Okay, I think we can begin. Good afternoon, good morning, everyone. I'd like to welcome you all to Political Science 303, Comparative Politics of Advanced Industrialized Countries. My name is Tolga Belikbashi, and I'll be with you throughout this term. Let me briefly introduce myself to you guys before I continue with the material that I've prepared for this morning. I studied economics at the Middle East Technical University, which is right next door to Belkent. Then I did a master's in economics, so I continued with economics. Then I thought, okay, where does power lie? Power, politics, those concepts have always been intrigued by these concepts. Then the question of who gets what, when, and how. Although these questions were always subsumed under my undergraduate degree courses in economics, I thought, hmm, let me look for these questions, and in fact, answers to these questions elsewhere. So I did my PhD in sociology. And there I learned more about where does politics lie, where does power lie, how does politics play out? Then I came back to Turkey. I started working at Belkent in 2009, around this time of the year. And I've been here since then, and I've been quite happy with Belkent students. And I've been, from my first year, I've been teaching political science 303, compared to politics of advanced industrialized countries. I see this course as more of a mature course, and I enjoy doing it. I've been enjoying doing it with my previous students, and I really hope that you guys will enjoy doing it with me. So, what does this course entail? This course is on advanced industrialized countries. Political Science 304 will be covering the developing world. So in this course, we'll be focusing on advanced democracies. What about these democracies? How do we understand politics? How do we compare politics in these democracies? We'll do it in five parts. In part one, we'll look at historical legacy. What does history tell us about contemporary politics? What lessons can we draw from historical milestones in these countries? How did the state tradition emerge and evolve in these countries? So that's roughly part one, after a short introduction. Then in part two, we'll be dealing with political economy. Political economy of economic and social policies. How did these countries develop in time economically? What kinds of models, what kinds of policy styles have they developed? And what kinds of policy making traditions emerge in these cases? After having surveyed political economy of these countries, we then started off with, we will start off with governance and policy making. And here we'll focus on the executive and the relationship of the executive with the other branches of governments, i.e. the legislative branch and the judicial branch. So we'll look at the interactions between the executive and its relationship with the other branches. And here we'll focus on what kind of an executive do we have in this country? What kind of a political system we have in this country? Are we talking about a presidential system? Are we talking about a parliamentary system? Are we talking about a semi-presidential system? And who gets what, when and how? How do these questions get resolved in these processes? In the fourth section, we'll look at representation and participation for each country, for each case study we shall be focusing on. And here we'll be dealing with, we'll start with political parties, party systems, electoral systems, electoral regimes, whether we have a multi-party system, whether we have a two-party system or a predominant party system, not this term, but in the next term. In addition to political parties, what are other institutions of representation, interest representation, voice articulation? What are interest groups like? What are social movements like? What are contemporary social movements like? So basically representation and participation, political participation. And finally, we'll look at, we'll survey contemporary issues what do we, what really capture? What kinds of issues really capture contemporary papers? What are the issues that surface in the political, economic, social, cultural agendas of these very interesting cases? So in these, in this part, we focus on some topical issues, some thematic areas, depending on the case we shall be covering. So basically advanced industrialized countries, their politics, their economies, the relationships between their political systems and also their markets. The course in fact comes in two parts. In the first part, we'll do an introduction. So that happens right before everything I just discussed. In the first part, we'll do a conceptual introduction to comparative politics, the scope of comparative politics, which I hope to cover in the next hour. And then we'll be focusing on three other, or two other main concepts. First, we'll deal with democracy. I'm sorry, first we'll deal with the modern state. How did the modern state evolve? Where did it originate from? How did it originate from? Or how did it originate? How did it get developed across time or over time? Where did it start? After this conceptual introduction to the modern state, the emergence and evolution of the modern state, we'll talk about democracy. First, a conceptual introduction to democracy, different types of democracy. But before different types of models of democracy, we'll discuss at a little bit of length, a little bit of detail, what democracy is, what democracy is not, with the help of Schmitor and Karl's classic article that appeared in the early 1990s. So compared to politics, a quick introduction, then comes the modern state, then democracy, procedural aspects, the rules of the game, when democracy becomes the only game in town, to paraphrase Juan Linz, and then followed by types or models of democracy. Then all of this conceptual introduction will be focusing on each and every of these five cases. We'll start with Britain, then we'll continue with France, followed by Germany, then US, followed by Japan. Normally I cover Japan as the last case. I'll try to cover the US case first, I mean as the fourth case, and then I'll conclude with the case of Japan because of the timing of the US elections. So when you guys will be thinking, reflecting on the US elections in November, we'll start talking about the US case, instead of talking about the Japanese case. My aim here in this class, ladies and gentlemen, is to make you think about first conceptual tools, what are the different concepts that we need to learn on comparative politics of advanced industrialized countries? What is governance like? What is participation like? What are the electoral systems like? Party systems like? What are the certain regime characteristics of these political economies? Policy styles, administrative traditions, policy making traditions, economic policy making processes, dynamics, actors, social institutions, social movements, interest associations, and all of these. So basic concepts, so what are these concepts? I'd really like you to think about these concepts, reflect on these concepts. And then once we cover these concepts, a little bit of empirical information about each case. We have about two weeks to cover each case. That means about six hours, so six meetings. It's a little bit of time, but we'll try to cover most of the basics altogether. So I hope to have a little bit of discussion time with you guys to go over these empirics. And here, once we discuss these, I really want all of you or each of you to be able to make your informed and discriminating judgments on the current topics, current issues, contemporary themes we discuss in this course.  So having talked about the objectives in this course, let me briefly go through our contracts, course organization-wise. The course will rest on a set of readings at the center of which lies our textbook, which is a very successful textbook, widely used in North America and elsewhere, which is titled An Introduction to Comparative Politics, Political Challenges and Changing Agendas by Kesselman and Krieger and Joseph. We've got the 2014 or the edition that was available in 2014. I'm sure it is being updated as we speak. So next year we'll probably be using a newer edition. In addition to the textbook, we'll be also reading a selection of articles. And here, and this is reserved for the first part, the main part one, where we'll be focusing on first the states, the modern states, early modern states or early states and modern states. This will be followed by, as I said, democracy as in terms of procedures, which would be followed by types of models of democracy. And here we'll be relying on three articles or three pieces, all of which are seminal pieces. The first piece is by Henrik Spurit, a Dutch-American political scientist who writes on the modern states, the historical origins and evolution of modern states. This will be followed by Philip Schmitter-Terrelin, Karl's seminal article that appeared in the early 1990s on what democracy is and is not. And then finally we'll be talking about island life parts piece, a Dutch political scientist piece on models of democracy, consensual and majoritarian systems. So in addition to these journal articles, I really would like to invite you to go over the papers, daily papers, I would like to emphasize please have a look at financial times. I really also would recommend The Economist, which really reviews what happens in the past week, every Thursday. So in addition to the class material, the textbook and the journal articles, please have a look at these daily newspapers, which I hope will familiarize yourselves with day-to-day topics, thematic issues, contemporary issues that we discuss in these countries. The readings will be complimented by lectures. In the first couple of weeks I'll try to do, I'll try to cover a lot of material, but when we come to the cases, I'd like to rely on you more and more after we break the ice. So the first couple of weeks I'll do most of the talking. I acknowledge that, I'm not too happy with it, but that seems to be the case. I've been doing this course at Beacons for the past six, seven years. So my experience shows me that it's mostly, in the first couple of weeks, I do most of the talking. So I will, I really hope to rely on you guys as we crack open in time. And then as a third element of the course, we'll be focusing on an audio-visual material, mostly a documentary, to cover, to address some topical issue, some contemporary political theme that we discuss in these countries. And we'll have in-class assignments on these. In terms of course requirements, participation, I value participation. If we, as a class, learn your name or we get used to hearing your voice in class, that means you're participating actively and effectively. That means you're going to have your 10% from there. Second, we'll have in-class assignments to be written in-class based on the audio-visual material that we'll be sharing with you. These are going to be short assignments which will take about 20 to 30 minutes to write. We do them in-class. We either show you an audio-visual material or we ask you to view remotely this particular material. And I'd like to learn what you make of this material in the in-class assignment. Then comes your quiz which will appear at the end of part one. The quiz will be, you know, fifth will count 15% for your final grade. It'll be a standard sit-down written exam type quiz. You'll get some, you'll get to have some choice depending on our pace. We'll see how it goes. Then we'll come the midterm exam and the final exam. The midterm exam will count 30% towards your grade and the final exam which will be announced, the date of which will be announced by directors or the dean's office toward the end of the term will count about 35% of your grade. So that's basically our contract. That's basically the course requirements in this class. Let me do a quick tour of the course plan again. Part one, key concepts in comparative politics. What's the scope of comparative politics like? The modern state, conceptions of democracy and also types of democracy. And in part two, we'll delve into case studies. And here, it's basically, we'll cover state tradition in historical perspective which will be followed by political economy of economic and social policies where we'll look at the interaction of states and markets in each case, governance and policy making, representation and participation and we will end each case with contemporary issues or current challenges facing these countries. Now, what do we mean by comparative politics? This is going to be your first course at weekends in the political science department, political science and public administration department on comparative politics. I'm sure most of you are familiar with these concepts but let me just briefly discuss with you what we mean as comparativists by comparative politics. What's the scope of comparative politics like? The subject matter of comparative politics is basically the domestic politics, political economies, societies of all countries as we shall be talking about. Comparativists or comparative political scientists focus generally focus on big substantive questions such as what are the consequences of this type of electoral system in country A? Could we conceive of different outcomes in country B of a very similar electoral system? What is interest representation and participation like? What are the political opportunity structures like in this particular country? How do they compare with the political opportunity structures in the other country? Or what is inequality? Or how does inequality feel like for an average citizen in this country? What are the sources of inequality in this country? Is it race? Is it ethnicity? Is it language? Is it functional interests? Is it whether you have access to means to resources or whether you don't? How do inequalities surface? Are they regional? Are they mostly ethnic? Are they class-based? All of these questions will be those that we try to answer as big substantive questions in comparative politics. In addition to these questions, we sometimes see comparative politics as world politics.  So there, they talk about comparative politics as what really exists in different countries, in different regions, in, across the world, all around the world. Let me now get help from Munk and Snyder once again from their article on the substantive scope of comparative research. There, I'd like to emphasize certain themes. They surveyed leading articles in comparative politics, and they categorized, they typologized, they put into types in terms of the main subject matter in these important articles appearing in these powerful journals, and they arrive at, after their classification, they arrive at overarching subject matters.  When we look at this, this slide, we see that more than half of all the articles that appear in these prestigious journals talk about democratic and state institutions, which was represented by over 50, 51%. And here, we see elections voting electoral rules, political parties, democratic institutions, including different branches of government, federalism and decentralization, you know, the integrity of the political systems, the judiciary, bureaucracy, military and police, and policymaking in general. So they find that about 50% of all these articles are talking about democratic and state institutions. So that really tells us that this is the heart of comparative politics. Just following this by a small margin, by about 10 percentage points, comes economic and extra national processes. Economic policy and reform, which includes the welfare state, the developmental system, includes the welfare state, the developmental state, writings on neoliberalism and varieties of capitalism, which really amounts to a more than quarter of the entire literature, contemporary literature on comparative politics that appear in these leading journals. Then comes economic development, globalization, supranational integration and supranational processes. So these make about 40%, over 40% of all the articles that appear in these journals. And let me warn you that these will not add to 100 because of the overlaps. Then comes as the third subject matter area or overarching subject matter, social actors. And here they tell us that comparativist you comparativists focus on social movements in civil society, which includes writings on social capital, strikes and protests. That we also focus on interest groups, which includes studies on business and labor. We also focus on citizen attitudes in political culture, religion and also clientelism as a means of co-optation. So social actors, societal actors make up about one third of all articles that appear in these journals. Then comes political regimes, which are also quite popular. They make up, they appear in more than a quarter of all these writings. Brides of political regimes, democratization and democratic breakdown. So what kinds of regimes are we talking about? Different types, different models, processes of democratization, democratic stability and democratic breakdown. And finally, which counts as about 18% of all these articles are on political order. And here we talk about state formation, state collapse, wars, revolutions, nationalism, civil wars and violence and ethnicity and ethnic conflict. So basically when we look at this once again, democracy, democratic institutions, state institutions, a big chunk of what's out there, economic processes, extra national processes which includes economic policy or economic policymaking, globalization and other issues. Then comes social actors, social movements, interest associations, interest groups, citizens, political culture. Then comes political regimes, different types of regimes, democracy, democratic stability, democratic breakdown which is followed by order, states, revolutions, nationalism, civil war and others. So they tell us, they reveal that these are the overarching subject matters in terms of the scope of comparative politics that we really focus on. All of us are thinking about these areas mostly. From here, I think we can start discussing the modern state. But before that, let me briefly do a refresher with you on what we mean by states. States are so central to our lives. They're also central as a concept, as an organizing concept in understanding the comparative politics of advanced industrialized as well as developing countries. States in empirical reality have been the building block of the international system for centuries. So we've been discussing especially during the past two, three decades whether the state is still relevant or the extent to which state as an organizational structure or a system of organizing society is still relevant to understanding domestic politics when we compare these systems. But we, I think in mainstream political science, we've, or comparative politics, we've come to the conclusion that state is not dead. We are still in or surviving the era of states. There are many difficulties in characterizing what states are. We can characterize states in historical variation, different types of states in history. Diverse functions, from simple functions, evolving towards a very diverse set of functions. So the functions of the state which get reflected in different policies have been proliferating ever since the states were invented as an organizational system or organizational structure. States come in diverse sizes from Andorra, from small states, micro states to large states such as Russia, the Russian Federation. So size really varies, geography really varies. And states, yes, although we talk about the state in comparative politics, we take it as a central building block of the international system. We also are aware that states are not the only actors in the international system. States are, or side by side states or with states, there are also other political actors. There are big corporations. There are non-state actors which really possess power and therefore they really affect our day-to-day politics. States also differ with respect to their level of recognition. Some states are fully recognized in the international community, in the eyes of the international community in terms of international public law. Some other states are not fully recognized such as the case of the Turkish Republican Jordan Cyprus or we can also talk about the case of Palestine, whether we have a Palestinian state, whether we can conceptualize modern day Israel as a two state system or one single state. So whether or the extent to which states get recognized in the international system is also a source, a variation, or a reflection of their variation. States also form through different means. Some states form out of secession, such as the ex-Yugoslav states or the ex-USSR states, the former USSR Soviet states. Some states merge and become other states and their history is replete with examples. And in characterizing the state, we also refer to other concepts such as country, nation, political system, nation, state, empire. So states really come in different forms, different sizes, different shapes, and they entail different elements. And in this course, we shall be talking about these elements. Key concepts, I'm sure you guys are aware of these key concepts, but let me, I thought, let me briefly touch upon these so that we have a level playing field for us all to discuss these matters. State is an organization for the purposes of this course. That issues and enforces binding rules for people in a given territory. And here we can talk about three elements. Territory is basically the geographical area that a state considers to be its own. And this has always been contested in the history of the modern state and pre-modern state. We also talk about people because the state enforces binding rules for its own people given its territory. People, basically persons living together with a developed form of common consciousness and a form of common identity. And sovereignty is also another concept that features in these discussions. It's basically, or it can be basically defined as the highest power that gives state complete freedom of action within its sovereignty. We can discuss two phases of sovereignty. One is internal sovereignty. So a state may enjoy sovereignty vis-a-vis its own people, domestic actors, and we can talk about external sovereignty. A state enjoys external sovereignty in the eyes of other actors outside the state, in the, for example, in the international system. Let me also remind you Weber's definition here. Classic definition of the state. Weber defines late 19th century political economists, economic sociologists, political sociologists. Weber defines the state as an agency or a set of agencies that monopolizes legitimate use of physical force, legitimate use of coercion over its people. So if you wanna remember one single definition of the state, I really invite you to remember Weber's definition here. An agency or a set of agencies that monopolizes legitimate use of coercion over its people. When we look at the historical evolution of the state, let's start talking about the pre-modern state. What do pre-modern states look like? In the earlier periods, we see the emergence of large agrarian empires. Where did these large agrarian empires emerge? These large agrarian empires emerged in Mesopotamia, in Egypt, parts of the Hellenistic Empire. And these large agrarian empires were able to serve certain functions. These states in a way, these pre-modern states were able to keep records, were able to issue orders, were able to organize large-scale forces for let's say irrigation works, and also for war-making. They were also exercised legal authority more or less within their own limits, within their own territories. And here in Northwestern Europe, and it's adjacent areas, we see the emergence of the feudal state, which really premises upon personal ties of obedience and loyalty. I'm sure you guys are familiar with the feudal mode of production. You will remember from your previous courses what feudalism means. In a nutshell, when I refer to, when we refer to feudalism, as you shall be reading about in the origins and the historical evolution of the modern state, in Henrik Spuritz article, feudalism is a system of social networks, and it's a system of bundles of rights. It defines a system of bundles of rights. Here at the top we have the king, and below this king we have warriors, military officers, and below these military officers we have a pyramid of other lords, and below these lords are the serfs. So in this system, we have relationships which are systematized based on a social order, which is quite structured, so which is quite stratified, which is clearly stratified. And here we have systems of obligations, systems of loyalties of actors against one another. And here let me show you what I mean by these bundles of rights. Here we have the king, the primus interparis, as you shall remember from your previous courses, and a military knight, a knight where the king blesses the knight, where the king declares that you are my protege, I will protect you, and the warrior says I will protect you in return. So this is a representation of Charlemagne and Roland, a Frankish military officer, a Frankish military knight, who lived in the eighth century. So a medieval period, feudal lord in a way, and the king is really throwing a lesser king here, and he declares him a knight. Here is the plan of a medieval manor. We have the landlord, the military knight living here, the vassal. Here is his house, here is the church. And here we have common pasture and planting areas, plantation areas, some of which are left to fallow. And here the serfs till the land, and when they till the land, they submit some of their, let's say bushels of wheat to the landlord, and in return the landlord will protect them against invasion and conquest. So here, so we have a bundle of rights and duties and obligations and responsibilities between the serfs and their protector, the landlord here, who happens to be a lord or a knight who is loyal to the king, and the king is loyal to the lord. So this is what we mean by bundles of rights and responsibilities and systems of social networks. And here in time, we see the transition within the pre-modern area, the transition from personalistic rule to formal authority. And Spirit says, he really describes this period of pre-modern statehood that early modern states ran wide, yes, they ran wide. These were large states, but they weren't steep. They didn't have the penetrative ability that modern states have in the current, in the modern period. Now we can talk about the modern state, what are its main features. Modern states rest on sovereign territorial rule. By the modern state here, let me talk to you about absolute states that started to emerge in the 14th and 15th centuries, depending on where you are. Absolute states had two main features that they were characterized by territories, so they were territorial, their boundaries were clearly, well, more or less clearly demarcated against one another, and that they were characterized by strong bureaucracies. Let me go back to this territory business. In the feudal times, we had different areas of power which may have had intersection sets. So Lord A and Lord B may be adjacent to one another, but their land, some of their land was contested. And we had a Lord C, which was right next to the land, or who had land right next to Lord A and Lord B, but within this land, another Lord, Lord D, probably a lesser Lord, D, claiming some sovereignty within this land. So as you can see, that this is a very messy picture. As time passed, what happened was, after rounds of war making, B, or B's frontiers, boundaries of his land get more clearly demarcated against that of A, and D gets out of C's land, meaning that we have harder borders as time passes. So with the onset of the absolute estate, we have more clearly demarcated territorial borders. And we also had strong bureaucracies, and bureaucracies were of two types. One is, you know, one part of bureaucracy is the war making, military bureaucracy. And the other part of bureaucracy was tax collecting, bureaucracy. So absolute states, early modern states, were states catrised by territories, clearly marked territories, and strong bureaucracies. So here, when we talk about the emergence of the modern state, we really talk about sovereign, more clearly delineated, sovereign territorial rule, and strong bureaucracies. And strong bureaucracies are what I refer to as the military bureaucracy and the tax collecting bureaucracy. And within these areas, we see the emergence of more homogenous governance and formalized legal codes within these areas. So within these areas of sovereign rule, we see some kind of homogenization, formalization of governance, and codes. When we come to the more recent period, late 18th century, we see modern states having higher levels of penetrative ability based on Napoleonic code, based on democratic ideals, standardized weights, standardized measures, and standardized administrations. And of course, on top of these, modern states engineered public education. That also helped them homogenize what used to be subjects, now citizens, even further. And with universal conscription becoming the rule, we see the emergence of the nation state. So this is a process of nation building with the emerges, or after the emergence and consolidation of the modern state. Now I'd like to talk about, finally, state formation stages with the help of Steinrocken's framework. Steinrocken is a Norwegian political sociologist, political scientist. He had very influential writings in the 60s and 70s. And there he talks about four stages of state formation. State formation, he says, the first stage is the stage of penetration. So the state starts to penetrate into society after having consolidated its territories. So once territorial consolidation process is completed, the state builds institutions to control its own territory and to secure compliance of what used to be subjects increasingly citizens to its own. How did the state do this? The state built internal order or mechanisms or instruments of internal order. The state also delivered in a way external security. It starts to extract resources, not only extensively, but more intensively. It provides builds infrastructure and improves communication within its territories. And states, by the end of the penetration stage, do develop clearly divided or clearly demarcated territories. So they really have much more clear boundaries against one another. So that's stage number one. Stage number two is the nation building stage, which is all about standardization. So once we have clearly demarcated territories, once we build some infrastructure, once we develop certain policies, to basically make subjects obey themselves, we create a common identity and sense of allegiance among disparate populations. So this is the nation building stage, which is all about standardization. And here, states develop national myths, national anthems about their shared identities, about their shared experiences and their shared fate, shared destinies, not only historical destinies, but destinies of the future. So they really try to develop, they really try to design a future altogether, us developing an identity and allegiance to the state. And we, as the peoples in this country or in this state, can dream about a single future, a shared future. And the state also designs, invents, sometimes reinvents system symbols. So this is the phase, this is a stage in which the state invents or reinvents or sometimes imagines communities. And this is by saying this, I refer to Benedict Anderson's imagined, I mean seminal work on imagined communities. So this is the stage of standardization of imagination and juxtaposing this imagination, invention, reinvention, production, reproduction of standardization of people in a given state. The third stage is mass demolition. Once we have the state penetrating into society, once we complete that stage, and we also standardize what's within our borders, the state's borders, the state now starts to equalize what's out there. So beyond homogenization comes equalization, where we witness masses conquering the right to participate in governance or government. And this is the period also, or this is the phase, this is the stage in which we witness the expansion of universal suffrage. So this is the period of mass democracies. This is the period where the state or states, modern states engineer mechanisms, instruments to democratize the system. So this is the stage, once again, of equalization argues Rockin. And finally, the last stage in Rockin's framework is redistribution. This is, in a way, the latest stage in the process of state formation. Welfare states emerge in this period. We can talk about this in terms of periodization. We can talk about this by about the end of World War II, so second half of the 20th century, in which we see increasingly progressive taxation as an instrument of redistribution and state contributions helping the needy make a living. And the state itself's intervene into markets and plays the game of Robin Hood. So it redistributes away from the wealthy to the poor. The state redistributes resources and it provides some goodies, not only in kind, but also invents a set of services to address the needs of its citizens. And finally, the idea behind this redistribution, Rockin says, is the goal of strengthening economic solidarity or socioeconomic solidarity. So all of these, once again, these state formation stages really bring us from the early modern state era, from the era of penetration through standardization and equalization and we arrive at redistribution. So these are the basic concepts that I wanted to share with you before we begin to talk about democracies and also types of democracies, procedural aspects of democracy. And I hope that this, you found this introduction helpful in refreshing your memories and we shall continue with democracies next class. Thank you.


Hello and welcome to the video lecture on Angular measuring instruments 3. At the end of this video lecture, students will be able to explain about various angle measuring instruments. The following topics will be discussed in this particular video lecture. Recap of second session, Sign Bar, Types of Sign Bar, Principle of Sign Bar, Uses of Sign Bar, Limitations of Sign Bar. Spirit Level A spirit level has a sealed glass tube ground on its inside surface to a convex form with large radius of curvature R. The tube is almost completely filled with ether so that only a small volume remains at the top part of the tube, which contains ether vapor in the form of a bubble. Cleanometer A cleanometer is a spirit level mounted on a rotary member. The angle of inclination of the rotary member relative to its base can be measured by a circular scale. There are various types of cleanometers, one-year cleanometer. It consists of a spirit level mounted on a rotary member carried in a housing. One phase of the housing forms the base of the instrument. There is a circular scale on the housing. The angle of inclination of the rotary member relative to the base can be measured by the circular scale. The scale may cover the whole circle or only a part of the arc. Generally used to determine the angle included between two adjacent phases of a work base. The base of the instrument is placed on one of the surfaces and rotary member is adjusted till zero reading of the bubble is obtained. The angle of rotation is then noted on the circular scale against an index. The instrument is then placed on the other surface and the reading is taken in a similar manner. If theta and phi are the reading of the instrument then the included angle alpha between the surfaces alpha will be equal to 180 degree minus theta plus phi. Now let's discuss about the next cleanometer that is your micrometer-cleanometer. In this type spirit level is attached at one end of the barrel of a micrometer. The other end of the spirit level is hinged on the base. The base is placed on the surface whose inclination is to be measured. The micrometer is adjusted till the level is horizontal. This type of cleanometer is used for measuring small angles, uses of cleanometer. They are used for checking included angles, relief angles as well as angular phases on large cutting tools and milling cutter inserts. They can also be used for setting inclinable tables on jig boring machines and angular work on grinding machines. Now let's discuss about sine bar. It's the precision instrument used along with slip gauges for the measurement of angles. It is used to measure the angles very accurately to locate the work to a given angle within very close limits. It consists of a steel bar and two rollers. The sine bar is made of high carbon, high chromium, corrosion resistant steel, suitably hardened precision ground and stabilized. The rollers are of accurate and equal diameters. They are attached to the bar at each end. The axis of these rollers are parallel to each other and also to the upper surface of the bar. The normal distance between the axis of the rollers is exactly 100 mm, 200 mm or 300 mm. When the rollers are brought in contact with the flat surface, the top of the bar is parallel to the surface. The various parts are hardened and stabilized before grinding and lapping. All the working surfaces of the bar and the cylindrical surfaces are fine to surface finish of 0.2 micrometer RA value. Sine bars are graded as A grade or B grade sine bar. A grade sine bar are made with an accuracy of 0.01 mm per meter of length and B grade sine bar with an accuracy of 0.02 mm per meter of length. Types of sine bars The sine bars are available in several designs for different applications. The simplest one is shown in figure A. In which the rollers are so arranged that their outer surfaces on one side are level with the plane top surface of the sine bar. Figure B shows a sine bar with hollow rollers in which outside diameter is equal to the width of the sine bar. It is useful in instances where the width of the bar enters into calculation of work height. Figure C shows a sine bar with pins on both sides. This is used where the ordinary sine bar cannot be used on the top surface due to interruption. Figure D shows a sine bar which is generally preferred as the distance between the rollers can be adjusted exactly. Principle of sine bar The principle of operation of a sine bar is based on the laws of trigonometry. To set a given angle one roller of the bar is placed on the surface plate and the combination of slip gauges is inserted under the second roller. If H is the height of combination of slip gauges and L the distance between the roller centers then sine theta is equal to H by L. Thus the angle to be measured or to be set is determined by indirect method as a function of sine. For this reason the device is called a sine bar. Accuracy requirements of sine bar If a sine bar is to be accurate then following conditions relating to its construction features must exist. The axis of rollers must be parallel to each other and the center distance L must be known. The top surface of the bar must have a high degree of flatness. It should be parallel to the plane connecting the axis of the rollers. The rollers must be of identical diameters and round within a close tolerance. Uses of sine bar, locating any work to a given angle. To set the given angle the surface plate is assumed to be perfectly flat so that the surface plate can be treated as horizontal. One roller of the sine bar is placed on the surface plate and a combination of slip gauges is inserted under the second roller. Let H be the height of the slip gauge, combination and sine it to be set at an angle theta. Then sine theta is equal to H by L where L is the distance between the center of the rollers. Thus knowing theta H can be found out and any work could be set at this angle as the top face of the sine bar is inclined at an angle theta to the surface plate. For better results both the rollers could be placed on slip gauges of height H1 and H2 respectively. Then sine theta will be equal to H1 minus H2 divided by L checking for measuring unknown angles. When component is of small size for measuring an angle it is necessary to fast find the angle approximately with the help of a bevel protector. Sine bar is then set up at that nominal angle on a surface plate by suitable combination of slip gauges. The component to be checked is placed over the surface of the sine bar. The dial gauge is then set at one end of the work and moved along the upper surface of the component. If there is a variation in parallelism of the upper surface of the component and the surface plate it is indicated by the dial gauge. The combination of the slip gauges is so adjusted that the upper surface of the component is truly parallel with the surface plate. The angle of component is then calculated by the relation sine theta equal to H by L when the component is of large size or heavy. In such case the component is placed over a surface plate. The sine bar is placed over the component. The height over the rollers can be measured by a 1 year height gauge using a dial test gauge mounted on the anvil of height gauge to ensure constant measuring pressure. The anvil of height gauge is adjusted with the probe of dial test gauge showing same reading for the top most position of rollers of sine bar. If H is the difference in the heights and L the distance between the roller centers of the sine bar then theta will be equal to sine inverse of H by L. Now pause this video for a few seconds and try to write answer to the following question. State true or false slip gauges are used for measurement of height. Probably you have wrote answer to the following question. Limitations of sine bar. It is reliable for angles less than 15 degree and becomes increasingly inaccurate as the angle increases. It is impractical to use sine bars for angles above 45 degree. It is physical clumsy to hold in position. Size of parts which is to be inspected by sine bar is limited. These are the following references. Thank you.


Try to get a win at this point. Sure, I mean, that's what we try to do every week. And I know that that sounds cliche, but it's one week, win or lose, you move on to the next one. You try to do everything you can to fix the mistakes and make the corrections, get the players to understand, get the coaches to understand what the players are learning and how they can execute it during the game. And then look at the good stuff and say, guys, we have to continue to try to do this, build a game plan, and try to get them prepared. And we're going to start that on the field here in a little bit. What's the precedent for somebody like Mahomes?  Is there anybody who his game reminds you of? Again, the comparisons in this league are always difficult. He's a fantastic player. It does a lot with the football, very quick with the release. Makes a lot of great decisions in the RPO game. Very accurate outside the pocket, can create, keep plays alive. I think the longer that he does that, then there's more opportunity for those guys that can run to get downfield. And that's where the play extension is critical that we try to limit that. Game against Evans, where LaShawn was called into action, maybe didn't go as well as LaShawn hoped now with Butler out. Where do you pick things up in the secondary? Well, I would say that that game, I don't think anybody. I don't think LaShawn was responsible for 198 yards. Again, you try to look at match-ups and you try to identify when you can play man, when you can play zone, when you want to try to have eyes on the quarterback, when you want to try to have help, how to play guys that are big receivers, such as, let's say, Sammy Watkins this week, a bigger player with speed, but then guys that have speed or are smaller and quicker than guys and how you play Hill and Hardman and Robinson. So there's a lot of challenges. They have a few backs that they run the football with, not to mention probably the best tight end in the league. How had you felt about where Malcolm was? The thing I always appreciated about Malcolm was his competitiveness. And I know it wasn't perfect, but certainly always appreciated his competitiveness and how he attacked and how he finished plays. So wished that he hadn't got hurt, but we understand that that's the unfortunate part of this business. How much confidence do you have in Sims to take that next man up mentality? That's, again, why guys are here on our roster is so that we have confidence in them that they have to go in the game and they have to play for us, that they'll be ready. And that's why they practice. That's why they try to improve each and every week. And so there's a lot of guys that get opportunities in this league and do some really good things with it. And then we're confident that that's what La'Shawn will do. Didn't Jawn just chill in concoction protocol? Or is he good? No, he's not good yet, but I say that he's progressing well. There's a lot of things that you have to do the last couple stages to pass through that, you know, the entire protocol, but he's working on it. Again, we'll find out here in a little bit. Usually they don't do a whole lot on Wednesday anyways. So based on how they feel, we'll see where they're at towards the end of the week. For Jeffrey against the Panthers, does he continue to respond well to the increasing workload? Yeah, I mean, I think physically, yes. And to just think he's only had probably a handful of practices with us, there's a lot of things that come up in the game that can be better. There's a lot of just checks and communication that he's getting for the first time. And that's, we're kind of just throwing them in there, not having had training camp and a lot of practices, but I'd say his attitude's been fantastic. And again, the most important thing is that he's able to continue to add those snaps and that workload that you mentioned and factor in some plays. And then, you know, I know there's a lot of plays that he would like to improve on and some techniques that he'd like to improve on. Ryan Tannehill suggested that maybe the time that he had with AJ Brown in training camp when kind of both are on the second team might sort of help their chemistry a little bit, the fact that they played a good bit together. Have you seen some evidence of that in the games Ryan has started? I think the quarterback's job is always going to be the same. He's going to try to get us in the right play and throw it at the guy that he feels like is open and gives him the best chance to gain yards. And whether that's AJ, Janu, AJ, Tajé, Corey, you know, that's, you know, and again, I think that they probably have had thrown the ball more to him just because that's where they were in preseason. But, you know, I hope that Ryan feels comfortable throwing to anybody that's open out there. With that ball down the sideline, the long ball to AJ, pretty good coverage. What does that suggest about, you know, maybe his trust in AJ to go up and get those kind of catches? You know, I think we have to be able to try to hit some of those.  We have to be able to do that. And again, that's giving them a ball, giving them a chance not to, you know, throw it out of bounds or, you know, put it too far in the middle of the field, or, you know, I think just giving them a chance to make a play, and that's what AJ did. What do you think gets outside the pocket makes plays on the run? I mean, what are the challenges you're facing? I think that you just have to say that you have to cover them a little longer and until you hear, you know, the whistle or the crowd or something.  So you just can't ever relax when they go out there and, you know, the route may seem to come to an end and they kind of relax, and then all of a sudden they burst on you. And I think that when you take that sigh of relief, you know, sometimes it was when they get you. And hopefully we can limit those opportunities just by being able to coordinate the rush and keep the quarterback, you know, from throwing from a well. How does that change the game for you? Well, I mean, I think you have to be conscious, you have to be smart of, you know, where you're at and the shots that they like to take and, you know, making sure that you play with, you know, proper leverage and that you're on top and that, you know, we understand that they have more X plays than any offense in the league. And that's, you know, when they're able to hit those, those chunk plays allow them to change field position, gain momentum. And so he's a large part of what they do to get those explosive plays. He attacks the football when there's coverage and just, you know, like John mentioned, a trust that the quarterback has to throw it up to a certain player, knowing that he's going to come down with the football. What's there? He's running more than just full routes. Long development routes, double moves. Is his ability to run those routes at that speed unique? Unique? Sure.   And, you know, that's always the challenge when that guys can go sideways just as effectively as they can gain and build speed down the field. They're always hard to cover. What's Derek like as a leader? I think that Derek, you know, by being, I would say good, very good. You know, and I think that I try to get him to understand that, that by his, the way he practices, the way he finishes, the way he conditions in the off season, the amount of time that he spends, how he performs in conditioning and in a weight room, you know, the toughness in which he plays with. I think that that's how he leads. And, but we all have different abilities. And I know that when he does those things on the field, or you watch him in the off season, to do those things, it certainly would inspire me if I was a player. What do you guys as coaches want the identity of the offense to be? Well, we want to be sound. We want to be physical. We want to be obviously effective. We want to be able to take advantage of team's mistakes. I think sometimes I talk to the team as much as I can about being a football team that takes advantage of mistakes that they make in the run game and in the pass game, if they're a gap short that we have to take advantage of it. If they're, you know, void in a zone in the passing game, we have to be smart enough. They uncover somebody and we have to be good enough and effective enough to take advantage of that. I want to play with an urgency. I think that we have to play with a sense of urgency and dictate the tempo. And, you know, we have to continue to try to be more consistent with when doing those things because I think there's evidence of a lot of those things. I think a smart football team, a smart offense, a fundamentally sound offense. And when you aren't some of those, that's when you create those longer yardage situations and that get back on track. You need to win a football game, obviously, which should be motivation enough that is there a challenge that goes with having a bi-week on the horizon as far as keeping guys focused, making plans for the bi-week? And do you fight that as a coach to make sure guys are locked in the week before bi-week? Or is that even an issue? I mean, I hope that we're focused on trying to get to five and five against a tough opponent. You know, I think it's been long enough for us to have not have a bi, so, you know, one more week. I just, I'm not sure if the emphasis on that, the emphasis is on trying to prepare in the meetings and have great practices, play a game, and then try to recover the best that we can. I think it is about Taylor Luong's playing style. There's led to so many face mask penalties and how can you counter that? What do you think is happening here? My son plays left tackle. Taylor plays left tackle. You'd have to ask Taylor. I tell him not to grab the face mask.  Set out to, no, no, but I mean, again, like, what? John, I wouldn't know where to begin to tell him, try to teach him not to grab the guy's face mask, stay in front of him. And then you won't have to grab anything on him or hold him or grab his face mask. Some of these things I think are comical that you could expect me to coach a guy. Not to, no, that's the question that you asked me, so I'm trying to help you. I can't, at some point in time, like my hands are up, I can't teach you not to grab the guy's face mask. Just like I'm trying to teach Kenny and Kevin relentlessly about how to be able to dislodge the football down the field on a defenseless receiver, not hit him in the head or neck when that player is still protected when he lowers his target. And Kenny looks at me and he's like, coach. And I'm like, Kenny, if it's lower he goes, the lower you gotta go, like, I'm with you there. Like, that one, there's some tricky ones that we're trying to work through as we teach penalties.  Outside of face mask, because last year, this team wasn't really penalized that much, but this year it's kind of changed. So outside of the face mask, where is the breakdown? Is it technique? Is it fatigue? Where is the breakdown?  And again, when we watch and we break down these special teams, whether it's against us or on another team, when guys fall down, the guy that you're blocking, that when he falls down, that's a big red flag to those guys. Because on special teams plays, 20 guys, 21 guys minus the kicker are all running around and they see a lot of bodies and sometimes they don't really see a hold or they're not really sure. But when guys fall down, you know, it kind of draws a red flag. And whether Bates held the guy or not, I know the guy he was blocking fell down and they called a penalty.  Fall starts, you know, we have to use our cadence and we practice our cadence and practice something that when it works and it goes well, we're able to get yards and we're able to be disciplined. We're able to get free yards or take shots down the field on free plays. But when we don't, our excitement level or whatever it is to get into that block when we move off, we move and we flinch, that costs us five yards. Holding, you know what I mean? Again, I don't want to go through all the things that we turn in and the results. But I would say that most of the things that we turn in are pretty favorable to where, you know, we're doing it okay and we have to do it better and then we understand the penalties hurt us, but some of them, you know, I get the aggressiveness, Bates had a use of the helmet. We teach that extensively. John, to your point, that's one that we can coach. That's a player safety issue to try to be able to play with our faces up and not in a posture that would be linear with our head down. And so that one got coached at length and showed at length about how we need to try to properly play one so that we're safe as we possibly can. And then the other one is that we aren't getting penalties. And Bax gets the wall, sees another line, there's a just the next game. It's in the National Football League, every game is probably as must win as you can get. It's the next one, it's a great challenge, it's a heck of an opponent. Our guys were focused this morning already. I'm hopeful that when we go out to the practice field, we can carry the meetings out to the field and be able to start the week off on a great note. Thanks guys.


It's the Brewers versus the Padres, Game 3. It's Lauer on the Mount and the Brewer bats behind them. Let's get some brew bombs, go Brewers!


Once in a while, I'd come across a study that's so juicy I'd do an entire video about it. It's like my which-fruit-fights-cancer-better video, or the best-cooking-method one, or that one comparing thousands of foods. Well, this is one such study. A group of researchers at U of F Gainesville and Penn State set up an elegant experiment. We've known ounce per ounce that herbs and spices have some of the greatest antioxidant activities known, but that's an attest to. Before we can ask if an herb or spice has health benefits, it's first necessary to determine whether it's bioavailable. This has never been done until now. They could have went the easy route and just measured the change in antioxidant level in one's bloodstream before and after consumption, but the assumption that the appearance of antioxidant activity in the blood is an indicator of bioavailability has a weakness. Maybe more gets absorbed than we think, but doesn't show up on antioxidant tests because it gets bound up to protein or cells, so they attempted to measure physiological changes in the blood. They were interested in whether absorbed compounds would be able to protect white blood cells from an oxidative or inflammatory injury, whether it would protect the strands of our DNA from breaking when confronted by free radicals. They also wondered if the consumption of herbs and spices might alter cellular inflammatory responses in the presence of a physiologically relevant inflammatory insult. What does this all mean? What they did was take a bunch of people and had each of them eat different types of spices for a week. There are so many really unique things about this study, but one was that the quantity that study subjects consumed was based on the usual levels of consumption in actual food, like the oregano group was given a half teaspoon a day. The kinds of practical quantities people might actually eat once in a while. Then the end of the week, they drew blood from the dozen or so people they had adding black pepper to their diets that week, and compared the effects of their blood to the effects of the blood of the dozen on cayenne, or cinnamon, or cloves, or cumin. They had about 10 different groups of people eating about 10 different spices.  They wanted to pick something really inflammatory, so they chose oxidized cholesterol, which is like what you'd get in your bloodstream after eating something like fried chicken. So they jabbed the white blood cells with oxidized cholesterol and then measured how much TNF they produced in response. Turmericrosis factor is a powerful inflammatory cytokine, infamous for the role it plays in autoimmune attacks like inflammatory bowel disease.  No. What about any of these other spices? Cloves, ginger, rosemary, and turmeric were able to significantly stifle the inflammatory response.  And so it represents what might happen when cells in our body are exposed to the levels of spices that circulate in our bloodstream after normal daily consumption, not megal doses in some pill, just the amount that makes our spaghetti sauce taste good, or our pumpkin pie, or curry sauce. There are drugs that can do the same thing. Turmericrosis factors are such major mediators of inflammation and inflammation-related diseases that there are these TNF-blocking drugs on the market for the treatment of inflammatory diseases like osteoarthritis, inflammatory bowel disease, psoriasis, and closing spondylitis, which rake in, collectively, more than $20 billion a year, because drug companies charge people $15,000 to $20,000 a year for the drug. At that price, the side effects better be hugs and rainbows, but no, these drugs carry a black label warning because they can cause things like cancer, heart failure. If only there were a cheaper, safer solution. Kirkumen, the yellow pigment in turmeric, a spice that's a tad cheaper and safer, but does it work outside of a test tube? There's evidence that it may help in all the diseases for which TNF-blockers are currently being used, and so with health care costs and safety being such major issues, this golden-spiced turmeric may help provide the solution.


Mile High United Way and Kaiser Pernant Day have had a relationship for 25 years. 25 years we have partnered together to do what you all do best, make communities thrive. So not only do we partner together to take care of community members, we have been partners for over a decade in taking care of our own employees as well. It is critical to the success of our business to have this kind of partnership because our biggest asset is our people. The amazing thing about the partnership with Kaiser Pernant Day and Mile High United Way as an employer is that it is a true year-round partnership around the health of our employees. It's not just, oh when you're not feeling well or oh my gosh there's an emergency, but you all help us think year-round of how to stay healthy. The tips you provide our employees, the workshops that are available to us really has helped create a culture of health and of wellness and prevention which we know doing the work that we do is critical in a community. So it's not only our bodies in all honesty, it's our spirits and it's our souls of how we work together. And having a partner like Kaiser Pernant Day helps us think holistically and that is the greatest gift that I believe Mile High United Way can give to the community. We went to New Heights 25 years ago when Kaiser Pernant Day came and joined us. So I'm looking forward to a very long legacy and a very long partnership because I think that's who we are as Coloradans and I know that's who Kaiser Pernant Day is as well. Congratulations Kaiser Pernant Day Colorado. Thanks for keeping Colorado and me healthy for 50 years and here's to 50 more years of keeping us all thriving.


So, I want to try something new, but the profit margins are tight so I want to try to make sure that I don't fail. So I'll go to any kind of event, and I've gone to any kind of event that's put on about soil health, and what I've seen happen at these events is they'll have a panel, whether a big panel or a small panel, but they'll have a panel that has some technical people on it that are talking about new methods, new techniques, and that's important and very interesting to me. But what gives me the courage to try these new things are the producers that they've got on the panel. There will be farmers and ranchers sitting on that panel that are saying, yes. These folks over here are talking about the weed suppression they've noticed by using certain crops and cover crops, and I've done that and it works like that. That's the way it works. So the producer addresses my fear. The technical people address the intellectual aspects that I need to help me make the transition, but it's really the producer on the panel that pushes me over the edge by saying, yes, I've done that and it works. When I go to a number of these events, I build up a network of these kinds of producers. So if I run in- Like a support system? Exactly. You bet. Exactly. And I use it. Maybe you start out with a half a dozen people that you know or that you just met that are doing these kind of practices. And if you run into a glitch, you give them a call and you say, hey, what's going on here? And most of them are more than willing to talk you through what they've done and how to make changes. In South Dakota here, the NRCS has put together a list of about 80 volunteers called the Voices for Soil Health. And these people have been asked to be a voice for Soil Health, and they've said that, yes. I would be willing to talk with people about what I'm doing and how this works and mistakes that I've made and how I've solved them. And all you need to do is get a hold of NRCS and they'll connect you with the right person in this Voices for Soil Health. It's a support mechanism to help us through the scary spots. You got to look at it as a long-term investment.  And the bad things are going to take care of themselves as you start doing this and learn more about it. But you need to look at the things that you don't like as well and say, okay, how do I change this and make this work?