gas okay so at study state so rA rA equal to rD you just equate those two and then k because this is easy so I thought I will cover this and then leave you so do you remember the equation Theta equal to capital K p by 1 plus K p where capital K equal to what yeah k by k dashed okay of course sometimes this is also imagined as small v by v where small v equal to volume of gas adsorbed divided by volume of gas adsorbed with a monolayer coverage with a monolayer coverage of surface that is always the fraction good anyway I think we will stop here this is what is Langmuir isotherm and even if you derive an equation for Haugen-Watson in terms of surface concentrations you will get a similar equation as Theta equal to only one equation K c into C g is the gas concentration and 1 plus K c C g this is Langmuir Hinshelwood this is Haugen-Watson it is same thing but that is expressed in terms of partial pressures and this K c is written because it is in terms of concentrations okay format everything is same good so these two the first equations and then we will actually derive the equations rate expressions for surface reaction where we have step 3 step 4 step 5 we will come into picture okay thank you


Let's get this done in five minutes, and then we've got loads of parts here. 1,000 behind the bars, we've got them in two seconds. I think, no, he lost about an hour last year, I think. There's some volume though, I don't know. Has he gone in green? Yep, hello. Can everyone hear me? Excellent. This is Learning Front-end Development as a back-ender. I'm Dave, I go by C for Thawney just about everywhere. So, I'm going to talk today a little bit about the purpose of this talk. I'm also going to tell you what I'm not going to be covering, because I have to squeeze everything in to half an hour, three quarters of an hour. I'm going to talk about how my journey started. This is an ongoing process. Toolkit that I've happened to choose. I'm going to give some honourable mentions for stuff I haven't used, or chose not to use, and look to the future and where we can go from here, because I see this very much as a process, and I want to try and help the community to become more in sync with each other. So, we have the back-enders helping the front-enders with various bits and pieces on d.oqs and vice versa. This slide comes with a health warning. If I cough and turn the colour of ribena, I'm probably all right as long as I'm still vaguely upright. Anyone who's been in any of the talks I have been today will know exactly what I mean. So, the purpose of this talk is to help back-end developers start their journey towards being more full-stack. The idea that these days you are a back-end developer, or a front-end developer, or a full-stack, I think everyone needs a little bit of everything these days, and I know that I've described myself as three-quarter stack for many years because I'm not that great at the front-end stuff. I want to start a conversation, as I've said, about how back-enders can help front-enders and vice versa, and I'm looking to do a boff tomorrow to try and continue the conversation as well. So, what I'm not covering, well, I'm hoping everyone here knows what CSS, JavaScript, and HTML at least are. I'm not really going to cover twig in any great depth. I'm not really going to cover things like atomic design in any real depth. This is a 10,000-foot overview, as it were. I'm not going to include details on how to set up or use pattern lab. Spoiler, that's the chosen toolkit. This is about overview only. I am, however, hoping to post blogs and video tutorials as and when I get to building stuff with my own site. Also, mostly talking about Drupal 8 here, the differences between Drupal 8 and Drupal 7 mean that, although you can use pattern lab with Drupal 7, it's not as easy. Google is your friend if you wish to look up that. So, how my journey started? I had a desire to be a more rounded developer outside of London and home counties. Most roles wanted full stack developers rather than specifically back-enders, and I don't want to do the London thing every day. So, basically, it was partly for better job opportunities. So, I then started looking into tools, techniques, relearning JavaScript, brushing up on my CSS, and even to a certain degree my HTML. So, to make sure this is what I wanted. I then started watching a lot of front-end inspired talks, particularly Mark Conroy's pattern lab stuff, but also quite a lot of the talks that came out at sort of Drupal Camp, Dublin, et cetera. They were a big source of inspiration for me in terms of both choosing pattern lab, but also going down that idea of, this is what I want to do, I like the idea behind atomic design, et cetera. As I say, I eventually chose pattern lab. Mostly because I liked the idea of atomic design. To me, its flow is more similar to a back-end orientated way of thinking in that we have atoms which become molecules, which become organisms, which generate templates and pages. Back-end development, lines of code, functions, classes, which might be interfaces, they might be through inheritance, we might have super classes, et cetera. The idea is similar at least to my way of thinking. That was one of the reasons that I particularly liked atomic design. As I've just explained, there were similarities in how I developed, how I break things down, matches the atomic design way of doing it, and pattern lab was the first thing I discovered, the first thing I looked at, and I happened to really, really like it. My choice of toolkit had nothing to do with the fact that I worked with Anatech. It just so happens that Anatech used a lot of pattern lab, and it kind of works in a synergy with what I was looking for. It is genuine coincidence. Patter Lab 101, if I say, this is a 10,000-foot overview. It's atomic design, the idea that everything is broken down to the smallest possible layer, and then you build up towards having full webpages. You've got your atoms, which might be your fonts, or your base elements. You then go to your organisms, which might be a div. You go through to sort of templates, which might be a header section, and obviously templates make up pages. I also quite like the fact that you've got a live automatic style guide. You build pattern lab in there is an automatic style guide, which allows you to, A, demonstrate to the client exactly what their design is going to look like. You can present it as a website. They are able to see it exactly as it is, so we don't have issues surrounding. Well, it was 16.25 pixel font in Photoshop, and we can't easily do that on the web, and a pixel is a different size on a Mac to Windows, let alone browser differences. This way, you have the ability to be able to say, right, this is what you're going to see, so my boss who sat there on a 2010 MacBook will see it exactly the same as my grandfather who's using a Windows XP machine and IE7. They will see what they see, and there will be consistency in that. Again, this is something that I like. It's consistency. It helps relate to back-end techniques and tools that I've been using all my life, and it makes my life easier to adjust towards being a front-end developer. As I've mentioned, it's the back-end mentality surrounding it. PatentLab is heavy on buzzword back-end JavaScript tools. You've got your NPMs, you've got your galt, you've got your yarns, et cetera. I'm not going to go into too much detail about what each of those are, but what I found when I was going away and learning all of these was, actually, if I related them to back-end equivalents, then they made a lot more sense to me. NPM, if you consider it to be similar to Composer in that it's a package manager, that, for me, worked. I could then completely understand how NPM worked and deal with the fact that known modules brings in 50 million files. Gulp was a task runner. Great. As a back-end developer, I completely understand that. Look at things like Fing, if you go back far enough, or using other language tools such as Ant Maven for building objects, running tasks, et cetera. Yn yarn is very much Composer with Prestisema installed. It's NPM on steroids, basically. There is a requirement for the Drupal module components to be used because we need namespacing within twig. This is the core functionality about how both atomic design and pattern lab work. Great. Another back-end thing. I'm able to understand this. I'm able to relate to this, particularly now with Drupal 8 using more modern object-orientated approaches. We're seeing similar things start to come through with front-end techniques. Particle, which is one of the base themes that pattern lab or Phase 2, who created pattern lab, came up with. I actually found it quite tricky to set up, so I am going to make sure that I blog and release a video series about this because, for starters, the base theme is called Particle, but the directory it's in and the file names are pattern lab. So you have patternlab.info.yaml. My advice to people who are wanting to look into this and look into pattern lab further, leave the theme name as pattern lab to begin with, otherwise you are going to have a couple of hours debugging trying to find which reference is looking for patternlab.info.yaml, which you have, of course, renamed David's Orn Theme or whatever. Unused alternatives. So I looked at all of these in some detail and chose not to use them. So why did I not use Bootstrap? Well, partly because it's Bootstrap, it is very much a bit of a Marmite framework, but I also found sites that are built in Bootstrap. I tend to find to have a visual smell. You know it's Bootstrap, and I appreciate the slightly oxymoronic with a visual smell, but you can see that it's Bootstrap and I didn't want to just be another Bootstrap person. I looked at it, took the techniques, loved the idea of a very simple grid system, great, and I can completely see why a lot of people, particularly using rapid application development tools and techniques, love it. But I personally thought this isn't for me, I had some difficulty trying to get menus to work nicely with it, within Drupal. I never did work out if that was me, the Bootstrap-based theme, Bootstrap itself, or Drupal, probably somewhere between the lot, but I basically decided that Bootstrap wasn't for me. Zerb Foundation, which is a rival, if you like, framework, I found that to be very front-end heavy, which is great if you're a front-end developer, but again, I'm trying to learn these techniques for the first time. I worked with it quite extensively at one of the previous companies I've worked with, because that was what they had decided was the right framework for them. So I had access to people who knew it and understood it well, and there are bits that I really, really like. For instance, they have some lovely JavaScript extension stuff that will allow you to do better client-side validation. But Zerb Foundation is also nice in that it is a component-based framework, so you can pull bits of it in without needing to pull the whole thing in. So I've taken the bits that I like, and I will use those such as its data-binding properties for validation, and I'll leave the rest for now. KSS Node, okay, that is more of a style guide building tool than necessarily a CSS framework and such. I started to look into this at the same sort of time when I discovered a pattern lab and ended up going down the pattern lab route because everything fell together nicely for me. So I've not hugely looked at KSS Node. I like the idea behind it. I will probably look at it again at some point, but the idea of when I'm starting out having to maintain something separate to give me my style guide and import everything in through Drupal didn't sit well with me. I want something as simple as possible for the first few times that I'm doing this. Therefore, KSS Node was pushed to the wayside for now. Why didn't I use Omega, Zen, or any other popular Drupal parent themes? Probably because I fell out with Omega when they went back from the Omega 4 to Omega 5, and they took a step away from being more backend-orientated. I wasn't after something that was pointy and clicky. I've not looked at Omega on Drupal 8, I will be honest, and I know Omega 5 has been out on 7 for a long time now. They may even be at 6, but it was, again, it was front-enders, it was site-builders. It wasn't quite what I was after. I'm trying to be more of a full-stack developer. I don't necessarily want to be reliant on point-and-click, although point-and-click is a very useful teaching tool. Zen, I got fed up with so much Ruby. Again, Zen's moved on. I've not looked at it for 8, but as far as I'm aware, Zen Grid is still a Ruby gem. I'd still need to work with Ruby tools and techniques. I don't necessarily want to have to throw in and install Ruby on my machine just to be able to compile on my code. Everything I need to run is already on there. I've got my PHP, I've got my JavaScript. I shouldn't have to look at installing Ruby in gems, et cetera, to be able to deal with that. Where can we go from here? How can I continue developing my skills further? How can I help you develop your skills further as back-end developers? As you move towards looking to be full-stack, let's have a discussion about it. Let's do it as a boff. As I say, I'm hoping to be able to organise one tomorrow. Failing that, we can talk down the pub when we go to the after-party. For me, the next steps are, I need to continue the process that I've started, so I need to continue researching. I need to look at exactly how pattern lab can assist me further. What front-end techniques do I still need to look at to be able to become that more full-stack developer? Do I need to brush up on my JavaScript? Definitely. Do I need to learn React? Probably not, or not yet at any rate. For me, it's very much a continuation of the process I've started, the research, the iteration, and treating my front-end development very much as I would back-end development. It's just more visual. The iterations are more obvious and they might be with back-end development where we're potentially looking at efficiency, we're potentially looking at getting the right data. I'd also like to push towards back-enders helping in the Drupal.org issue queues. It's something I'm trying to do as and when I have the time. Because time and time again, I see both on internal slacks and in Drupal Slack, in IRC, a front-end developer saying, can a back-ender have a look at this, please? I don't completely understand it. 99% of the time someone does step up, but it seems that it's something that doesn't happen often enough. There is too much time between that request for help. It might be a couple of days before a back-ender gets in and helps with certain bits and pieces and depending on time zones, particularly with something like Drupal, that can be a very, very long time. I want to push for back-enders helping the front-end colleagues more. I also want to see the reverse. I want to see front-end colleagues helping back-end people more, helping with things like the accessibility side of it. We have our part to play in making sure that things display correctly. You've got the right data. It's as accessible as possible. Front-enders are very good at getting the data to look right. Let them help us. Let us give them the best chance by getting them the right data in an accessible way as possible. So some contact details. As I say, I'm Sifa Thorny on just about everything. I hang around in IRC slack from time to time. I do respond as time allows. I'd be a bit remiss given my boss couldn't get over because of the snow. Anatech hiring a sport engineer. Come work with me. Come work with other front-end people like Mark Conroy, who's been doing an awful lot after the box initiative. Sport engineers at Anatech do get to work on exciting projects, but also they do get to deal with working with building new features. A support engineer is not just standard support tickets. Q&A and then the pub. So, do people have any questions? I've not looked in any way shape or format angular, so probably not. There is limited support for React. I believe they're working on better support. The version 10 of pattern lab, which is currently in, I'd say early beta, because it's about beta 2, beta 3, and I checked a few days ago, is very much at the moment a much more JavaScript-orientated and looks like it's going to work better with things like React. So it looks like they're working towards better support for that. Pattern lab, I believe, can work with other templating languages as well. I don't think it is limited twig. I've not seen anybody using it with things like Smarty, which is another templating language, but my understanding is it can be used with that. Any other questions? When you're running a grunt, and you're getting modules from the MVM, there's always tons of warnings like, this looks different, this isn't working, so we're just starting to work. I've used the Particle starting kit, which is near enough as plug-as-play as you're going to get with Pattern Lab and Drupal. Basically, it's a case of download it, NPM run, build Drupal or Drupal, build something like that, and it will run off NPM, get your 50 million warnings, and it's then near enough ready to go, particularly if you don't rename it. In terms of where do we start from, well, actually how much attention do we have to pay to warnings of deprecation, et cetera? On NPM, yeah, I basically learned to ignore those warnings because it seems that NPM iterates at such a rate and deprecates so much so quickly compared with certainly what I would see as a lifecycle within back-end development that a warning of deprecation is as common as anything. In terms of what can be done about that, I'm not a strong enough JavaScript developer to be able to go away and say, right, this is actually what it now needs to do and don't file a patch with relevant module maintainer for that particular NPM package. But, yeah, if you are developing your JavaScript skills and have the confidence to go and do that, then let's help others, let's contribute fixes that say, well, actually, I don't know, index of has been deprecated, we now need to use index for or something. So go away and help the module maintainers start to move towards that in terms of how you can improve your JavaScript or getting used to the huge changes in JavaScript that are happening. I've used Wasteboss's JavaScript 30 course, which is 30 roughly 20-minute episodes that's freely available online, and everything there is JavaScript or ECMAScript 2015. JavaScript and ECMAScript are mostly the same. I think what traditionally we would know as JavaScript was ECMAScript 6, and they've now gone to a yearly, so ECMAScript 2015, ECMAScript 2016, et cetera. It's pure JavaScript rather than React or jQuery, so I found that very useful for brushing up on my JavaScript. In terms of CSS, I treated that very much as I would learning a language. I just went away, okay, how do I do this? What is a transition? What is a class? Do I want to look at using things like SAS less, or do I want to just write raw CSS? Again, I went down the... Well, actually, everything seems to use SAS, so I will use SAS. Root. HTML, we write enough of that that I didn't have to worry too much about additional stuff there. So there's plenty of resources online. I found with Boss's stuff from the JavaScript side to be top-notch. He's got some very good free stuff, some very good pay-for stuff as well. Any other questions? Okay, well, in that case, I think we'll head to the pub early. There's a tab behind the bar sponsored by Funder.


What's up everybody, Jason here for JasperysCaseBricks.com 2022 Tops Chrome Update, Sapphire Edition, Baseball, Five Box, Hobby, Random Team Number 4 just sold out, guys. And again, this is the second half of the case, and we have an early bird, free spot giveaway. If you buy one of the first 16 spots, you had a chance to win a free spot. So dice roller here, there's the first 16 that I bought, there's everybody else, and the teams are using the dice roller for the free spot giveaway and the names and teams for the break. Roll it, it is a 6 out of 5, 11 times, good luck, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, excuse me, and 11. 11 times, 6 out of 5, Andrew Douglas, congratulations buddy, so you are an early bird winner. Yeah, he ran out of the airport with one shoe wreck, and 11 times here now, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11. Well why would you always think that though Rex? Just hated him from the start without even knowing the guy? Come on Rex, kind of a human being are you? 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 11, 11, White Sox, that's what it is, I don't know, Hobbybys is way worse Rex, at least from what I've seen. Hobbybys definitely looks like a douche, sounds like a douche. Alright, Josh Smith, White Sox, Tristan, Royals, Devin, Reds, Craig, Nationals, Douglas, Twins, Andrew, Metz, Tristan, Cubs, Dale, Mariners, Tristan, Tigers, Josh Smith, Marlins, Joe, Rangers, Robert, Giants, Andrew, Guardians, Jacob, Cardinals, Angel, Aids, Anthony, Brewers, Jason, Johnson, Pirates, Tristan, Red Sox, Josh, S, Astros, Joe, Rockies, Richard, Reyes, John, Diamondbacks, Tristan, Braves, Daniel, Jays, Eric, Dodgers, D Lo, Phillies, Ryan with the Yankees, Kev, Orioles, Jacob with the Angels, and then Shay with the Padres. Alright guys, anybody want to trade? Tom Foxes, this is break 3, now this is break 4, break 3 happened yesterday. If you want to see 3, it's right here buddy. That happened yesterday, last night, Hunter becomes the Huntsman. Alright, anybody else want to make a trade guys? No, I'm closing it right now. Alright guys, let's close the trade window then. Alright guys, ooh, let's see if we got a red. Either red or a pink. Looks like a red, Spencer Torgelson, and it's Rowdy Tellez. That looks like a red 1 out of 5 for the Brewers going to Anthony. Jordan Luplo, number to 50, and then Jarendra Red. Hunter Strickland, not the Hunter you were looking for Devin. And Max Scherzer Green, 75. Alright, let's go to box 3. Julio, these actually go for like 4 or 500 bucks. Can you believe that? That is a Seattle Mariners save for Dale. It's wild. Got a purple, Kirk McCarthy and Tanner Tully. Rookie combos to 10 for the Cleveland Guardians that's going to Andrew. Suzuki and Sonny Gray, number to 75. Bobby Witt, Wander Franco. Man, this is a solid box. This is a personal box. You would have double tripled your money probably. Red. That looks like red. Save that. Oh, that's the pink. That looks like red. Yeah, the green one? Was it green? Did I put that one? That's pretty sweet, man. That's what I'm saying.  Especially if you hit the right players. And George Kirby. A little bit of a teaser there with Seattle, but still a nice hit though. Got a 25. CJ Abrams. Ooh, this one's going to have a third color card. That's nice. LaMette to 75. There's Hunter Green. Alright, come on, maybe let this be an autograph. Let this be an auto. Let this be an auto. Or at least give me a rookie. Oh, it's an autograph. Wow, no way. That's two Julios out of five today. I knew something was hiding in this damn case. What a break for Dale. I'm done. I am done. Oh my God, that is out of five. Two out of five. Jesus. Two Julios out of five today for me. Yesterday was on Neil Cruz, today's Julios. That is a monster. Dale had one spot it looks like. And he's probably dancing. I don't even know if he's watching this break. I had a feeling there was something nice in this case, guys. I talked to it earlier. I said the first half minus that banyan green that we pulled yesterday. I don't know. It felt like it was just weird. All the colors were nasty. This wasn't the craziest players at all. I mean, I guess my spidey sense is we're right. Oh, Dale's here. Nice, it's going out, man. Jesus. Well, I would suggest hitting us up on support and, you know, getting that bad boy insured and stuff like that so it's safe in case. Or, I don't know if you're local or not, but you can always come in and get it. But that is a monster, monster card right there. Big time. It's wild. Alec Thomas. It's a very nice orange there. 25 for the Diamondbacks, John. Banya. Mike Brasso.  Oh, I seen Franco there for a second.  Another box that delivered three parallel colors. Nice. Yeah, I don't know how much is going to go further, honestly, but it's... It's definitely going for more than Dale spent on this break, which is $55. That's for sure. Alrighty, what a memorable break. Oh, man, that was wild. I mean, this alone was like $300, $400, right? Or $400, $500 we looked up earlier today. I mean, I think he would have just been happy with that. At least I would have. But now you're going to have this. And I'm pretty sure you're going to get a lot of buyers for this, man. Congratulations. This is why we do it, guys. This is why we get it to group breaks. Could have had a personal box. Could have been great. You could have got that. Would have spent a couple hundred dollars, though. Maybe you don't get it. But you paid a small fraction to get into a five-box break, and that's breaking for you right there. So, I appreciate it, guys. That was the break. I think we do have more. So, five will go up soon. Jaspeyskatesbreaks.com.


So thank you. It's a real pleasure to be back in Zurich. This I think is my third, I think it's my third, maybe my fourth event with the liberal institutes. So thank you for inviting me back. It's always a privilege and a pleasure to be here. All right. So one of the things, as we've just heard, you know, Europeans, I think, not so much Israelis, but Europeans, war is a distant memory. War is something Europeans have not had to think about, deal with in a very long time. You've had some, in a sense, skirmishers. The Bake Up to the Balkans is one major example in the 1990s, where, you know, different tribes were fighting each other. They still want to fight each other so far. So far it's kind of peaceful. But that was the extent of war from the perspective of the Europeans. You saw it in the Middle East, and to some extent you had to deal with it with the migration crisis in the mid-2000s. But it wasn't, it didn't involve actual European forces. And indeed, I think this idea of unity through trade seemed to very much apply in Europe, and Union, of course, created a system where you could, where there's a free movement of labor, capital, and goods, and resulted, has resulted in 80 years of peace. In spite of the fact, and I don't want to offend anybody, but in spite of the fact that Germany is right over there, right, we still have peace. So it seemed like this trade worked. And indeed, a lot of the logic behind the idea of increasing trade with Russia was to further integrate Russia into the system, into the European system, and the idea that if we just traded with Russia, then Russia would be peaceful. Because at the end of the day, it's all about material well-being, at least that's what the leftists and the Marxists believe, that that's what drives history, right? Material well-being, what drives history, is economics. And if we can connect the economy of Russia to the economies of the rest of the world, we have nothing to worry about. Indeed, if that were the case, then we have nothing to worry about China, because China is super integrated into the world economy. We depend on China, most of the goods you buy, I'm sure, in Switzerland, are made in China, and indeed China cannot survive without American, without European and American expertise, capital, investment, and many sophisticated goods as they're discovering now with a ban on chip technologies going to China, they're suddenly discovering that they can't survive without good relationships with the West. If that was the only factor, if trade was the factor that determined peace or war, we thought there would be no war in Ukraine, between Ukraine and Russia, and there will never be war between China and Taiwan. But indeed, I don't think that the world is determined by economic forces. I don't think the world is determined by trade relationships. I don't think that that is ultimately the determining factor. And we'll talk about it, trade certainly helps, but there's something much more important than trade. And I don't think it's democracy.  Russia arguably had a period of democracy before Putin has established his authoritarian rule. Democracies often turn bad. Maybe they don't go to war as democracies, but democracy is not necessarily a stable form of government. Democracies change. The will of the people changes. So I think if we're going to look for cause for war, it has to be maybe something deeper. Now, capitalism was mentioned. Now, I don't think capitalism is either trade or democracy. I think capitalism is something more substantial and something more fundamental and substantial. We'll talk about that. I do think capitalism prevents wars. But what is capitalism? What generates capitalism? What is the cause of capitalism? Maybe if we understood the cause of capitalism, we can understand the cause of war. I think at the end of the day what drives history and therefore what drives the kind of political system we have, the kind of economic system we have, and whether we have wars or not, what drives all these events are ideas. Fundamental basic ideas. Things that people believe. And where we really need to explore what are the ideas of peace and what are the ideas of war? Ideas lead to these outcomes. And I think particularly right now, because I think this could be a real turning point in European and potentially global history, it is super important for us to understand what ideas cause the war in Ukraine. Are those ideas more generalizable? Is the war in Ukraine just the beginning of something bigger? Is something shifting? Is something changing? And the peace, the period of peace that we have had, what are the ideas that brought it about? And is there a way for us to bolster the good ideas, the ideas that drive peace and a way to condemn and minimize the ideas that bring us war? So I think to look at the ideas that bring peace and war, it's important to look at history and to think about errors of war and errors of relative peace. We've never had complete peace. There's never been no violence. But there have been periods, particularly in Europe, where there's been less violence and periods where there's been more violence. And it's interesting to look and dig a little deeper into what led to the violence in particular errors and what led to the elimination, to the peace of others. And I think what, if you're looking at history, what really jumps out at one, and I don't know if you're familiar with the books of Stephen Pinker. In particular, he's got a book called Better Angels of Our Nature, which is a study of violence throughout history. I highly recommend it. It's, I think, an amazing book. The things you're going to disagree with, I disagreed with. But it's still just the data that he presents is incredibly valuable. But one of the things you will note is that Europe has always been an extraordinarily violent place.  City-states were fighting each other. Little countries were fighting each other. Big empires were fighting each other. But war was a constant phenomenon, where there's a 100-year war. Imagine a 100-year war. A war that lasts 100 years suggests something about the consistency of violence. That means people were killing each other all the time. Or a 30-year war, maybe. Maybe the most violent war at least in the West in history, in terms of the number of people killed per capita, given the proportion of the people killed in the population. Maybe the 30-year war, Catholics and Protestants slaughtering each other, in Europe was maybe the most violent, probably more violent than World War I or World War II. And then it kind of really slowed down. Wars became rare phenomenas. And when did this happen? When did wars kind of really slow down, particularly big wars, particularly wars between big, powerful empires and countries in Europe? When did that slow down? And almost go away. Curious. Yeah, after Napoleonic Wars. So Napoleonic Wars, 1812, 1814, I'm not good with exact dates, but somewhere around there, after Napoleonic Wars, Europe goes through a period until World War I where there are very few wars in Europe. What is characteristic of that period in Europe as compared to the period before that? The period going back maybe 500 years. What changed in 1812, 1814, other than Napoleon losing? What changed in Europe between the 19th century and centuries before that? Well, suddenly we had a massive increase in economic production. We had industrialization. But one could ask the question, what caused industrialization at that point in time? It's not clear. I don't think industrialization may be brought peace. Maybe what brought peace is the same thing that brought industrialization. Something magical happened in Europe and in the West around the turn of the century, around 1800. Something amazing. Economically, the West took off. Just took off. Industrialization and everything else. But also peace came. And what characterized that period? What were the ideas that drove it? Enlightenment, just the situation. This is the era that comes after which era? The Enlightenment, the age of reason. And the age of reason is characterized by two things, I think, two important ideas. First, it's a fact that as human beings our means of knowledge is not revelation. We don't discover the truth through revelation. We discover truth through reason and science. Thinking is what is necessary. Now this is important because I'm going to argue that most wars are caused by a different view of how we discover truth. That most wars are motivated by mystical, otherworldly motivation. And certainly that is an element in the war right now. Reason rejects that, rejects mysticism, rejects the whole idea of reveal truth and says each one of us, each human beings, each individual human being can think for himself. Each individual human being has the capacity for the reason and therefore each individual human being has the capacity to discover truth for himself. He doesn't need the philosophy of kings. He doesn't need the pope. He doesn't need some superior leader to tell us what the truth is and what the truth is means. We don't need a superior leader to tell us how to live our lives. Who determined what profession you would be in before the Enlightenment? Place you were born in a social class? Not really, it's what your father did. You belonged to the guild your father belonged to. You did what your father did, even if you hated it, even if you didn't want it, even if you didn't have talent, you were funneled into that profession. What did women? Women didn't get any choices. There were no careers, there were no professions involved. Did you choose who to marry? Not really. Did you choose who governed you? Not really, but think about it. If you believe the truth is revealed, if you believe that people do not have the capacity to take care of themselves because they cannot discover the truth for themselves, then we need guidance. We need philosopher kings to tell us how to live. We need authorities. So, one thing that liberated the individual, liberated all of us is the idea that we have the capacity to think for ourselves and choose for ourselves. And indeed, the difference between the 18th century and the 19th century in terms of individual choice, in terms of what you could do as an individual, what you're allowed to do as an individual is dramatic. 18th century and everything before that, you could call a permission society. You had to ask for permission for everything. The 19th century is a permissionless society. Suddenly, it's up to you. You get to make a decision. We were free, relatively speaking. It was a revolution towards freedom. So, first idea is reason, big deal, rejection of mysticism as a standard of knowledge. The second idea is who reasons, who makes choices. The individual does. So, the unit that matters in society is not the tribe. It's not the group. It's not the state. It's not any of those things. It's not the king. It's the individual. The individual's life is his own. I mean, this is the key political idea that comes out of the Enlightenment. It's the idea that the individual's role, moral purpose, is the pursuit of his own happiness and that he has a right to live his life based on what? Based on his own judgment in pursuit of his own values. Not the values of the king, not the values of the government, not the values of the state, however you want to define it, not the values of his parents, not the values of anybody else, or the church, his own values. Sometimes they'll be good, sometimes they'll be bad, but that's his problem, not ours. We leave individuals free. We leave them alone. And again, it's connected to the idea of reason. We leave them free and alone because we know he can reason for himself and discover these things for himself. He doesn't need guidance. He doesn't need this hand. Each one of us is capable of living our lives. That is a powerful idea. Again, coming out of a period of tribalism, of what matters is not the individual, what matters is the tribe. And when the tribe matters, when the tribe is everything, when your purpose in life is the well-being of the tribe, a war is more likely or less likely. If we don't care about the individual, are we likely to go to war? Yes. Look at Bakhmut right now, where Putin is sending thousands of soldiers in wave after wave after wave to be slaughtered and to slaughter Ukrainians. Does Putin respect individual life? Forget the Ukrainians. Does he respect individual life of Russians? You can see that even in the way they design their tanks, the way the Russians design their tanks. If you look at American tanks and German tanks, and Israeli tanks and British tanks, you'll notice that the tanks have a huge amount of investment of money, effort, thinking, processes that have gone into securing the lives of the people inside the tank. They have this double armor. They have explosive armor. They have all kinds of technology to do what?   That comes from caring about individuals. That comes from caring about human life. Russian tanks don't have it. Or if they do, it's plastered together quickly and is not effective. And you can see that again in Ukraine with the torrents of the tanks flying out into the sky as they're being hit. That doesn't happen to American tanks. It doesn't happen to British tanks. It doesn't happen to Israeli tanks. Because the Russians don't care about human life.  They don't care about the individual. So if you ask me what causes war, I would say it's a negation of reason in favor of some mysticism, mystical cause, and it's the negation of the individual in favor of some collective. Call that collective whatever you want, but in favor of something else, something, what do they say? Greater than you.  They don't care about you. They care about that cause. Greater than you. You're just sacrificial fodder. And that cause greater than you is almost always, again, the state, the tribe, the collective of one form or another. So I believe those are the two causes of war. Lack of respect for individualism, i.e. collectivism, lack of respect for reason, i.e. mysticism, but add one more because I know many of you are big, you know, economics is very important to you and economic principles are very important to you. What is war? You know, what is trade? Let's see the positive first. What's trade? What's the relationship between two traders? You know, I gain you lose, right? Mutual benefits. Yeah, mutual benefit. Traders win-win. Traders are win-win relationship. And this is maybe the fundamental principle in economics. That when we trade, at least the intention is for both of us to gain. Sometimes we make mistakes and we land up losing. But hopefully, for smart, most of our trades are win-win relationships. What is war? I mean Europe, right? What is war? Is it win-win? Is it win-lose? It's lose-lose. It's lose-lose big time. You could argue the weapons industry is the only winner in a war. And even there, you know, we can discuss what winning means in that context. But clearly, for almost everybody, war is lose-lose. Now, sometimes you still have to go to war maybe to defend yourself. But generally, you're going to lose something. You're going to lose a lot. You're going to gain more by preserving your liberty or everything, but materially, it's a massive loss. And again, just look at these Ukrainian cities. Look at the number of lives lost. We'll do questions at the end if you don't mind. Just remember what you wanted to ask. I promise I'll answer. Massive destruction throughout. And the only reason there's not massive destruction right now in Russia is because the Russians have nukes and nobody wants to attack Russia proper. But the destruction is total. And think about, there's probably in excess of 200,000 young men who have died on just the Russian side. Probably over 100, we're not died, died and injured, right? But injured so that they can't fight anymore. Serious injuries. 200,000. And that doesn't include the Ukrainians where it's over 100,000 on their side probably. We don't have accurate numbers. But you know, by the time this conflict is over, I wouldn't be surprised if a million young men are either maimed or dead because of this. That's lose-lose. No matter what benefit you might gain, that's lose-lose. And it takes a certain mentality and attitude towards economics that is oriented towards zero-sum thinking that gets you into lose-lose transactions. Because if you're engaged in life to win and really understand that in order to win, how do you win in the game of life? You win in the game of life among other things by creating as many win-win relationships as you can. Materially and spiritually.  You become just somebody who has friends and enjoys social life by creating win-win relationships with people. And people engaged in that kind of activity motivated by that kind of... They're not interested in war. They're interested in creating more win-win relationships. They don't want to lose lose. But think about the Russian economy. The economy of Russia is based on not quite a zero-sum view of the world but close to zero-sum view of the world. The Russian economy is not an economy that thrives on entrepreneurship and innovation and small business and business creation. Under Putin in particular, the Russian economy has been oriented towards one thing and really one thing only. What is that? Natural resources of one kind or another, primarily oil and gas. Everything else has been suppressed. Everything else has been rejected even though Russia has great engineers and great software people and that hasn't been what you think of when you think of Russia's quiet economy. The entire state has oriented that economy towards oil, gas and certain minerals, maybe agriculture. But it's all about taking stuff out of the ground and shipping it somewhere else. Which is not zero-sum. We know it's not zero-sum, zero-sum thinking. There's no reason Russia had to have this kind of economy. The reason is the state decided on it and one has to think about what is it about Putin that oriented him towards just wanting stuff out of the ground. Lack of respect for the human mind, lack of respect for entrepreneurs. Maybe he didn't want too many independent thinkers, independent doers, independent wealthy people. All the billionaires in Russia are who? His buddies. We call them oligarchs, but at the end of the day it's just another name for Putin's buddies. And he can control them.  So the easiest thing is to create an economy where we don't get Elon Musk's. And where there isn't an Elon Musk, they leave. Because you don't want them. You want a bunch of oligarchs who'll do what you tell them to do, and at the end of the day who holds the power in that circumstance. So in my view, war comes about when we have zero-sum thinking, when we have a collectivistic mindset, and we reject reason as our tool of knowing the world. And I think that's what happened at the end of the 19th century, early 20th century, because philosophers constantly chipped away at the idea of reason as efficacious, as reason as valuable. You know, Kant, Hegel, Nietzsche, Marx, Schopenhauer, Nietzsche. Reason doesn't matter. Reason is not efficacious. Reason doesn't teach us about the world out there. We create reality in our minds. All the variations of secularized mysticism, which is what I consider it. I mean, what is Marx if not a secularized mystical philosophy? You replace God with a Paulitarian and it's just all the same. You as an individual don't matter. You have to sacrifice, too. Not God, you have to sacrifice through the Paulitarian. But you don't matter. Your mind doesn't matter. How do we discover truth? Well, you have to be born a Paulitarian to know the truth. You have to discover truth because there is no universal standard of reason. And if ever there was a philosophy, there was zero sum, Marxism is zero sum. So with the rise of Marxism, with the rise of other zero sum, anti-reason, anti-individualism ideas in Europe, it's no surprise we got a World War I, a World War I in the name of what? Nobody really knows what the war was fought for, basically a war of collectives fighting each other for power with the idea that power is to be gained not through win-win relationship but through control, through war, through controlling other people. And World War II, again, mystical ideologies associated with race instead of class, but the same thing. The individual doesn't matter. Reason doesn't matter. How do we know what the truth is?  Us Jews don't know the truth. We're just a different type of human beings. Inferior. There's no difference. It's just a different way to categorize people, but it's always about categorizing people and your genes are what determine who and what you are. But it's about the individual doesn't matter. The collective matters. Reason doesn't matter. Revelation matters. And it's a zero sum mentality. I need more land, Hitler told me. We need more land, Hitler told the Germans. It's not more trade, not more entrepreneurs, not more innovation. We need more land. We need more gas. We need more natural resources. It's all the same thing. It's all the same mentality. And we got a World War II as a consequence. And for 80 years, to some extent that mentality is being held back partially by the fact that the Soviet Union clearly was a failure and partially by the fact that fascism clearly was a failure. And Europe at least was not going back to religion. So there was this void, a void that was filled mainly by people living their lives based on their own reason, caring about themselves, i.e. individualists. And because I think of economists' understanding of win-win relationship, the establishment of win-win relationships on a global scale. I mean, I think the European Union is a massive achievement in the sense of it's a regional intent, free trade, money, capital, goods. That's fantastic. And that's a recognition of non-zero some nature of the world. And you saw that. All over the West, trade opened up everywhere globally. There's a recognition of the value of the individual. You can go to any village, anywhere in the world, pretty much. Not everywhere, but most places in the world.  And I have a feeling that two, three hundred years ago, most people would say the church, the king, the state. Nobody says that today. There's an implicit sense of individualism. Maybe it doesn't manifest itself politically as we would like. There's a lot of work to do there, but there's a real implicit sense of individualism. There's an implicit sense of my mind is capable. I'm not looking for the philosopher king. There's a real implicit notion of that these ideas are true. But it's implicit. And for a long time, you can survive on these implicit ideas. Our philosophers, the people who teach here at the university and teach at universities in the United States and all over the world, don't believe in any of that. They don't believe the individual matters. They don't believe in human reason. And they have a really hard time with win-win relationships as with regard to trade. Almost all of them are statists when it comes to economics. So we have this populist that's kind of with us on the ideas that lead to peace an intellectual class that has no clue that is exactly opposed to it. And the result is, yes, we have peace, but it's weak. We are weak as countries. We don't know what we stand for. We don't know what identity is. We don't know what the West is. We talk about the West and civilization, but we have no clue what it is. We let it be challenged from the left and from the right and from the middle. And we have no way to defend it. One of the great challenges of liberalism today is to defend it. It's being attacked from every direction because our intellectuals are not liberals, not in the sense that we mean liberal. And I think Putin is a manifestation of those dark forces, those ancient dark forces that lead us to war. And he could be an ominous sign of what is to come. Putin is a mystic. Listen to his talks. He is filled with this longing for some glorious, mystical, ancient Russian empire, Russian people, Russian land. I mean, there's clearly a mystical notion to almost everything that he says and how he inspires his audience. So this is not uniquely to Putin. This is cultural in Russia. There's a Russian spirit, a Russian destiny, a Russian exceptionalism that's built into being Russian. We can argue about American exceptionalism, but American exceptionalism almost always is about ideas. Russian exceptionalism is almost always about genes, about heritage, about being part of this Russian-speaking world. They don't talk about ethnicity because Russia, of course, is multi-ethnic, but they talk about the spirit of the Russian language and the spirit of being Russian. And it's a dominant force in Russia. The individual doesn't matter for Putin or for Russia. What matters for the individual and for Russia is Russia. Sacrifice hundreds of thousands of young men on the, you know, on the ground. Nobody cares.  Their fathers care. Putin, people in charge, don't care. It's for greater cause. Russia. And you can see how he's built his economy. It's an authoritarian economy, which you'd expect from an economy, from a regime that does not respect individualism and does not respect human individual reason. And he is committed to this zero sum. Let me say that, well, and this is why he went to war. People could say that he went to war because he felt threatened by NATO. That's a joke. NATO's the last threatening thing in the world. There's nothing threatening about NATO. It's not threatening. It hasn't gone to war. It's not going to go to war. NATO members barely agree on anything. There's no consensus. I mean, it's unique now that there is one because of this war. But before that, I mean, one of the reasons Putin went to war is because he believed NATO was fragmented and they'd never agree on anything. They would never threaten him. And indeed, if that was the standard, if the standard was NATO expansion, well, Putin's lost the war already and the value of the Ukraine to NATO much more valuable than Ukraine. It's Finland and Sweden. They have much longer border with Russia. They have much better soldiers than Ukraine. I'm sorry, they're much longer border than Ukraine has with Russia. Finland and Sweden do in the north. They have much better armies. And they actually manufacture their own weapons. They have very sophisticated weapons systems built in Sweden and Finland. The fact that they were not part of NATO was a relief to Putin. Now they are. He's lost this war. If that was the goal, the goal was to keep NATO away. NATO's just got much closer to Moscow, even closer to St. Petersburg and really close to, I forget the name of the port, in the Baltic Sea there, that is this far from Estonia and not that far from Finland and Sweden. So if NATO was the issue, I think the issue was his desire for empire, for the Russian people, for a legacy. He wants to have statues built, you know, constructed for him. He wants to be considered not Putin, but Putin the Great. There is a real desire here for a great Russian mystical state. He sees the West weakness. The West is weak. He sees they're not weak, militarily weak, intellectually weak, philosophically weak, in our commitment to our ideas. He sees that weakness. He's exploiting it. He's been plotting us for years, invading Georgia just to test it out. What did the West do when he invaded Georgia? Nothing, basically. Nothing. You know, they said don't go to Tbilisi. George Bush, I think, told him that, but clearly nothing. He plotted them in 2014 with Crimea and Donbas. What did the West do? Nothing. So what did he figure the West would do this time? Nothing. And this time he was going to Kiev and it was going to be over in a week for a variety of reasons. He was that delusional. So he believes in this greater destiny of Russia. The West is weak. That is a sign. This is the time to, he's probably sick as well, so this is a good time for him to implement this destiny and bring it to the reality. Ukraine was goal number one. Georgia was going to be number two. If we're not going to stand up to him in Ukraine, we certainly wouldn't stand up to him in Georgia, Georgia, Armenia, Azerbaijan, why not? This oil is natural resources. He is oriented towards oil and natural resources. Guess what exists in the southeast of Ukraine? Oil and natural gas, huge reserves, largest in Europe, exist right there under the Ukrainian land, on the border with Russia, the land that he now is occupying. He has that mentality of zero sum, natural resources. That's what he wants, not trade. And there's one other thing that I think really scared Putin. Putin knows, deep down, he'll never admit it and he can't maybe even admit it even to himself. But Putin knows way deep down that he is an illegitimate leader. He knows enough about the world that legitimacy at the end of the day comes from the governed, comes from the people. He has stolen election after election. He is not a legitimate leader of a country. And he fears his own people. He's afraid of them. And he needs to give them a cause to focus on, not to focus on their own poverty. Russia is very poor. I think GDP per capita is a third of Germany's, something like that, half to a third of Germany's. That's pretty poor, given natural resources and given what they have. He wants them to focus a way of that. There have been demonstrations in Russia over the last 20 years, repeatedly. People unhappy. War is a great tonic, a uniter, something to divert attention to the way from the flaws of the regime, of his own flaws. And Ukraine is a real threat. And the threat that Ukraine constitutes for Russia is the fact that it's corrupt and horrible a government that Ukraine has. The Ukrainian people have been slowly moving west intellectually. The spirit of the Ukrainians, the culture of the Ukrainians has been over the last 10, 15 years moving to the west. The 2014 revolution was a revolution to establish what the people hoped would be western values. They didn't quite get it, but they're working in that direction. And that's a real threat. I visited Russia. I've spoken in Russia in Moscow and St. Petersburg and I've been to Kiev several times. And there's a palpable difference in the air between the two places. Russia is an oppressive place. It's a scary place. And it's a place where if you say something not so good, particularly about Putin, people look at you like, you should be careful not to walk next to people with umbrellas or what you drink or what you eat. Kiev has that sense of you could say anything you wanted. You could do anything you wanted. It's corrupt. There are problems, but it was moving in the right direction and that posed a real threat to Putin. It's not that NATO was going to be a neighbor. The West was getting closer to Moscow. And that's scary to a dictator of an authoritarian regime. The real danger, I think, long term here is that we don't find and we don't discover the ideas that allowed us to live in peace. And that does not be the last conflict. I think Putin's going to lose this one. I think that will establish peaceful little while, at least in Europe. But our ideas, we hold our ideas so weakly. We don't believe in ourselves. We don't believe in the ideas that made the West as rich as it is and as peaceful as it is. And if it's not Russia, maybe it's China, maybe it's something inside Europe, maybe it's a change in America, who knows, but there are many, many enemies of liberty, of liberal governance, of peace in the world right now. And unless we stand up to them, I think beginning with Putin, but stand up with them inside our own countries, then we are indeed destined to lose that peace and ultimately to lose that prosperity that has made life in the West over the last, certainly since World War II, pretty amazing. In spite of all our complaints about our governments, in spite of all our complaints about the modern world, in spite of all our complaints about left, woke, whatever, and crazy right, life's pretty good. But that is not necessary. That is not determined. That does not always have to be the case. When Franklin left the Constitutional Convention in America, somebody asked him, what kind of government did you give us? And he said, a republic, if you can keep it, it's upon us to be vigilant in the cause of liberty. It's upon us to understand the causes of liberty and to fight for them, and those causes are intellectual, those causes are philosophical, and if we don't defend them, I think we risk everything, all the beauty that we have built in what we call Western civilization. Thank you.


Let's look at now some protocols that provide this quality of service in the engine architecture. The real-time protocol being at the forefront. It's not essentially a protocol, it's a family of protocols that includes a real-time protocol itself, real-time control protocol and real-time streaming protocol. So first and foremost any voice service would require certain signaling support. This signaling support actually has to be done through the network. In our case in NGN, the signaling is gathered out by SIP and the and the diameter. SIP is included in the IP multimedia subsystem, the IMS, which is part of the engine architecture. The data transfer is carried out through RTP. RTP as an alternative to UDP and TCP is because voice needs some special treatment and voice needs some additional signaling. That signaling is not exactly related to the establishment of connection but it is between the two end-to-end users or the two parties. So all the coding related functionalities including encoding, decoding, etc. are carried out by the RTP family. So RTP essentially provides the end-to-end transport functionality and since it is an end-to-end phenomenon it is available at the end host. The primary responsibility of RTP is to provide QS related guarantees. That means what are the requirements or the service level agreement between the service provider and the end user in terms of QS and how those have to be achieved. So it means some kind of provisioning, feedback monitoring and tweaking that is modification is something that is going to be part of the RTP. So QS guarantees and reservations are going to be part of functionality. RTP is actually the real time protocol that establishes connection for the data that is the voice in this case but in order to look at the statistics there is another protocol real-time control protocol. Again it works between the two endpoints. It keeps track of the statistics which relate to the transmission, which relate to the quality of service and in case multiple streams have to be synchronized or overlaid on top of each other then the real-time control protocol manages those as well. This is the RTP packet format. It is not a very big concern to look at the RTP packet format as the final one because the different applications may even go for some slight modification to the RTP packet itself. Let's look at the fields like we have the version, we have the CSRC count, we have certain flags like PXM, we have the type of the payload etc. Then we have the sequence number and time stamping and the sources synchronization source and the contributing source. Let's look at the fields now. So the version is obviously what defines which particular version is being used in in these days we have the second version which is being used. Then if we are using padding which compensates for the incomplete packet that means that it is not part of the payload it has to be notified from the sender end to the receiver end that this particular part of the payload is not going to be considered as voice. Then if there's a requirement to extend the header then some kind of extension flag has to be enabled. If the extension flag is up it means that there is going to be an additional header exactly one in number between the RTP header and the payload. Then we have the contributing sources. It is all these senders whose audio or audio related information is mixed together. So up to 15 contributors can create the mixed audio and the number of active users or active sources has to be identified. Then we have the marker. Marker actually contains an indication if this particular flag is up it means that the packet in which this flag is found to be up is the is the boundary or is the last frame which is going to be part of the audio conversation. Then we have the payload type. The payload type is specifically dependent upon the encoding scheme and the application which is eventually going to use it. Then sequence number actually identifies the ordering the sequencing and the time stamping related information. The sequence numbers actually identify the packets between RTP sender and receiver. Then we have the time stamp. Actually this is the information that the sender has to send to the receiver because each part of the audio conversation has to be placed in a certain time sequence. So this particular field actually helps the receiver to play back the content at an appropriate time. Now this particular time is a relative concept because the sender and receiver may have clocks which are which have different times. It means now the the rate at which the timestamps are stamped in at the receiver side and played back on the on the center side and played back on the receiver side have to be derived from the clock. Now the clock is provided by the application. It means the application has to make sure that any physical clock time differential between the sender and receiver is compensated to the offset that the application has to take care of. But essentially the clocking information has to be such that it linearly increases and it is a non-decreasing function. So it means the time is going to be an increasing phenomenon.