Welcome to the lecture 4 and today we will continue our discussion on how to determine the corrosion rate of a metal. So, to say what are the governing equations that can be used to compute the corrosion rate. Before we proceed on this a brief recapitulation of what we discussed in the previous class will be in order and towards the you know the end of the class we saw that how to predict if a metal will undergo corrosion in a given environment that we saw that right. And we also saw that if the metal is under equilibrium it is not going to corrode it will corrode only when it is deviating from the equilibrium condition. Suppose I immerse let us say iron in hydrochloric acid you know what are the reactions right. The corrosion will occur by the oxidation of iron into a ferrous chloride and the H plus ions in the solution will get reduced to hydrogen gas evolution. These two equations you know one is an oxidation other is a reduction process. So, before we looking at the the governing equation for the oxidation of the iron and the oxidation of a iron or similar metals and the reduction of the reducing species like H flyers or metal ions anything can happen we were trying to discuss what an electrochemical equilibrium is. If you recollect we we said that if I am going to construct an electrochemical equilibrium let us say if I am going to dip zinc zinc in zinc ions. We said that there is going to be an equilibrium between the zinc ions in the solution and the metal that is immersed in the solution right. So, you define this equilibrium as zinc 2 plus plus 2 electrons gives you zinc here. You define this equilibrium by one parameter all of you know what are the parameters which is E. E depends on what? E depends upon the activity of zinc ions in the solution. You can determine using Reynolds equation. What is more happening here? What is happening here is constantly zinc ions or getting formed in the solution by oxidation that these zinc ions will again go back and get deposited on to the metal surface. And we saw this is under equilibrium condition for simplicity we consider that the zinc ions are in the standard state right. Then what happens to E? E equals to E naught right and this is going to be equal to minus 0.763 volts in the standard state you know this. Now, we also said that the rate of zinc going as zinc 2 plus plus 2 electron is is equal to zinc 2 plus plus 2 electron to zinc right which I would say ok. This is the rate of this reaction this is the oxidation and this is going to be the reduction reaction. So, we say that rate of oxidation is equal to rate of reduction right and you can convert this into current right. How do you convert into current? Any of you can recollect r equals to i upon n f and right. Since the rate of forward equal to the rate of backward or whatever and this current is termed as termed as exchange current density. We saw this in the previous class. What are the unit of current density? Amperes per unit area right ok. So, that you know that. Let me go further into this ok. Let me represent this graphically right. I am going to make little more simpler. I am please look at I am plotting current density versus the potentials. It is relatively positive this is relatively negative here. Why? This equilibrium it has got two characters. One is a potential defined, second I define by the current density am I right. Now, for a standard state the potential is minus 0.76. So, this probably let us say it is coming somewhere here it is minus 0.763 volt right this axis now right. It also has a current density am I right or not. So, forward reaction and backward reaction they go equally. So, can I represent in the diagram? So, I represent in the diagram somewhere here. What is this current called? This current density is equal to I naught current density between z 2 plus and that here. Is correct or not? I am going to now disturb this equilibrium. I disturb this equilibrium now. Let us look at the equilibrium again. What is the potential of this? The potential of this measured is equal to 0.763 volt with respect to standard hydrogen electrode. Now, what I am going to do?  I am going to take the case 1. I am going to make this potential here minus 0.863 volt. I am going to make this potential minus 0.863 volt. How do I make it? I to make it I need one more electrode here and I need DC sold right. I just make like that. Now, what will happen? This is now made negative by using another electrode. If you make it negative what will happen? The electrons will start flowing towards this. Will the electrons flowing through this? So, make a negative electrons flow through this yes. You can change the potential. But the equilibrium will remain the same that will be a new equilibrium potential right. Assume that the concentration of the electrolyte zinc ion from 1 molar it has become that is a 10 power minus 2 molar right. You calculate the potential. What is the potential called? Still it is called equilibrium potential right. Is it correct or not? And you use the Nernst equation ok. So, even there the metal is in equilibrium with zinc ion, but at a different potential isn't it? Rate of forward reaction equal rate of backward reaction. The exchange condensate may not be the same isn't it? The rate of reaction depends upon the activity of the species. So, the exchange condensate may not be the same, but even at lower concentration when you change the potential right. In fact, you do not change the potential. The potential automatically get adjusted that is a new equilibrium potential. I put other way around for simplicity. I take a beaker, I take zinc ions of 1 molar concentration, I put zinc there, I measure the potential using a standard hydrogen electrode is minus 0.63 volt. I pour some water into that ok. So, what will happen now? The concentration of zinc ions will decrease. It will establish a new potential. Zinc ions still will have an equilibrium with the zinc metal. The new potential is different. You can calculate using the Nernst equation. That is not a deviation from equilibrium. It is a new equilibrium not same equilibrium. Am I right or not? This is it is different ok, but it is also an equilibrium potential. So, standard that is why I said what is the difference between a equilibrium potential and a standard potential? Standard potential is a special case of equilibrium potential in standard state. It is not different at all. We are in equilibrium condition. That is why I always say that when you are predicting corrosion you please do a simple calculation of equilibrium potential using Nernst equation. Please do not go into short catch right. Then use that to determine whether corrosion occurs or not.  So, metal is going to corrode. This is not going to corrode at all ok. That is saying you should understand. Equilibrium potential is independent of the concentration of ions independent of even the activity of metal metal on the metal. Because the pure metal we consider the activity of zinc is or metal is unity ok. So, I think it is a good point that you rise that you should understand that. So, let us put the comeback to this. I apply a potential here minus what happens? Now what will happen now? Please look at this reaction. If you do this what will happen? Zinc 2 plus plus 2 electron this becomes faster. And what will happen to this? Zinc going as zinc 2 plus plus 2 electron becomes slower. Agreed? Agreed or not agreed? Let us look at this one right. Let us look at this equation right. If I provide more electrons what will happen to this reaction? The forward reaction will be increasing. The backward reaction will be simple you know some normal chemistry concepts nothing is different right. So, by doing this that means, now the net current is going to flow am I right or not? So, if I am going to have an ammeter here, if I am going to have an ammeter here I can measure the current when the current is going to flow. On this surface earlier rate of oxidation equal to at a reduction here rate of reduction is more. So, there is going to be net flow of electron in this direction like this it goes like that only. So, the ammeter will start showing some values. So, there is going to be net current in. Do you agree or not? No, I think some of you have a problem ok. So, the current is going to increase. So, I am going to move from that to this. So, this value the current is now is increasing now. Agreed? Now I am going to make it even more negative what will happen? I make it let us say minus 0.963 what will happen? The forward reaction will be faster the reverse reaction becomes slower. So, the current will start increasing like that agreed. So, you find that we are going to follow like this. It is a good question I come to the later actually ok. It is a good very important question is a straight line is a slope is fixed variations right. It is a straight line or not? Of course, I put a log scale here I come back to that answer it is a good answer I mean it is a good question right. So, you will also ask a question why not the slope is like this ok. They are right I am going to answer all this because it is a mathematical equation we are going to derive from this ok. So, it happens like that. Now, on the other hand I am going to now apply now I am going to apply now what I am going to do? Now, second I am going to apply let us say minus 0.663 volt please see here I am applying minus 0.63 volt I am not applying plus 0.63 ok. Now, what will happen now? Now, this reaction will start moving faster this becomes so, that means, now I am going to get current given by this by increased voltage further, further you follow or not. Please do not worry right now why I am writing like that, but at least conceptually you agree that when I move the potential relatively positive, annular reaction occurs, relatively negative cathode reaction occurs that is what I want. Do not worry about this slope and all these things all I want to say that ok that ok that how things will be changing. Now, I am going to write this here as zinc going as zinc 2 plus plus 2 electrons represent this and this is what is zinc 2 plus plus 2 electron gives as zinc here. Conceptually understand right, I have some value of potential I move relatively positive that means, I am going to remove electrons from the matrix at this right, is not it? When I am going to make it minus 0.63 what does it mean? I mean the electrons are going to leave out of the system right, because it is moving out system that means, there is going to be oxidation. When I make it relatively negative the electrons will move in there is going to be reduction process. So, depending upon that the things are start moving up and down like this. Please understand this is if you understand this you understood corrosion full you will have no problems in anywhere in understanding the electro chemical corrosion process at all. This is basic thing please see here why I am saying it is important. I have started with the potential of minus 0.763 I moved to a value which is let us say let us say I have moved to a value I give some value let us say minus 0.560 ok. I moved to a value here let us say minus 0.9638 I am just giving some arbitrary value do not worry about it ok. At 0.63 I am sorry 0.763 no oxidation no reduction because same I move up this oxidation please look at the sign here. The sign is negative here the sign is negative here I can have a sign negative and I can still have oxidation you can still have reduction. So, you do not have to change the sign in order to call it an oxidation reaction reduction reaction otherwise the old convention European convention used to say e is negative its reduction e is positive oxidation incorrect. I can have ok a negative things here and still I can have oxidation I can have a negative over here and still I can have reduction. If I put a equilibrium potential there is no oxidation no reduction takes place. So, it is positive negative has no meaning at all in this case. To illustrate further if I take copper suppose I take copper what will be the value here what will be the value here for a copper plus 0.337. 337 right if I move out move sorry if you move up it is positive slightly moved down it is still positive I can have oxidation and I can have reduction. This is a important thing do not get carried away with the sign and tell there is oxidation there is reduction process no that is totally incorrect to attribute the sign for oxidation and reduction process. e is independent of convention it is value that you determine from the from the equation that you get from here and please notice we said last time it is measurable just not only calculable I can measure it. Only thing is I had to measure with respect to a another reference electrode that is all ok. You understood this actually any of you have any questions here please yeah. Whole changing current does equilibrium stabilize again? No that we call steady state. What is the difference between a steady state and the equilibrium? Steady state means there will be a drift slowly and then it becomes constant. So, when you when you change the potential I understand the reaction rate will not jump immediately it will take some time but at some time it is just a value a steady state value. Yeah when you say equilibrium no oxidation no reduction steady state no it can be oxidation some reduction but does not change with respect to time steady state means it is not changing with respect to time. So, do not confuse between equilibrium state and the steady state they are totally different at all ok they are not the same. Let us continue this this is a important one you should continue will we continue this spending some time on this ok. Now, come back to this this discussion now. What happen if we consider tangent or unsteady state? See I will tell you right now we do not bother because now we are trying to tan walk run then we going to take up walk ok. People do calculate transients when you do research for examples these transients have meaning at all actually ok that probably we have time we talk about it. Transients do have meaning they are used in understanding the electrochemical interface but right now we are not going to talk about transients. We are talking about steady state because that is only a state where I can define very well right you cannot define about it right. Otherwise transients have a meaning you do it electrochemical, ember, spetoscopy all this we do that where the transients are being used ok. Right now we will not talk about that particular one. Let us let us talk about the difference between chemical reaction and electrochemical reaction. What are the difference between these two? Metallurgy should tell chemistry I should tell everybody should tell everybody right ok. Let me give a lead rate of chemical reaction ok. What are the factors that affect the rate of the chemical reaction concentration temperature pressure ok. Pressurize I can talk about temperature pressure order of reaction. So, the rate of the chemical reaction is a function of what function of concentration temperature pressure rate equation right is what happens right the rate equation is what you get to use this right. Let us look at rate of electrochemical reaction. What is this function of what can somebody guess now we are reasonably now we have seen depends on what. So, it depends upon the concentration, temperature, pressure and what and I can alter the rate of reaction by altering the potential. So, when you are talking about reaction kinetics rate of corrosion for example, we talk about what is the concentration of species or the temperatures or the pressure you are going to add one more dimension what is that potential is going to be there. And potential and current are interrelated we have seen in the previous in the previous thing right I will I show you here please the potential and current are interrelated. I have not completed the story here, but I just wanted to tell you that rate of reaction depends upon potential and current are interrelated to each other ok. You talked about what happened to the change of concentration that will change. So, that is the difference between a chemical reaction and electrochemical reaction. Let us look at other things what difference between these two we have. Suppose I have hydrogen and oxygen I put them together do you think water will form very easily? I put take oxygen I put some combination of it will be explosion, but otherwise you just take hydrogen and oxygen put in a cylinder. The free energy change is negative that is why we have water right otherwise water will not be will not be there. So, the free energy change for hydrogen combining with water I am sorry hydrogen combining with oxygen given as to water is negative right, but put oxygen hydrogen together and it does not form water easily. People can ask questions differently. You heard the concept called activation energy right there is activation energy barrier unless you cross activation energy barrier you cannot. So, how do you cross the activation energy barrier in chemical reaction to raise the temperature? So, temperature is the catalyst kind of thing right or we add a catalyst and do that. So, in the case of in the case of chemical reaction ok we use temperature as a factor to control in electrochemical reaction we use potential to work on the barrier corrosion does not occur just like that. You apply more potential then only corrosion occurs otherwise the free energy change is negative only it does not happen. So, we need to understand what is an equivalent of of activation energy barrier in electrochemical reaction ok. So, I am going to now talk about what they are ok. So, let us go into that concept of what it is. Now, we all know this is I I call it as a how do you use the term G? E is a potential right I use the term G maybe you know in the distance A turning into B there is a barrier for that and B coming to A you have bigger barrier for that. So, this is all you guys know about it right. In electrochemical reaction also there is a barrier ok. What is happening in electrochemical reaction? There is a zinc here goes in the solution as zinc 2 plus ions it cannot simply come out it is a lattice it has to break the bond right. So, there is a barrier of activation from this to come over here it is not exactly correct ok. So, there is a barrier it has to overcome unless you have this barrier to overcome the lattice zinc will not come to solution ok. And for that to overcome we use what is called as the potentials. I come back to this concept here ok. Let us see what it is E versus log I this is true for most of the electrochemical reaction B to H plus H zinc zinc plus copper 2 plus copper whatever and this is your oxidation and this is then and what is this? This is your I naught what is this? This is your am I right. Now, please notice give let us say let us say the reaction is let us say the reaction I give in here I just change the reaction here what is you can use any reaction you want right I use this if this is the equilibrium. What is the reaction here can tell me yeah quick what reaction for this is the equilibrium that I am representing what is the reaction here hydrogen evolution reaction I wanted to speak what is this one? This is hydrogen oxidation reaction. Now, if I have to increase the rate of reaction suppose you know rate of you know suppose I want to increase rate of reaction to this I need to move the potential to this point to this point am I right I have to move this potential here. So, what is the equilibrium state? I call it is a 00 you want it ok if the standard state you call it 00. Now, please look at I moved from this one to this one in order that the reaction takes place of my own rate I wanted you want to increase it I move further I move further and you further I want oxidize it I move up move up move up ok. Please look at as I move down down like that what happens the reaction becomes either oxidation or become reduction and the electrode is now set as the electrode is polarized. What is polarization? Yeah net now earlier it was just it is not any character at all it is simply both are forward same now it is polarized if I what means if I move down it becomes a cathode so move up it becomes a anode so it is now polarized. So, that means the electrode is now polarized ok. So, and this is called as polarization a deviation from the equilibrium condition is called as polarization that is polarization means that means, you want to say the concept polarization means deviation from the equilibrium is called as polarization anybody has a problem ok. Let me move further into this diagram the concept now let move further into this. Let us draw this diagram fresh again ok. I move to this value and this is called as eta ok ok. So, eta eta is a wall potential right is a term is called a wall potential and what is this one which is called as E applied and what is this potential called it is E equilibrium potentials ok. So, eta is equal to E applied minus E equilibrium please remember this equation if you or confuse this equation you will have a problem ok. Let me see here now for a anodic reaction when anodic what will be eta will be positive or negative positive right great cathodic because this is the cathodic side this is your anodic this is the cathodic. Now you will ask question you have been asking question before what is this?  So, beta c is a cathodic slope, but I am going to use cathodic please use the term daffyl slope a equal to anodic. If you use I use the t h capital here the name of the person right he you found this relationship in the year 1905 you got this relationship actually we did an experiment ok. We did an experiment we got this similar trend we measured the slope that time we called a slope to recognize this contribution we call that we call that slope as the daffyl slopes. So, the daffyl slope now defines the rate at which the reaction occurs am I right or not ok the slope is equally important right. Now you can now use this we have also derived equation eta anodic equals to plus beta a log of the mouth I upon I naught beta cathodic minus beta c log I upon I naught c you guys are all now good in mathematics right you should be able to see how this can be derived. It is a simple linear equation right nothing more right because you know this is your I naught right the daffyl slope you know that right. Now this is the the difference that you have here. So, you define this with eta. So, I at any given eta I at any given eta can be given by I naught if I know the daffyl slope this these are called as daffyl equations because see here beta is what beta is a negative slope right that is why they put here ok slope is negative. So, you have minus beta and log now what is beta can I take it out what is beta beta is equal to 2.303 hot T by alpha what is alpha coefficient also called as symmetry generally normally alpha is equal to 0.5 I will spend a minute on this ok. Just take this not a good diagram ok, but I just made it ok. This energy right versus the reaction coordinate right it is called reaction coordinator distance reaction co-ordinate. This is let us say this is let us say zinc 2 zinc here ok zinc zinc I say zinc 2 plus please look at this one. If the guy has to move from zinc has to move from here to this see I am describing this I am describing this like this right what is this 2 plus this guy goes back and forth like that right zinc has to move from here to this is much easier it is because the slope is less, but for zinc 2 plus to come up here it is going to be more difficult that means, what is here alpha is given as this is let us say this is y. Now, alpha alpha for what alpha for zinc to go as zinc 2 plus given as dx divided by x plus y for zinc to gamma what happens? For zinc to come out this is similarly let us say some other alpha for zinc 2 plus moved towards zinc it is going to be 1 it is going to be y upon and you guys would have seen it before ok. That means, this is much easier now alpha is alpha is smaller here right alpha is smaller this is going to be here. So, r I would say this is equal to 1 minus alpha can I say this? If this is alpha this is equal to 1 minus alpha you can able to get this alpha plus 1 minus alpha is equal to 1 ok it is going to be there this is you guys should have studied in many chemical equations and all actually. So, alpha and is what this really means please notice please notice very clearly here ok ok. If alpha is going to be small beta is yeah if alpha is going to be small it is going to be it is larger here ok. So, it relate this to much more easier in this case actually ok. Can I move or you have any questions in this case ok? Is beta a characteristics property? It is ok. Let us look at what is alpha? Alpha depends upon the hill that moves here beta is equal to 2.303 RT by alpha n F. What is n? The number of electrons involved 2, 3 whatever F is a Faraday is a temperature or is a gas constant. So, beta is a characteristic property. And what is that? Yeah i not of the characteristic property right because the guy going to move right alpha means the guy goes you know left and right right. So, i not is characteristic of a given system ok it is very important. In fact, you will see later i not is going to decide what is the rate of corrosion more or less if i not is small corrosion rate is small if i not is more corrosion rate is going to be more we will see later ok. Right now I want you to get a clarity in terms of the electrochemical equations that is dictating the kinetics of that actually ok. That is that is what you should be knowing ok. So, this is so far we we understood ok excuse me the equations. Now, can somebody somebody you know able to tell what are we have discussed so far you know what is what is what is the what you understood actually what are you understood in the discussion we had so far. See in order that in electrochemical reaction to occur either oxidation or reduction there has to be in over voltage over potentials you have to deviate from the equilibrium potentials and that is also called as a polarization. If we increase the over voltage if we increase the eta what will happen to rate of reaction will automatically increase. If you look at the tabular equation there ok if you visualize more i is going to be more beta is less i is going to be less. So, higher the eta higher is the polarization the higher is going to be the rate of reaction taking place. So, this is the most important aspect of the the electrochemical reaction electrochemical kinetics ok and you have any questions so far we can we can clarify this and then move further no questions. When concentration is changed then equilibrium potential also changes. So, does i naught changes with changing concentration of ion corresponding to new equilibrium potential? You need to have yeah you need to have these values either you should theoretically calculate or you should experimentally measure the i naught values they are required very much the same that equilibrium potential change with change in concentration the i naught also will change. Because let us look at this now see the chemical reaction the electrochemical reaction there are lot of commonalities that you have. Suppose go back to this suppose if this are going back and forth right how do you determine the rate of this reaction r equal to k into concentration it is a first order reaction all right. If r is changing I mean it has to change if the k is changing and c is changing if r is changing then i is going to change. So, the exchange condensate will change automatically, but only thing it will happen is the exchange condensate for a forward reaction is equal to backward reaction that is not going to change. The difference between i and i naught is i naught there is no net oxidation reduction, but when it is i it is either oxidation or reduction process yeah i naught will change if you change the concentration of if you change even temperatures things will change ok. So, but all it means it is an equilibrium and no oxidation no reduction takes place ok. So, I am not going to details actually some of you are more interested please go through the book Bacchris and Reddy modern electrochemistry all these are given in details, but since it is not electrochemistry course I am not talking. So, I am discussing electrochemistry to the extent that you can understand corrosion better that is no way a comprehensive treatment of electrochemistry ok it is not at all ok. But those who are interested please read that book or you can read the book Buckanan right that is also a good book I referred in the in the beginning of my my first class and I said what are the books I am referring you can refer that book as well. But Bacchris and Reddy I would call it it is like a Bible or Giza whatever we can call it ok the ultimate in terms of in my view in understanding clarifying your concepts or you can also read by Baud Baud is another you know big guy in the field of electrochemistry ok. Now, so let us now look at these things and now what I am going to look at here is now what ok. So, what you should know? You should know one the equilibrium potential calculations you should know what is over voltage you should know that is E voltage. Now, you should know how eta is related to we have not done much so far we are just only you know made only three concepts clear to us actually how fully they are clear. Actually there is one more if you are really more keen I will write the equation here and those of you you want to understand better. A better equation to represent this electrochemical kinetics is I is equal to I naught exponential 1 minus alpha eta n F r t minus exponential minus beta sorry minus minus alpha eta n F i. What is this? Please look at I what is I here I is the net current density ok and this corresponds to I anodic current it corresponds to I cathodic. That means, I is given as I anodic always minus I cathodic. These are the equations we have and this is called as Butcher-Walmer equation and I am not going to discuss this in details, but those of you who are interested can read the book and understand it or if time permits we will discuss this during the somewhere in the middle of the course we will discuss this ok. Let me just before I proceed let me just clarify this. So, you should be in a position to calculate the current density right. Can you can you solve the numericals if I give some values based on the Caplet equations would you be able to do that ok. So, you will have some numericals to to understand these concepts ok and probably by the coming week we will give you these numericals actually. Let us go to the electrochemical reaction more in details. Let me take this steel say in sea water steel in sea water. What is the corrosion? Now, you will have iron going as Fe 2 plus now we also have oxygen water is it clear is it is it right. You guys are aware of this equation that is right pictorially here the sea water it has some oxygen there dissolved oxygen somewhere all the places iron corrodes the electrons are liberated here. What is the cathodic reaction? This is the cathodic reaction this is cathodic anodic reaction. The anodic reaction occurred the cathodic reaction to occur the oxygen has to migrate from here to this place right or not. Similarly, the iron has to migrate from here outside has to migrate from here you cannot just accumulate it there. So, what are the reaction here? What are the process involved here? The process involved here are at the interface there is charge transfer. What does it charge transfer? Iron becomes Fe 2 plus strips the two electrons out the oxygen moves here and change the electrons it becomes ways minus. So, charge transfer occurs at the interface, but for that to occur you have to have the migration of this. So, to put it simply some pieces ok maybe it is a a negative a negative charge or a positive charge to move here what happens then what happens here? Charge transfer and this charge transfer you have seen the relationship now what is the relationship here? It is the capital relationship what you have seen before is a charge transfer is a relationship and what is this? This is your diffusion control. So, the over voltage we talked about so far it is eta a and eta c they are all called as charge transfer over voltage they are called as charge transfer over voltage ok. They are called as charge transfer over voltage or over potential what are we going to call it? That is the potential required for metal to get oxidized or reduced what happens? Now, we have one more thing so, we need to know how these are happening at all. If you do this then you have a complete understanding of electrochemical corrosion process right. You already seen how the relation between the potential and current exists at the interface. Now, we also know that if the ions have to take charge they have to move from the bulk the interface. So, we need to know the governing equation for that. So, what is the governing equation for that? Ok. So, that you can completely define any electrochemical corrosion reaction understood ok. So, we are going to look at this now and see how we can understand that yeah. What about the cemented present in the steel? Oh ok I am well it is a good question ok. Right now we are not talking in terms of microscopic processes on the surface we are looking at a macroscopic. I gave steel as an example here. So, that you get an idea about how the steel corrode in the sea water ok. You can take an iron you want ok. You can take nickel you want actually ok. The idea of giving here is that the oxen you know I gave oxen here. I did not put sulphuric acid. I have given you a problem I think I have not given it. I think T s have not given the A to H to be ok. So, the difference between an acid the sea water containing or exposed to air is that the solubility of oxen here is what is about 6 ppm to 7 ppm maybe 8 ppm something like that. So, they are not going to be easily available on the surface. They have to migrate from here. The corrosion now depends upon what? Depends on not this. It depends upon how quickly the oxygen molecule migrate to the interface. If they do not migrate then the reaction will not occur. These equations have no use. So, I am talking in reference to why you should care this one. Please look at this. This is in series. Please look at this in series right. This move like this. If this is faster and this is slower the rate determining reaction is going to be this. Right. If this is the slowest the fastest this is not going to control this is going to control. I mean I do not know I am jumping at all ok. This should be easier for you. This is a series process right. If assume that transport is much slower I apply more over voltage right. I apply more over voltage. Just go to this just go to this reaction ok. I apply more over voltage the current is increasing right increasing. But, current will increase only when if the species are available for reaction. If they are not available what happens? You only increase the voltage nothing happens right. So, this current will increase only when your species to accept the electron or release electron if they are not there. So, that means, you have a transport process and then it is getting accepted here right. So, it is a coupled reaction. The transport is an integral part of electrochemical process for any chemical process is also you know there is a transport happening at all. So, I did not use sulfuric acid because sulfuric acid the concentration of H plus ions are a huge H plus move very fast you never have diffusion control process. But, oxygen is less soluble and so, in this case the transport becomes very important. We will see this later when you talk about corrosion of steel in sea water how important these equations are. These equations are very important when you talk about corrosion of steel in sea water corrosion of stainless steel in sea water they are very important. Why? Because that is governed by this transfer process that is why we are now trying to understand the equation governing the transport of ions in the solution at all ok. Am I making this point clear to you ok. So, we look at this now transport there are two laws governing a transport what are the laws? I am talking diffusion. What are the governing laws of diffusion? Fick's law you cannot forget that there are the great guys. So, there are Fick's law the one is called Fick's first law second is the Fick's second law. What is the difference between a first law and second law? First law is steady state and second law is a non steady state. So, we are not getting into non steady state is very complex ok. So, they are useful we are going to do research electro chemically you solve that also, but I am not going to use this in the class. So, the so, the diffusion processes starts with the Fick's law you cannot start from that. What is the Fick's law it says? Fick's law says j is equals to minus d dc upon dx. What is j is a it is a flux the reaction rate is given in terms of moles per centimeter square area per second am I right? Reaction rate all of you guys may be knowing. What is d diffusivity? What unit of this linked to square load by time? What is dc concentration difference? dx is what is the between two points right ok between the two points where the diffusion occurs. Let us define the electro chemical system. Now, you have the bulk a concentration ok and what is this concentration here? It is a surface concentration right. This is a bulk concentration surface and assume that the diffusion distance is assume this is your x for example. What do you have here? Now, can you convert flux into current? What is the unit of flux? Moles centimeter per second. How do you convert this? No j is equal to j multiplied by anywhere can you not? Is it right or not? So, what happens? i is equal to minus d dc upon dx difficult equation or easy equation. See if you know the number of moles can you not convert that into see there is a number of moles per centimeter square per second is a rate no it is a rate right it is a rate of reaction. So, you how do you convert that into current? Is the equation correct or incorrect? So, you can somebody point out. Correct. How do you get this? Please look at your notes ok see that is why you see we are now making a slow progress ok and they are not difficult. But if you are not you know following up completely you might find it very difficult to understand what it is it is simply very simple equations only ok. So, it is possible for us to relate the flux to this. So, you we will find out what is called as as the governing equation for what is called as a diffusion process. And how the diffusion is related to the current see what is for example, I take s plus ion I start moving from here to this what does it mean? Is it only mass is moving or something else is moving? Charge moving when charge is moving what does it mean? Current is moving right try to try to understand they are not total molecules right. So, if these ions are moving they carrying the charges and so the current is going to flow accordingly depends upon what direction the ions are moving and which ions are moving positive and negative right. So, the flux is related to current ok. So, far flux was related to what in terms of moles and all this now we are going to relate the flux to current. Why I am interested? Because I need to know what is the diffusion rate of oxygen to find out the corrosion rate otherwise I do not know ok. How do I calculate this? So, I need so I am really worried or I am bothered I would say that I need to know what happens to the corrosion of steel in water having 5 ppm oxygen there or 100 ppm for example, if the diffusion coefficient of species changes what happens? Corrosion rate is going to change. So, what is the basic equation for that? So, these are the basic equations ok. So, when I say I can calculate corrosion rate I can able to calculate corrosion rate by knowing all this they are not difficult I think you guys have done it in earlier subject at all actually ok. So, please brush up your things when you come back and we will see this in the in the next class ok. Please understand we are now slowly complicating the subject. Why? I talked about so far zinc oxidation, zinc reduction by one one Tafel equation you have two Tafel equations right. In the actual corrosion process what is happening? Zinc is getting oxidized, H plus is getting reduced. So, there are going to be four Tafel governing equations am I right or not? So, please understand ok. They are very simple, but there are two equilibria we are talking about in corrosion one is zinc is in equilibrium with zinc ions, H plus is in equilibrium with the H. So, we talk about only one equilibrium of zinc having two Tafel equations. Now, there I am going to talk about four Tafel relationships because one equilibrium for H plus H, other one for zinc and zinc plus. So, solving that equation becomes more difficult unless you understand it ok. Please do understand it ok. Get that things clear to your mind it is not difficult again I repeat, but please look at the equation and then try to understand what these equations are actually ok. So, I mean like solving any mathematical problem, but you should know the physics behind these governing equations at all ok. So, please come prepared for the next class. Next class I can assure you it is going to be more complex more complex and more more complex ok, but they have a very common simpler understanding of the auto chemical concepts that I can say ok. So, that is not difficult ok. So, please come prepared for the next class I will I will really appreciate that. So, we will close today's discussion just introducing the relation between diffusion and the current ok. Thank you.


Live from New York, it's theCUBE. Covering Big Data New York City 2016. Brought to you by headline sponsors, Cisco, IBM, NVIDIA, and our ecosystem sponsors. Now, here are your hosts, Dave Vellante and George Gilbert. We're back, welcome to New York City everybody. This is theCUBE, the worldwide leader in live tech coverage. Kevin McIntyre is here, he's the data first strategy leader at IBM and he's joined by Nick Green, who is the director of BI and data management at Dell Hayes America. Gentlemen, welcome to theCUBE. Thanks for coming on. Thanks for having us. Nick, let's start with you. Dell Hayes America, what do you guys do? Sure, so we are a traditional supermarket retailer and so we are in the grocery business and we own two brands that people might be familiar with. One in the mid-Atlantic called Food Lion, which has a rich history and a strong presence in that area. We also have the Hannaford Brothers, which is further north in Maine, outside of Boston. And so those two are banners and like I said, I run data for both banners. I'm at Hannaford at least twice a week. Oh, great, that's great. Malboro Mass. Okay, and Kevin, your role is to help get clients to where they want to achieve outcomes, right? Yeah, absolutely. So I'm part of our global sales leadership organization and what we're announcing this evening around our DataWorks platform, we need a model in order to make our clients successful. So it's not just a focus on the technology, but the process, the strategy, the culture and everything that needs to be in place in order for our customers to be successful. So if I look at, if I want to make an analogy, maybe you want to start working out. You have a goal and you want to either gain some muscle mass, lose a little bit of weight. You can determine, hey, I'm gonna start running, I'm gonna go to local YMCA, maybe I'm gonna go to a really prestigious gym. Maybe you'll get the right outcomes doing that yourself. Running's not all that hard, going to the gym isn't difficult, but a personal trainer that comes in puts a diet plan in place, looks at the specific kinds of workout, the timing, making sure that you're motivated to do that. So Data First is kind of the personal trainer of the DataWorks platform that we are launching. So bringing in that expertise and the strategy and repeatable patterns through workshops and methods in order to help our clients really partner with us as we make them data-driven organizations. Gelhaze was an early example of this process. You guys kind of co-developed it and now you're taking that to market. Can we talk a little bit more about that? How did you guys get started and where did it start? Sure, so we can go back. I've been with the company for going on three years now and actually it goes back to, we wanted to do some experimentation with big data and this was very early on in IBM's kind of cloud journey and especially from a data perspective. And so it all started with, we wanted to really try and do some work around weather and sales information and understand if there's correlations between the two and that was really our first journey into this kind of big data space and leveraging the cloud because we knew as we're in the supermarket business, we're grocery retailers, we're not technologists. So for us to try and stand up complex Hadoop clusters or no SQL databases, whatever the case may be, we really don't have that engineering skill set. And so we wanted to move fast. We wanted to do things in a cost-effective manner. We reached out to IBM because they're a strategic partner and through that we stood up, this was again, before any of this really existed from a commercialization standpoint, we really partnered with them to understand what the offering was that we needed. And what it started with was I went to my client exec and I said, here's what we're trying to do and we have no idea what we're doing. Can you help us? And they really started pulling together resources from all over IBM to help us get that off the ground and we've just evolved from there. And that was two and a half years ago and we've continued to evolve, moved to a number of the different cloud offerings with BlueMix and some of the other new technology that's been rolled out. And at this point, I think we're probably one of the clients who are using most of the technology in the cloud space. And Nick, the problem you were trying to solve is you wanted to understand the relationship between weather and ultimately sales. Yes, exactly. Okay, and what did you find out? What did we find out? That's a secret. Yeah, it is kind of our secret sauce. Give us some general direction. There's a relationship. Well, you know, I think one of the interesting things about this is for us, it was, we have very strong retailers. We have people who understand our business inside and out and what this did was kind of affirm with data what they already knew. So it wasn't like we got these brand new insights. It was a great opportunity to try some new technology. So one of the things we learned is, and this may be revolutionary to everyone, but when it's hot, people tend to buy beer. So that was one of the insights that we had and they tend to stay away from things like veal. So these were two of our big insights that we had. But more from that, it was understanding how we could work with external data, internal data, glean some insights, leverage the technology, understand how to innovate fast within our company. We'd never done anything like this before. We went from just idea and concept to insights in a matter of weeks, which, if we were to try to do this on our own, it would have been months if we were lucky. Well, the interesting thing about that example is it's external data. It's weather data. The famous beer and diapers, I don't know when that was from the original data warehouse example, but it was- Yeah, for hurricanes. No, it wasn't just- No, that was- It was guys who run out to buy diapers, grab a six-pack or whatever. And so, but that was mostly internal data. The world has changed. And so, okay, so what about the process around that, the people and the process side of that? What did you learn from this experience? Well, I think what's really great about the relationship we've had, and I think Nick's right, we have been working together for, I think a little over two years at this point, is that it just wasn't success in one area. I mean, that's a great application where they were able to look at that data and validate patterns or understand kind of the relationship between sales and weather. But we've also been able to work with them on new systems of engagement and new web and mobile applications for how their end users interact with their brand and really kind of come to work with their haze. And then also providing kind of next generation analytics around customer loyalty and then looking at other unstructured data. So what we're doing with Data First is that ability to be very tactical with the problem. Maybe we need to better understand how we're going to engage with our clients with the new system of engagement. So there's a problem and a specific outcome to that. So with this Data First method approach is helping them put together that executable plan to get them from where they are today to where they want to be in the future and understanding everything you need to know about getting there. The data movement, the security, the interaction, quantifying and qualifying the business value that comes out of that. So not just talking about feature function product, it's what is the process to make this a success for you as a client. And I think we've had tremendous success in being able to do that with Dell haze across different projects and now with them embracing our technology and being kind of this cloud first data-driven organization and thermarchy client for us. So with that experience we've had with Dell haze, we need to be able to really kind of package this up, put some structure and operationalize this method so we can work with hundreds and thousands of clients globally. And what I think is really exciting about this too is that I'm focused on making sure that we're not just bringing the IBM point of view to technology and becoming a cognitive business. We want to have kind of a community effect here where we can work with other partners both within IBM and outside IBM so they can bring in their credibility and their expertise in helping our clients become successful on this journey.  It started with a mandate from the top. But really it was one of the things that we try to do is with IBM because again we see them as our partner is really we talk about business problems. We don't talk about technology. We go to them and say, look, this is what we're trying to solve from a business standpoint. And we have multiple use cases like that that we've implemented. And when we go at it from a business problem standpoint that may incorporate multiple pieces of technology, a single piece of technology, but it's about having an end-to-end solution. So when you think about an enterprise like ours or any company that has kind of grown up in a traditional, you make these capital investments, you depreciate those over five years and you do these sorts of things. Moving to the cloud and doing some of the things that we're doing now takes a dramatic shift. And I think just even from a financial perspective it's very different than how you used to operate. You would build this big business model in a business case with this ROI, make this huge capital expenditure to bring in the technology, struggle for months to try and get it stood up and then you hope to get the benefit out of it. What we're able to do now is really cut that cycle down and we really focus on what's the problem. We remove the technology piece from the equation because we just say, look, we want this on demand. We want to be able to stand this up when we need it, answer our problem and then see if new problems arise or we spin it down and we're good to go. So it's really changed the dynamic of how we really go to market with our partners. What was the mandate from the top? Was it accelerate cycle time? It's really what we've seen as a business is really a transition to thinking about data as a key strategic asset. So for us, I would say when I joined the company we really shifted from data being an afterthought to whenever we're embarking on any type of strategy we want to one use data to understand how the strategy is performing but also figure out where do we want to go strategically? So we really started thinking about data first and thinking how do we incorporate data, how do we utilize this asset more effectively? And that's really where my role started and so for me it was how do we get speed to value quickly? How do we get the outcomes, not focus on the technology? And that's really been the evolution. So it was understanding, you had an understanding of how you make money. How can we enhance that with data? It really was the task, okay? I'm curious about over time how the mix went from consulting with IBM about outcomes towards having internalized the process of that consultation into repeatable technology. In other words, from a pure consulting engagement where you went to them with a request for an outcome to when you could take problems internally and say, oh, we know how to solve that based on all the experiences we've had. Yeah, well I can say one of the things that we're exploring now is we've been working with big insights in the cloud and we've been working on a supply chain project. Well, one of my leads who's running that is seeing multiple opportunities to leverage that platform beyond what we're currently doing. Now, obviously being in the tech space, big data has been a hot topic for a few years now and there was no way that I could go to both my business leadership and IT leadership and say, hey, I want to spin up a Hadoop environment and they look at me and say, for what? What we did is we saw a business problem and fit that business problem to the technology. Well, now that we have the technology and the capability in-house, we're learning as a team, we can understand how to use that same design pattern to address other business problems that are coming up or on the horizon and so that's how we're really leveraging the platform. We've done the same thing with the cloud and no SQL platform and we're doing that over and over again where we're seeing, we're using IBM to really understand how to get the technology up, how to start leveraging that for a very specific use case but now it's in our portfolio and now we understand how do we continue to expand that capability. Do you measure your maturity in terms of, I don't know, maybe the cycle time from initiation of project to completion of project or do you measure based on perhaps how much external skills you need to source to get it done? I think my boss would like for me to do that. I think for us what we're focused on is really just getting faster at turning around a solution to our business. Moving away from the challenges, the real engineering challenges of standing up a new database, there were times in this company or in other companies where it would take months to stand up a new database. Those are months that I'm not getting business value to my business partners. If I just simply remove that from the equation and focus on the business value, that's speed to market, that's speed to value, and that you can't really put a measurement on that because what we're really doing is shifting how we think about how we do projects. We've gone from a great example when we were redesigning foodline.com, we used our Cloudant database as the back end and we have project managers who would say, okay, we're working on the plan. How many weeks do you need to stand up the instance? We say it's a matter of minutes. All we have to do is contact our partners and they really could not understand, okay, then what do you have to do after that? That's it, it was an email. So it's changing how we think about planning, how do we think about execution, 100%. When you guys started working together, like who's involved? Who did IBM have to bring to the table and who did Dell Hayes bring to the table? What type of folks? There's more than IT people, obviously, and can you describe that? And so typically when we're kind of starting on a new project, there's a new business challenge and some outcome that Dell Hayes or any other client wants to achieve, it's really important for, I think, everybody to be aligned from the beginning. And when I look at it for what's gonna be a successful way to get started, you need to have your business users who is responsible for that outcome, who is going to get value from that outcome, someone who's technically going to deliver that and facilitate that outcome, and probably an architect who understands kind of the existing kind of lay of the land at that organization. And IBM brings in there our enterprise architects as well that understand how our technology all works together. We bring in a business value consultant who can speak the kind of the lingo of the business value, understanding kind of industry specific imperatives that are important to that organization and some technology experts. So we're able to understand, hey, this is the challenge you're facing today, this is where you want to go and we're gonna help you be put on that plan in order to get there through quantifying again the business value, understanding that outcome and being mindful of everything that needs to happen in order for that to become a reality and bringing kind of those repeatable patterns of deployment. So if they're looking at a new project where it's gonna take technology X, Y and Z to make that a success, well we can look where we've been successful in the past with other customers and hey, we've worked with technology X, Y and Z, this is how it's done, we've done this before, we've been successful, so put that to the side and we're gonna focus on the other things that's gonna make this really kind of come to life and drive the outcome that you're looking for. And it is about being data driven and insight driven and the fact that Del Hayes is looking at data as an asset and that is really what's gonna help them make better decisions and how they're going to engage and make money from their clients is just they're a great customer to work with because not all customers have that mentality and it's just been a great partnership. And Nick, this happened predominantly at Del Hayes America HQ or did you have samples that you brought in from the stores or retail locations? It was pretty focused on, we're a shared service within Del Hayes America but we have very tight partnership with our banners and so actually the president of Foodline was one of the sponsors for a lot of the work that we were doing from a data perspective because she has such a great understanding of the value of data and so she and I work very closely together. It was really through her that I got great insight on some of the big business challenges and then we kind of bring those back and say how do we best solve that? How can we answer those questions quickly? How do we build platforms that allow us to iterate really fast? So she had skin in the game. Oh, absolutely, she still does, absolutely. All right gentlemen, we have to leave it there. Thanks so much for coming on theCUBE. Really appreciate it. Thank you, thank you. All right, keep it right there. Everybody will be back with our next guest. We're live from New York City. This is Big Data NYC, data week strata plus a dupe. Right back.


ServiceNow Knowledge 4T is sponsored by ServiceNow. Here are your hosts, Dave Vellante and Jeff Frick. Good afternoon everybody. Beautiful day here in San Francisco. We're at Moscone South walking the building. Look right. We're right there. Great setup here at ServiceNow Knowledge. Really a lot of buzz going on here at the show. Transformation of IT. One of the huge themes really at this event is transforming IT from a cost center into a value producer. I mean, it's something that CIOs have talked about for decades. You certainly had the alignment discussion, but the value piece has been elusive. And so that's something that we are really starting to see take hold within the ServiceNow customer base. It's actually feeling quite real. Mitch Kenfield is here. He's a managing director at KPMG. It's a topic, Mitch, I know that's near and dear to your heart. So welcome back to theCUBE. Good to see you again. Thank you. Hi, Mike. I was here a year ago. And to your point, I think just in that year's time, the number of clients that are coming to us around this concept of value around not just cost, but that's a different part of it. But value of the products and capabilities they provide is just exponentially getting bigger. I love how Frank Slum's keynote this morning really put down I would say a challenge to IT, even though he didn't pose it as a challenge, is you must transform and become a producer of value or else you're going to be a dinosaur. He didn't say those words. I mean, it was his customer base. But Frank, you know, over the years has been pretty controversial, right? He sort of trashed help desk in the early days. He mentioned that today. He got a few booze. But I love the message. And so my question to you is when you go into your accounts that are transforming their IT, whether it's with ServiceNow or not, I mean, ServiceNow seems to have this really amazing platform. For those that are sort of focused on IT, you know, service management, going beyond help desk into enterprise service management, can you discern a difference in terms of the way the company has run, the culture of the company, the relationship between IT and the business? Yeah, absolutely. And I think if you look at the technology organizations we work with, there are still a good majority of them, I would say, that still operate in kind of in a supplier mode, right? Our customers ask us for things and we go figure out how we will produce those and then we supply them and then we support. I mean, there are numbers that say, you know, the typical IT organization still spends 70% of its collective budget on keeping the lights on of things it supports, right? Well, then you transform that and you think of a different model and you think, well, if they were truly operating as a business unit, you know, imagine a business unit that spent 70% of its effort just maintaining the things that it already gave to products. It would go out of business, right? It wouldn't know what its customers need next year and it wouldn't understand how to improve the value of that. And so there's a smaller number of our clients have started, but most of our clients understand the journey, if you will, in this transformation of how do we truly operate in a different way? And an interesting kind of way that we talk to our clients about it is if you look at a CIO and you said they were a CEO of a business, right, what would they do differently? And, you know, the focus they would put on their customers and products and research and development would be a lot different and therefore you go back to the value term and it would be driven by that. Okay, so let's take that. I like that analogy, the CIO as the CEO of his or her business. If you're walking into that job, oh, hey, you're now the CEO of my IT department, what's the first thing you're going to do? You're going to say, okay, well, how are we doing? What's the business look like? Let's look at the numbers, you know? Let's talk to the people. Are our customers happy? You know, what are they telling us? It's the first thing you do, right? You maybe say, okay, on paper, what does it look like? And then you try to validate that and understand where the dissonance is. So are CIOs doing that? Are they qualified to do that? Are they trained to do that? And what are you seeing with the ones that are actually doing that? So I would say they are trying to do that. Qualified, I think some of them have a mindset shift, if that's a good way to say it. But then if you look at the other aspect of this, do they have the information necessary to do that? Do they have the environment and their organization from a processing perspective? Do they get intelligence? It's interesting. We use this term business intelligence and what organization usually helps implement that? It's the IT organization, right? But most IT leaders, most CIOs don't have intelligence on their own business unit in terms of their true value and metrics and true kind of quality of products. And so I think our clients at that level, I mean these are obviously senior executives and so they understand where they need to be, but getting there is tough for them. And it's both tough from an organizational shift and from capabilities and data underneath. Has the DevOps culture, what's forcing them to change? Because if you go into the development side of the house and they're all building applications, they've got charts and graphs and meters and red lights and green lights and yellow lights and a lot of automation of a DevOps development model, but then the organization supporting it doesn't have the same instrumentation. So what are the drivers beyond just purely I need to do a better job or I'm going to be out? And I think it goes through a few things. So again, if you kind of take that as a business kind of structure and the customer group is changing, the expectations of the customer groups are I want products faster. In other words, you can't take six months to do all these formal requirements and build stuff and then spit it back to me. That's not fast enough. There I want to be able to change things. So I can go to this provider and then grab this one and so on. The quality expectations never go down. Financial expectations never go down in terms of the dollars they want for that. And so really we believe that the IT organization, as we know it today and have known it for years, it's going to have a hard time surviving if it doesn't, to use your words earlier, transform, right? It doesn't do that mind switch and really connect those dots and look from a true business perspective of all the way through R&D to product, manufacturing, how am I building the things I'm providing, those services, all the way through support and have that end to end kind of running the business perspective. We think they're going to have a hard time. So I want to come back to this analogy of running IT like a business. So if I'm a CEO, I'm going to come in, I'm going to say, okay, how are my bookings doing? So show me what we're doing, what we're selling by product. So what's my product? My product is my service catalog. Absolutely. Okay, so who's buying what? And what's my pipeline look like? So that's my project portfolio. And how are we doing on R&D? I guess maybe that's my project portfolio. Are we on time, are we on budget? What's my P&L look like? So now it gets interesting. My P&L, okay, it's my income statement, my revenue minus my expense. So okay, revenue. That's a foreign concept to IT. So IT will use the parlance value, but then how do they value IT? So how do they value IT? So that's a great question. And that's where you really tie in the financials of running the business, right? And you tie in the financials of, just because we provided the thing you asked for, doesn't mean that we're doing a good job of that, because then you have to look back at your revenue or the budget dollars coming in. And am I provisioning and leveraging that investment in the best way possible, right? And am I putting those to the right things? In other words, back to your analogy from a business perspective of kind of my R&D arm, am I bringing in dollars that's my, and am I spending those on the things that are most valuable to my clients and most needed by my clients? And then can I have the optimization aspects underneath to show that it would be, if it were a business, my profit margin, if you will, would be up? And so I think in many of our, in most of our technology organizations, we have a financial budget, we build stuff, and at the end of the year, we make sure that we're kind of in that range of accurate, right? As opposed to I spent the right things on the right results. And I spent this thing too much here for too little result and truly treating it in more of a service by service review. If you were the real CEO of the company, I wonder if this happens, why wouldn't you go in and say, okay, you're now Amazon? Okay, you can resell Amazon if you want, but that's part of your service portfolio, whatever. But you're is now selling services, you know, everybody calls it charge back. Maybe just eliminate that word charge back. You're in business. Sell your services, charge your services, compete with the rest of the world. Here's your P&L go, your profit center. Wouldn't that totally flip the mindset of the CIO? I think it would, and I would tell you this, while we're not seeing that as a wholesale change. No, nobody does that. But we're definitely seeing the competition on case by case situations, especially as technology. We're seeing competition of, okay, well, I could get that through this provider or I could do that myself. Tell me why I should use them. So that kind of competition is definitely there, which again drives this need to be able to accurately explain your costs, accurately promote your value, because otherwise why shouldn't that true CEO, that true business leader find it somewhere else? And that's a valid question. I mean, do you have examples of anybody doing that? Absolutely, so especially when you think more with SaaS technologies, mobile technologies to oversimplify it and cloud technologies, there are definitely, I won't say simpler is probably the better way, options for a business unit to go somewhere else and get that service completely compartmentalized outside of a traditional IT organization. And it goes back to, so if I'm running the IT business, there's a competitor out there that I've got to figure out a way to be competitive with and compete with and manage. Excellent, okay, let's see, last question. So you've got this vision of sort of the service now is putting forth, I think you called it off camera, the ERP of IT. They're talking about enterprise service management. What is that vision and where do you see customers? Yeah, so I would tell you this, so we started a year or so back and realized that we were helping our clients with parts of this transformation, if that makes sense. We were helping them implement a service now solution for managing services and we would help them implement a solution for their portfolio and so on. But what we really needed to bring to our clients was an integrated offering that says over a period of time we can help you with this transformation. And then what we realized is we need to underpin that offering with a core environment and then we use this term ERP for IT not to scare people but because a true ability that facilitates workflow and collaboration and facilitates inside and information from a data perspective to run that business and we see service now as being that kind of core underpinning blue with some of the partners that are here as well playing into that role. So again, back to rewind so that if you're running that business unit, that IT business in it, you have an environment that helps you make decisions. All right Mitch, we'll leave it there. Thanks very much for coming back in theCUBE. It was great to see you again. Appreciate it, thank you very much. Good luck with everything. All right, keep right there buddy. We'll be back with our next guest. This is Dave Vellante and Jeff Frick. We're live from Moscone, great back. Thank you.


What's up everybody? Jayce here for JaspiersCaseBricks.com 19-20 pinning the inspection basketball first off the line just sold out This is a one box break random teams number two again 30 total spots everybody gets a random team in the NBA Remember first off the line exclusive is look for one on card rookie jersey autograph wave first off the line or rookie jersey autograph Gold wave first off the line and every box So here you go guys. Good luck. So again We sold 10 spots straight up from Gretchen down to Michael and then the rest from Joshua down to Joshua Wondos and Hoops 58 and 59 and there's a teams right there as well Roll the dice Five and a six eleven times. Good luck one two three four five six seven eight nine ten and 11 Michael down to Joshua one two three four five six seven eight Wizards down to the Boston Celtics All right, Michael you have the Wizards Joshua the Warriors David with the 76 is Michael with the Bulls Joshua the Heat Jazz T-Wills Michael with the Spurs Joshua with the Mavericks and Bucks Gretchen with the Nets Thunder Hawks Kings Michael with the Blazers Josh with the Pistons Robert with the Hornets Brad with the Grizzlies Eric From Hoops 58 gets the Pelicans. There you go Russell the Rockets Joshua with the Pacers Gretchen with the Orlando Magic Joshua the Raptors Clippers Robert with the Nuggets Joshua the Knicks Robert with the Suns Terry with the Lakers Robert with the Cavs And Joshua with the Boston Celtics. What up ties? How's it going man? All right, if anybody wants to trade, I'll give you guys a quick minute any trades. No guys. No trades Tribune the closing guys All right, again guys, this is first off the line 1920 that Zion Jean-Marat rookie year Nice. Yeah, man. I feel like it's been a little bit, but thank you man. Good luck. You should be doing that soon today at some point There was a spectra first off the line guys Four autographs and four parallels per box again the next last box is in the store You guys want to get the next one rolling to all we got first one here is John Collins That is number 23 out of 25 We have Jokic Keldon Johnson and Oak Paula KZ of Paula nice little patch autograph right there That is 19 out of 39 Miami Heat that is going to Joshua Remember some of these can also be like variations authority Magic Johnson Lakers is going to Terry Chris Middleton Tim Duncan and out of 149 Kyle Guy For the Sacramento Kings that's going to Gretchen 17 out of 149 That's what I say right there. All right, let's go the next two Joellen bead It's my second car there for Philadelphia David Lee with that one 91 out of 99 Bradley Beal Talon Horn Tucker and to 49 We have Eldon Campbell for the Lakers. It's a little old school right there 6 out of 49 for the Lakers that is going to Terry All right, we've got Zach Levine right here for the bulls. It's like a little silver Might go with that one Dylan Brooke had a great game yesterday for the Memphis Grizzlies D'Angelo Russell And Jo Morant to 99 look at that Brad Newman with the Memphis Grizzlies Those Grizzlies 63 out of 99 I think that's just a normal rpa to 99 that wasn't like the first off the line exclusive like the KZL Apollo But you did get three rpas in this break though This one out of 149 the KZL Apollo was the first off the line exclusive and then you have the John Morant John Morant stuff has been going up as of late because Hey playoffs are coming around.  This was Spectre first off the line. We do have one more box Remember these don't really come just specifically from cases So it could be like a Zion rpa hiding in the next one. So I appreciate you guys Jaspyscasebreaks.com


Hello everybody, welcome back to Prima Pro Tutorial, and this one I'm gonna show you how to match up audio and video with precision. Normally, as in a case like this, I've got this lady punching the bag, and I want the audio to match exactly when her glove hits the bag. Now I've determined that it hits the bag around right here. So I would zoom in as I've done here and I would move this to the left. And you'll notice here that as I move it, it only moves in one frame increments. You can't really get any closer. So this is on the fifth frame, sixth frame. If I move it back to the third frame, I can't really get like three and a half frames. All you gotta do though is head up here to the hamburger menu right beside here, the name of the track here, and then enable show audio time units. When you do this, you'll notice that it went from a frame to a audio time unit. And now watch this. I'll move this out to the left and I will then say, you know, I'll move, okay, I'll move my playhead to right here. Now when I zoom in, watch this. I can move this and it moves in small increments. So I can now actually precisely match this. Just one sec, I'll do that. Bang. Now if I hit play, I got it exactly matched up. So it's show audio time units. That's the trick.


Terima kasih. Excellencies, ladies and gentlemen, I am standing between you and your cup of coffee, so I am going to try to keep this short. I hope to leave you with three points. We have a problem, but the first point is that the root of this problem is misalign commercial interests. The reason companies burn forests and engage in unsustainable degradation of our land is because of short-term profits. The second point, the main victims of this in fact are the local indigenous people living on and adjacent to those lands that are subject to such environmental vandalism. The third point is that there is therefore an urgent need for governments, for non-government organisations and for local communities to insist on transparency, to collaborate more effectively, to pursue investigations and to prosecute those responsible. So those are the three points I wanted you to remember. The rest of my speech, you can accept and take at face value. We are here today, as I said, and because we have a problem. And there are three key reasons why this problem matters. First, the loss of biodiversity. Second, the huge emission of greenhouse gases. And third, the negative and real impact that these practices have on our local communities. The forests of Southeast Asia make up about 5% of the world's total. But I think many people don't sufficiently appreciate the fact that there is greater biodiversity in the forests of Southeast Asia than there is in even the Amazon or in the African rainforest.  So the point is if we mismanaged the rainforest in our neighbourhood, this is a loss not just for us but indeed for the entire world. But we know unfortunately that Southeast Asia is losing rainforest at an unprecedented rate. A 2013 publication in the journal Science revealed that the amount of forests lost globally from 2000 to 2012 is approximately 2.3 million square kilometres. To put this in context, this is about 3100 times the size of Jakarta or indeed 1.2 times that of the entire Indonesian. The forests in Southeast Asia are not spared from this worrying development and it is basically being driven by economic interests. Logging, park wood, clear cutting have also led to extensive deforestation. But it's not just the loss of biodiversity but also the impact on global climate change. Deforestation contributes at an alarming rate to the emission of greenhouse gases. In fact, a 2010 REDD report suggests that the majority of Indonesia's greenhouse gas emissions actually stems from land use activities. 37% of it due to deforestation and 27% due to peat fires. In fact, deforestation occurring on peat lands, especially peat lands that have been cleared by burning, releases a disproportionate amount of carbon dioxide. I saw a recent study, in fact this was research conducted by C4 and it estimated that in June last year, when we experienced the worst episode of haze so far in Southeast Asia, in June last year, the estimate is that about 171 megatons of carbon dioxide equivalents of greenhouse gases were emitted. To put that 171 megatons in context, it represents about 10% of Indonesia's reported annual greenhouse gas emissions for the period from 2000 to 2005. So it's ironic that we spend, and I'm on the climate change circuit. All of us negotiators have a very big footprint because we jet all over the world to release more hot air in our negotiations. But I find it ironic that we argue about shaving a few percentage points in international commitments, yet right here in our neighbourhood, we're releasing such copious amounts of carbon dioxide. So we need to be frank about it and to accept that we do have a problem and that in fact the whole issue of sustainable development of forests is a complex issue. Because in addition to being a source of biodiversity and of providing pulp and logging, we have to contend with the competing issues of land development of agriculture. And it is also supremely ironic that even as we clear our forests and even as we emit more carbon dioxide because we need more land for agriculture to feed our people. But ultimately this is self-defeating because as climate change progresses and the sea levels rise and we get more drought and we get more floods, nature will take revenge on us and in fact our agricultural systems will be put at risk. So that is why if we continue on this current trajectory, all of us are in trouble. I started off my speech by asking you to just remember the three points which is that the root cause was commercial, the main victims are local and that the solution requires collaboration, effective, decisive action on the parts of governments, NGOs and local communities. Let me just expand a little on that. Last year Southeast Asia experienced one of the worst episodes of haze ever and the negative impact that had on our economy, on our livelihoods, on our environment and most importantly on the health of our people was unprecedented. Despite this happening in June and we would have thought we learnt a lesson but the brutal truth is that in fact in January and February this year the fire burning season began even earlier taking advantage of a drought which occurred in our region. So far the signs are not promising. The haze affected Singapore but it is important to remember that there are far more citizens in Indonesia and Malaysia who are affected far worse than my fellow citizens in Singapore. Businesses also suffered losses. Workers could not get to work sites. Even wafer fabs were affected because the air in their plants was contaminated. Airports were closed, accidents occurred and we all know that in fact the external cost of such a disaster far exceeded the short term profits that the companies would have made. For too many years our region has grappled with this recurrent challenge without making much progress. We cannot and should not blame traditional slash and burn agriculture. Slash and burn agriculture has been occurring for thousands of years but we didn't have haze on this unprecedented level before. The reason we have it is because of industrial scale deforestation at an unprecedented level and this happens because the short term gains are too compelling whilst the companies are not liable for paying for the damage that they cause to the external environment, to the larger economy and to the people who are most affected by their actions. So the question then which confronts us is can we realign the interest because you see my friends it's important for us to realise that to call a halt to development is not possible. It's not viable. Every nation, every group of people has a right to development, has a right to growth, has a right to feed his or her family. So the question is how do we grow our economies, how do companies make profits but in a sustainable way and in a fair way. I would leave you with three final thoughts. The first is that people have rights. They have rights to jobs, to growth, to health and to security and to long term safety despite the threat of climate change. Second point is that companies have responsibilities. Companies have to make a profit, without a profit you don't exist but you've got to make your profits in a way which accounts for the impact that you have on the local communities and on the environment and the really viable, sustainable long term companies are those who can account for this completely. The third point is transparency and that is where NGOs and the more responsible companies come into it. We now live in a day and age satellite photos being available almost real time of drones being able to ground truth data of cheap air quality sensors of an always on, always connected world of the internet. We've got to turn those eyes and build a system of transparency which makes people accountable for their actions and companies operating in such a transparent world. I'll give you an example. Unilever has committed that it will track the source of its palm oil all the way down to the plantation and therefore sends the message that it wants its sources to be derived from sustainable practices. We need to start to wake up and to operate in such a transparent world. And if we do that, I believe it is possible to develop, to make a profit, to be responsible and to look after our people. Only and only if we do that then can we fulfill the goal that President Susilo Bambang Yudho said just now which is that we're not making decisions just for the present but to leave a legacy, a viable legacy for the next generation to come. So I thank you all very much for the honor of being able to address you and to speak so frankly for all of you. I look forward to your deliberations and most important to your actions to leave a better world for the next generation. Thank you very much.


I'm taking a minute before I'm gonna over, I'm gonna swing because I need to warm up my shoulder and uh I'm gonna play a game but I'm playing on the other side so just note that I'll just start this Jasmine task. We're about to start this we are playing two games to 25 the first team and then we're gonna play again the second team I don't know how long I'm gonna live stream yet but these games can run quite long. I actually hurt my knee a little bit yesterday so I'm gonna make sure to be extra extra careful I'm gonna move you guys so it looks like I'm playing summer off look at the scoreboard orange team all right for three competitive I am team orange let's do this get you guys set up trying to get a good angle so you guys can see everything I'm not diving I can't my legs it just they broke do you guys want to watch the other game give me a thumbs up because I'm about to straddle in is that tie is that tie thank god are you here to play what's your name at least so far have you been we've been calling your name for like forever in it I'm struggling why y'all did I you see me better working did you see me sacrificing my life I'm tired right now where's my water but you did good though you're quite so good like nobody was blocking I'm a LeBaron now but we had no one blocking yeah but didn't you see me that's what I'm talking about because I could tell I got that fire though I don't know if I'm going to play middle back now because I'm becoming exhausted I need to be out you need to make Brian I need to be playing outside for sure but then also I'm like super covering though so we're missing one girl she just didn't ever show up protect somebody else to calm okay so we lost okay we lost um you guys know that I am 100% not a LeBaron uh it's not my life I'm becoming I am super exhausted not a LeBaron but I'm doing a LeBaron job right now um I think I'm gonna move myself to outside because when you're playing force it's so much more difficult because there's so much room to cover on a standard size court so because we're missing one person it makes it hard um so I think I'm going to play outside because it will give me a better range on the swing and I'll have a lot more room to do stuff but uh like my friend was saying I'm covering so much so we'll see let me see how much battery I have okay so I'm gonna try to get another perspective oh my god I'm dying right now I ain't never sweat like this in my life this way I'm not a LeBaron what oh my god you guys right here I'm gonna get some water we got one more game yeah oh my god okay just a lot I'm moving to my child's moment break I know what time it is it's game time I love how you guys converse in the comp and the comments and talk to each other okay we got another game how you feel that's what I'm talking about all right guys we have another game so I'm gonna go ahead and play I will catch you guys later thanks so much for coming to my live stream and I'll see you guys in our video next week bye


Hi, this is Dr. Don. I have a problem out of Chapter 8 in Larson. This is Section 8.3 on dependent samples, otherwise known as paired samples. In this case, we have a company who wants to know whether or not its ratings have changed from one year to the next. And the question is, is there enough evidence to conclude that the ratings have changed? The way we should interpret that is that the claim is that the ratings have changed, which is the first question here. That means this is a, that's a not equal for the mean difference, mu1 minus mu2, and that means that our hypotheses would be set up this way. The null is the mean difference is zero. The alternative is the mean difference is not equal to zero. So let's jump into this. I'm going to click on the rectangle, open this data in stat crunch, bring this up and expand things a little bit here. What we're going to do first of all is run stat, t stats, paired samples. My sample one is last year, sample two is this year. We want to save the differences in order to find the S of D and D bar easily. This is a hypothesis test for the mean difference equal to zero, and it's a not equal for the alternative. So I'm going to click compute. And we get our answers here. We get our standardized test statistic 1.106. And we get a p value of 0.305, which means if our alpha is 0.05, that this test is not statistically significant, which means we fail to reject the null hypothesis. But here we wanted to use the rejection area method. So we'll find the critical values here and look down alpha is 0.05. So I'm going to go back to stat, calculators, get my t, and we need to input the degrees of freedom, which it tells us right there, seven, which is just the number of pairs minus one. And we've got an alpha of 0.05. But this is a two tail. So we put 0.025. And that gives us a lower critical value of minus 2.365 and an upper by symmetry of plus 2.365. And again, because our test statistic is 1.1, which is somewhere in here, it's definitely not in either one of the rejection zones. Therefore, again, it is failed to reject the null hypothesis fail to support the claim that the mean differences are different. Okay, so we want to get the D bar, the output from the t test will give us that, which is this mean here, the mean of the differences is 0.625. It does not give us S of D, the standard deviations of the differences. And that's the reason that I save the differences. So here we call when we ran the test, I checked that little box there to have us save the differences. There's my differences. So I go back to stat, summary stats, columns, and I just want to click on my differences. And I want to get the mean, hold down the control key, standard deviation, and click compute. And here we get again, the mean, which is D bar is 0.625. And the standard deviation S of D, which is just the standard deviation of these differences, is 1.598. So quickly done using stat crunch.


Ssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss That's drunk?! A long while back I posted a 3-hour video that was nothing but relaxing music you could find in Super Nintendo games and one game I managed to stumble upon while making that was Waterworld for Super Nintendo. I didn't even know this game existed and it's just as well since it was never released in the US. Only our friends in Europe got this game, but man-oh-man when I first heard this music I knew what I had to put to lead off the video. And that's just the friggin' map screen and check out the music for the menu. menu. That is one intense menu. I feel like the fate of the world depends on if I pick a new game or enter a password. Dean Evans composed the soundtrack here, which he actually uploaded himself to his own YouTube channel and I highly recommend listening to the whole thing. There's a link in the description and holy crap, seriously every song is really good. So that led me to wonder, okay, the soundtrack is clearly great, but what about the game itself? Unfortunately, not so much. This is the rare Super Nintendo game that has exactly one great quality and the rest of it can just be flat out ignored. Waterworld was developed and published by Ocean, well I mean of course it was. Who else was gonna do it? Fire? Earth? Wind? Captain Planet himself? Yeah, no. If you need a crappy, thrown-together movie-licensed game, you call Ocean, especially after their stellar work with Dennis the Menace, Lethal Weapon, and the Addams family, Pugsley's Scavenger Hunt. The story here is that Kevin Costner was really feeling himself after the success of Dances of the World's JFK and the Bodyguard, so hey, let's start doing flat-out star vehicle films and I got off track there. The story of the game has you playing as the Mariner. No, not that Mariner, the Kevin Costner character, and you're completing various vague tasks like collecting stuff, rescuing civilians, and making stuff go boom and fighting the bad guys who are called the Smokers and are led by the hilariously evil Deacon, played by Dennis Hopper. The game starts and you're drifting around in a boat and none of the face buttons do anything except Y, which shoots a fairly pathetic-looking projectile. Okay, I shoot at these things, but I appear to be boxed into this particular area.   Follow the arrow over here and it takes you to the next part of the game, which is just...ugh.  And again, what the hell do I do here?  That's the red bar up top. But wait a second, doesn't he have gills in the movie? Isn't that like a major plot point? Well, maybe this isn't the Kevin Costner character at all, since this guy looks more like Dolph Ziggler. Anyway, if you die down here, it doesn't really matter because apparently this is just a bonus stage, I guess? Because no matter what happens here, you move on to the next boring asteroid's boat section, where you're rescuing people and shooting more bad guys as they try and ramp their way into this floating town here. If you squint, you can see Fonzie jumping over a shark. Again, after an arbitrary number of people are rescued and enemies are destroyed, you can go into the main area, where it switches to a side scroller. And seriously, who is this guy? Brian Bosworth? Barry Windham? Because it sure as hell isn't Kevin Costner. The number in the upper left is the same as the number of the bad guys that got into the floating city in the boat section, so you gotta wander around and get rid of them. The problem with this is that it's incredibly boring. You got the same section repeating over and over as you continue on to the right, you climb ladders if you can grab them in the first place, you pick up weapons along the way and it's just very mediocre.  Thank God for the music. All told, there's eight total levels split up into two sections each held together with a password system. Ultimately, it's just the same stuff over and over and GAH! Look at this guy, what's wrong with him? But yeah, eventually there's this store here where you can buy special weapons for the water sections, so at least there's that.  Hey, what's wrong with that? Oh, everything? Oh, okay. But yeah, I guess at least the Super Nintendo Waterworld game isn't that bad, it's just really boring. A Sega Genesis port of this game was planned, in fact it was finished, but the movie bombed so badly that it ended up getting canceled, and honestly that's too bad because I would have liked to have heard how the music would have sounded on Sega. So yeah, in the past I've recommended a game's manual over the game itself, with Double Dragon 5, The Shadow Falls, and with Waterworld I'm gonna recommend the music over the game. Skip the game entirely, but go check out Dean Evans' soundtrack, it's fantastic. Alright, I want to thank you for watching and I hope you have a great rest of your day.