Let me go back to the perturbation theory that we discussed. There are several issues which I have to repeat again once more. First of all, we said that to start the perturbation theory, we wrote H as H0 plus V. That is important. We made sure that the psi-hat-ree-fock is a ground state eigenstate of H0 because that was our idea of starting the perturbation theory. So we said that the H0 is a n-particle operator which is sum of the Fock operator. So this is how we discussed H0. Please understand this is a n-particle operator. So these i's are not spin orbitals. I just want to make sure because people get confused. These are the coordinates. So whenever I am writing f of something, that is a coordinate. So I have r1, x1, x2, xn basically. Fock operator in terms of spin orbitals. So r1, omega1. So these i's are not spin orbitals because the Hamiltonian is a function of electron coordinates. So I am writing the Hamiltonian. So this must be function of electron coordinates. So this is a sum of the Fock operator. Each of them, I have f of 1. Similarly, I have f of 2 and so on. Although as far as the eigenvalue equation is concerned, any one of them is good. So I have the eigenvalue equation of chi i1 as epsilon i chi i1. And please note that I am explicitly working with the canonical Hartree-Fock just for simplification. So here these are coordinates. Chi i is a spin orbital. So whether I take f1 or f2, the eigenvalue system will be same. So that is the reason when I do eigenvalue, I take only one f of 1 with eigenvalue system will be same. But when I reconstruct the zerethodder Hamiltonian, there must be some of f of 1, f of 2, f of 3 up to f of n. Just want to clarify this. There should be coordinates of the electrons, spin and space both. And we also know f of 1, f of 1 which is f of x1 is h of 1 plus sum over j integral chi j star 2, 1 by r1 2, 1 minus b1 2, chi j 2 d tau. Please note that everything in the parenthesis is a function of coordinates. So this is a coordinate, this is a coordinate which is integrated. So that is why it is a dummy. These are also coordinates. Everything is coordinate. So explicitly what is written is this spin orbital chi j. And this acts on a chi i to give me epsilon i chi i. But in the definition of f operator, only one chi j appears. I want to mention this. Again some people have confusion. I saw in the Midsam paper, they wrote chi i, chi j and that got totally confused. Because obviously this is a integration of only one coordinate of electron, not both the coordinates of electron. Otherwise I will not get the fork operator. When I go to the energy, I have a two electron integral which will bring in i and j. But here chi i1 is not there. chi i1 will be here when it acts on this. But the definition of fork operator just includes this part. So this is something that you have to first understand properly. So this actually is a 1 by r1 2 integrated over the other electron, one of the electrons in any spin orbital chi j. So this summation is actually 1 to n. But this summation j is spin orbital. This is a summation of a spin orbital. This is coordinates of electron. So they can be any spin orbital and all of them are accounted for. And then I take the coulomb and the exchange part. So the potential due to the second electron or the third electron, that is not important now. Because by summing over spin orbitals, I am taking care of all the electrons. So that is what I have said repeatedly. So I define the single particle fork operator. Its sum over all the n electron coordinates give me my n particle operator. So H0 is a n particle operator whereas f of 1 or any f of i is a one particle operator. But this is a non-interacting problem now because H0 is sum upon electron operator.  So I have already told you any one particle function is an orbital or spin orbital depending on whether it is space, coordinate or space people. So these are now spin orbitals. So I take an anti-symmetrize product of this. I will get the eigenfunction of H0. So the ground state eigenfunction happens to be of course H0 psi hard trifog which is now, so psi hard trifog you already know is an anti-symmetrize product. So chi 1, chi 2 to chi n and this gives me the zeroth order energy which is sum of epsilon i's 1 to n psi hard trifog. So this is the eigenvalue equation of H0 because it is a non-interacting problem. So if I take an anti-symmetrize product of this spin orbital which is psi hard trifog I know the result is an eigenfunction and the eigenvalues are simply sum of the orbital energies. Is it clear? So remember we had an approximate wave function psi hard trifog approximate to the exact Hamiltonian. However I now discover that this is an exact eigenfunction of another Hamiltonian H0, an approximate Hamiltonian H0. So the eigenfunction which was approximate eigenfunction of H is however an exact eigenfunction of the approximate Hamiltonian. So I have just changed the picture. Now I have made this approximate state exact state the Hamiltonian is changed from H to H0. Further with an m basis problem I could generate many determinants. So I categorize them as psi a r psi a b r s and so on and we find that for the same reason since all those spin orbitals are eigenfunctions of this Fock operator each of these determinant is also an eigenfunction of the H0. Is it clear? For the same reason because they are anti-symmetrize products of the spin orbitals. Some of them are virtual orbitals but they are also included in this solution. So let's assume that I have a solution which goes up to capital N which is much larger than N. Although I am explicitly using only capital N for the definition of the Fock operator. My solutions are capital N which is of course done in a Hartree-Fog-Ruthan basis that's a different matter. I will not worry right now how do I get the solutions. So with those unoccupied orbitals if I construct these excited determinants of H0 then each of them is an eigenstate of H0 and with an eigenvalue which can be written in reference to this as so let us call this sum over epsilon i i equal to 1 to N as E0 0 by the notation of the perturbation theory since it's a ground state eigenfunction for the zeroth order Hamiltonian let's call it E0 0. So I can say with respect to E0 0 I have one extra orbital energy and one less and so on. So I can now write down all the eigenvalue equations of H0 so E0 0 plus epsilon R. So in fact entire n-to-plie excited determinants can be formed as an eigenfunction of H0 is it clear? Note that this is the entire thing is now an n particle space so these are all n particle determinants which are formed out of one particle function or spin orbitals and they are in particular the solutions of the Fock operator and that is why it is called Hartree-Fock perturbation theory. So this sets this stage because now I have a H0 which presumably is a dominant part of H and that's a question that you can still ask but I presume it's a dominant part of H simply because its ground state eigenfunction is a very good approximation to the exact eigenfunction because it recovers 95 to 97 percent of total energy. So I presume that H0 is a dominant part of H and of course the solutions all solutions of H0 are known in this basis. So that's not a problem I can keep on increasing m I will get more and more solutions but in principle in that basis all solutions are known and please remember in quantum chemistry everything that we now do is in a basis. So even I have repeated I repeat again I had told before that there is nothing called exact Hartree-Fock. Even the Hartree-Fock is in a basis okay so exact energy is also in a basis. So whatever we are going to discuss np2ci couple cluster everything will be defined in a basis there is nothing called exact because we don't have an exact Hartree-Fock but we know when m will go in the limit m tends to infinity everything will reach its exact limit okay. So whatever we are talking is of course an m basis problem. So in that basis my entire solutions of H0 are known which are mcn in number okay mcn is the number of determinants that I can form. So mcn number of solutions are already known this is a dominant part of H so I can start my perturbation theory with that okay. So we did the perturbation theory and I again we will just write the final result of E01. E01 is something first order perturbation I derived on the day and that was the 0th order wave function which is psi Hartree-Fock ground state V psi Hartree-Fock. So it was the expectation value of the perturbation operator with respect to the psi 00 which is the ground state Eigen function of H0 because I am looking at a ground state correction to the energy. So the first order correction merely comes with this and then if you see E0 0 if you look at E0 0 since this is the Eigen function of H0 I can write E0 0 as psi Hartree-Fock H0 psi Hartree-Fock correct by definition because psi Hartree-Fock is already an Eigen function of H0. So if I take an average value exactly like this then this is obviously E0 0 which is nothing but sum of the orbital energy anyway but this is alternative way of writing because this is an Eigen function of H0 with E0 0 as the Eigen value so this will become E0 0 psi Hartree-Fock psi Hartree-Fock psi Hartree-Fock is 1 so I get back E0 0 is it clear to everybody? So this I can always write any Eigen value equation Eigen value can be written as an average value with respect to its own Eigen function okay. So if I add these two then of course I see that E0 0 plus E0 1 now that everything is same I can only add the operators okay. So I have psi Hartree-Fock H psi Hartree-Fock which is nothing but E Hartree-Fock. So we had already noticed that the psi Hartree-Fock is an Eigen function of H0 but the Eigen value unfortunately was not E Hartree-Fock it was sum of the orbital energy. Now we see that if I add the first order correction to the ground state then together I recover the E Hartree-Fock okay and we can do lots of other things that we will now talk about but the important thing to realize that within this perturbation theory any improvement to Hartree-Fock energy will only occur at second order because up to first order we are recovering the Hartree-Fock energy okay. So that is the reason the genesis that the correlation theory starts from MP2 okay. So MP2 is the first correlation energy because correlation energy is going beyond Hartree-Fock I told you already it is a difference between exact energy minus Hartree-Fock. So unless and unless you have improved from the Hartree-Fock you do not have any correlation energy. So it starts only at the second order which we will do later but I just want to make some remarks on this point that at the first order you do not have any improvement. So because I cannot write H0 psi Hartree-Fock or E Hartree-Fock psi Hartree but with the first order correction I can write the question that was asked was very interesting that can I have an H0. So can I have an H0 let us call it H0 prime some other H0 where psi Hartree-Fock remains it is a 0th order Hamiltonian remains the Eigen state but the Eigen value now becomes E Hartree-Fock. So can I have this question mark you understand the problem can I have such a H0 H0 prime I am not saying this H0 some other 0th order Hamiltonian such that I can write such a nice equation this is very nice because there I can interpret the Hartree-Fock is very nicely everything as an Eigen function and Eigen value of a 0th order Hamiltonian if it is so then of course you would say that the correlation energy should start from first order we will see what happens which means if I write H with some other Hamiltonian H0 prime plus V prime of course if H0 becomes H0 prime V will also change. So let me call this V prime then is this possible that is a question we will come back to this and how to make it possible and then do you have a correlation energy from first order that is a question so I have not answered the question I will come back. Can I erase this I will just give this on the board if you realize little bit from these equations that what is the difference between E Hartree-Fock and E00 only one number E01 right this is a number remember so there is only one number which is differing from E00 to E Hartree-Fock so it is very easy to bring the E00 to E Hartree-Fock by simply writing a new partitioning where I write H as H0 prime plus V prime and make H0 prime H0 plus this number which was E01 before my previous H0 gave me E01 that is a number I can simply add that number do you understand what I am saying so I redo I rescale my Hamiltonian by adding a number which means my H0 is nothing but prime is nothing but old H0 plus Psi Hartree-Fock old V Psi Hartree-Fock if I do this then it is very easy to see that this is exactly what I will get because what happens Psi Hartree-Fock remains the eigenstate of H0 prime because it is only scaled by a number eigenvalue will be scaled by the same number right so the eigenvalue will become E Hartree-Fock so in fact the question that I am asking is actually a trivial question because this is only a number I can always scale and all my eigen solutions of new H0 prime will also be scaled by this number right so there is no problem they will all remain eigenstates is it clear please ask question if it is not clear I know these are not done so I am trying to again repeat so I am now reconstructing a new Hamiltonian H0 prime new 0th order Hamiltonian by simply adding to my old H0 this quantity which is not a problem which I can calculate I have V I can calculate this I will do the calculation more explicitly little later and of course my V prime will also change old V minus this correct I will come back to this V prime little bit later but I just want to tell you that of course my H must be same so if I have added a number in H0 same number must be subtracted to have the V prime now remember my perturbation should be now V prime I cannot have H0 prime as 0th order and V as the perturbation that is wrong so my perturbation operator is also changed to V prime which is simply the old V minus psi heart rate of V psi heart rate if I do this then it is very clear that I can answer this question so I have I have indeed I can take this box but then the question is what happens to MP1 so when I do the MP1 now remember how do I get the first order correction perturbation and I average value with respect to psi heart refock so what is my E0 prime so let me call it E0 prime 1 so what is my E0 0 prime that is E heart refock right that is the new so whenever I am saying prime it is a new new partitioning so what will be E0 prime now psi heart refock right that is still the eigen function V prime psi heart correct so what is the result replace V prime psi heart refock V psi heart refock and this is a number this is a number so the number will simply come out because psi heart refock is normalized to 1 so it will become psi heart refock V psi heart refock and that is still 0 so this was a number but the same number has been subtracted in the V prime so your V prime average value with respect to psi heart refock it is 0 so although it is nice that I could get E heart refock as the as the eigen value of H0 prime I still do not have a correlation at MP1 that is 0 so in a way as far as correlation is concerned either H0 or H0 prime I do not care both are good because they do not they do not give me any extra solution at first order as far as correlation energy is concerned the improvement only starts from second order at the second order of course things will start to change which I will come little late much later when I do the second order perturbation theory but I just want you to get convinced that at the first order by simply adding a number it does not help any question there are many many things that you can do this is not the only way to get H0 prime I can keep doing lots of things in fact there is to be very good papers which are simply titled what is a good H0 some of the papers are titled what is a good H0 or partitioning of the Hamiltonian how do I partition the Hamiltonian and lots of interesting paper in the 1960s have been done by Diner, Cleverie and Malryu they have written a lot of interesting paper in the 60s Malryu is who came in this Goa conference yeah the same man so he did a lot of work on what kind of partitioning would be good and you can see that at the first and up to first order it is trivial but at the higher order second order onward things will change depending on how I partition okay so second order onward results will keep changing so what is a good H0 is a very interesting title of a paper you know how do I get a good H0 and can I play with it and of course I will get a different perturbation theory I will get a different perturbation series from the second order onward depending on how I change my H0 is it clear of course second order I have not done but trust me that the from second order results will start to change depending on what is my H0 prime I want to convince you that by just adding a number like E01 previous E01 I do not get any change only thing is that I can be happy that the Hartree-Fock is a eigen value of H0 prime that is my only happiness but then E0 prime is 0 first order correction is 0 so eventually what is important is 0th plus first order is E Hartree-Fock that part is not changing either in unprime or prime partition okay before I go forward and look at different partitioning let me now analyze what is V just want to write down V explicitly note that your total Hamiltonian is sum over H of I plus 1 by R I again these are coordinates of electrons so whenever I am writing Hamiltonian they are coordinates of electrons okay I's are all coordinates and then I have a Fock operator which if you remember was H of I plus sum over kaij star 2 1 by modulus R I minus R 2 sorry into 1 minus P12 by Pi 2 kaij 2 d tau please note that you have to be you know since I have started writing I I am managing I so what did I do everywhere coordinate 1 I have written I it does not matter okay so it is just that you should be very comfortable in writing this so this should not be P12 this will be Pi 2 interchanges I and 2 so it does not matter so then I am saying my H naught is sum over Fock operator right so what would be my V now so if you look at this part if I sum over Fock operator I first get this part but then I get an additional part okay which must be subtracted from this so let me call this part this part sum over j this whole part let me call this V Hartree Fock so let me write F of I plus H of I plus V Hartree Fock where V Hartree Fock I is this in the parenthesis so that is exactly that extra Coulomb and exchange operator okay and your H naught contains sum of all such V Hartree Fock I okay remember again I again repeat that this j is a spin orbital this I is a coordinate okay because j is a spin orbital okay normally I would have written F of 1 but then when I want going to do any F of I a dummy variable I must I must not worry so then what happens to V so V now becomes V Hartree Fock V now becomes V Hartree Fock subtracted from 1 by r i j so it becomes 1 by r i j minus sum over I V Hartree Fock correct I am just talking of this partition of course if your H naught becomes H naught prime then V prime will have a further subtraction okay but this is the V you can now see my H naught is sum of the Fock operator so if I do H naught plus V I get back my Hamiltonian please make sure because when I do H naught I have a sum of Fock operator so sum of H of I sum of V Hartree Fock I and V has 1 by r i j minus V Hartree Fock I so that V Hartree Fock I sum gets cancelled and I am with H of I sum plus 1 by r i j sum correct so I get back my Hamiltonian so please make sure so basically this part has been added to H of I to give me a Fock the same part the sum is subtracted to give me V so many people may think that V is just 1 by r i j that is not true since I am starting from Hartree Fock perturbation I am starting from F as my original operator one particle operator to start with if I would have started with H that is if my H naught was just sum of H of I then of course V would have been r i j but that I have discarded long back because I know that is not a good one particle solution that was this thing that I discussed that would have been the simplest to have a non interacting picture and this would have been perturbation but that I have discarded since my solution now includes an additional operator I have to make sure that that operator is subtracted when I define the perturbation operator and then you can see what is psi 0 or psi Hartree Fock V psi Hartree Fock this is my E01 note this is my E01 I hope you can do this I hope you can do this this is an average value you can use later rule to tell me now so I have two terms psi Hartree Fock 1 by r i j psi Hartree Fock minus psi Hartree Fock sum over one particle operator V Hartree Fock I psi Hartree remember again this is a coordinate of electron so can you write this later rule remember this later rule is the first one that we do it type A average value so tell me this first part half of half of A B I am calling it instead of i j A B chi A chi B anti symmetrize chi A chi correct do this part this is the one electron part like sum over H of I you did how did I do sum over chi I H chi I correct so write it sum over A chi A V Hartree Fock chi A that is the first thing I will write because V Hartree Fock is my one part is it agreed everybody agrees so this is a one particle operator so I will take its eigen function its average value sorry its average value with respect to each of the spin orbitals A equal to 1 to n I am explicitly writing A and B just not to confuse this I and J okay so I write chi A V Hartree Fock chi A and then the coordinate can be anything 1 1 1 whatever does not matter then what will I do I will I will expand V Hartree Fock from here okay now if you expand V Hartree Fock you already have let me let me write this in greater details in actual integral form so what is chi A V Hartree Fock chi A so this is equal to integral chi A star 1 V Hartree Fock 1 chi A 1 data 1 agreed now I will expand chi A V Hartree Fock by this expansion this is my V Hartree Fock okay I will bring in another sum of the orbitals so this is equal to integral chi A star 1 V Hartree Fock has one more integration over d tau 2 so that will anyway come but before that another chi J which I now call chi B sum over B please remember that only J I am replacing by B to be more consistent so B equal to 1 to N spin orbital chi B 2 1 by R R I is now R 1 1 by R 1 2 1 minus P 1 2 that I should be replaced by 1 now and then chi B 2 so I have this chi J 2 chi B 2 and then this is this is a this is a V Hartree Fock so V Hartree Fock started from here correct and then I have chi A 1 then d tau 2 is a part of V Hartree Fock and of course d tau 1 is something that I have to do okay sorry yeah chi B star yeah I can shift it around and I can write this as sum over B equal to 1 to N chi A chi B anti-symmetry is chi A chi correct by just shifting this around that is okay because this is not exchange this is just that I am writing one first and two first it does not matter whichever I write right so this becomes chi A V Hartree Fock chi A now what I have to do I have to sum over A remember my this quantity E naught 1 this minus this right I am doing by a letter rule so your final E naught 1 is half of sum over A B chi A chi B anti-symmetry chi A chi B minus now there is a further summation A comes and of course summation B is already here so A B chi A chi B anti-symmetry it is exactly the same thing except the half factor right so you get finally minus half sum over A B chi A chi B anti-symmetry chi A so that is your E naught 1 so in a very long form E naught 1 is that same repulsion energy with the minus half minus so now what is happening remember in the orbital energy when I did that I had this part double counted that is why it was different from Hartree Fock energy sum of the orbital energy and that double counting is precisely going to be subtracted when I add E naught 1 and hence I am getting E Hartree Fock you remember my E naught 0 plus E naught 1 is E Hartree Fock E naught 0 was sum of the orbital energy which is actually E Hartree Fock double and this part double counted this part is actually includes half so now I have subtracted this to restore sanity so I get back E Hartree Fock okay so I just want to complete this again instead of I j I will write A B so it makes it easy so epsilon A if you remember was chi A H chi A and this is something that I have given in this papers also plus sum over B chi A chi B anti-symmetry chi A only sum over B here many people have got confused with this epsilon A also orbital energy is a number so it must be two electron integral but no sum over A because I am writing for a specific spin orbital this is actually obtained this is nothing but chi A F chi A correct if I do chi A F chi A you will easily get this because B is the incomplete integration but this completes the integration over dita 1 dita 2 so I have the orbital energy so if I do sum over E A E A which is my E 0 0 you can see this is sum over A chi A H chi A plus so this sum over A is here sum over A B chi A chi B correct which is different from E Hartree-Fock whether the half factor is missing here now when I add E 0 plus E 0 1 this minus half will come okay and you will get back sum over A chi A H chi A plus half A B chi A chi A this 1 minus half would give me the plus half and that is exactly the Hartree-Fock energy okay so this is a very long way to derive remember I initially told you very quickly because you just add H 0 and V you get H but if somebody is not convinced show me by really is later rule integration you can show it no problem okay you can actually integrate and show that the result that we got is exactly stands true and of course if I I have done just for a F 0 H 0 plus V do H 0 prime plus V prime does not matter we just scale add something and subtract something anyway that is much easier to see okay so it is a long algebra if you do it this way because I am first calculating this calculating some of the orbital energy then I am adding then I find that what was missing here from E Hartree-Fock this half factor that is comes back because this contain minus half this comes because of the following reason that you have first the 1 by R 1 2 part which is which actually has half then when I subtract the V Hartree-Fock it does not have the half so you get a full minus 1 so you get a minus half so you remember the same term is coming in various ways this chi A chi B anti-symmetrize originally I had E Hartree-Fock as half of this E 0 1 is half of this minus 1 of this to gives me minus half add that to E 0 0 I get back half it is just really playing with 1 and half okay plus half minus half so it is nothing it is a very simple algebra but make sure that you are convinced and I would put it the way I put it that is E 0 0 is size Hartree-Fock H 0 psi Hartree-Fock E 0 1 psi Hartree-Fock V psi Hartree-Fock add that you will get Hartree-Fock energy okay so that is easiest way to understand but I think this long expression is important because you learn that whatever slatter rule you have learned you know you can apply and get the same results okay.


I'm not a good person Ask anyone who knows me And bitter and a failure At everything that I say I believe I'm not a good person Ask anyone who loves me I never think about anyone at all I'm not a good person No matter what I do My exhaustion will consume me I'm too tired for the truth I'm not a good person I'm sure you're not surprised It must be pouring out my sweat Blames it, it must be someplace in my eyes I don't know why I am this way I've been like this since I can't remember I try to keep up with everything I know I should do but then I'll fall the pieces anyway I don't know why I am this way


Fort Laramie, starring Raymond Burr as Captain Lee Quince, specially transcribed tales of the dark and tragic ground of the wild frontier, the saga of fighting men who rode the rim of empire, and the dramatic story of Lee Quince, Captain of Cavalry. How far you reckon it is to the North Platte, Captain? Ten miles, Sergeant. No more than that. Lieutenant Cybert should have the company Bivouac there by now. You aim to follow the creek bed clean up there, sir? Not after we water the horses. Ah, this spot's good enough. Yes, sir. Move out, Clint. Captain says we'll take a break here, ease those cinches, and leave the mounts down to the stream there in water. All right, Sergeant. After they're watered, they can pin graze. I'll mind them. Kind of peaceful, ain't it? It's quiet. Sit down, Gorse. More comfortable than the McClelland. Yes, sir. Them Chachonis, they got a way of wearing you out. You think they're still running, Captain? They'll be back. They never run for long. Not when they're hungry. I never heard of Chachonis as far east as the Nebraska border before. You can find them as far east as Texas. Only there we call them Comanches. They're offshoots of the same tribe. They sure don't talk this thing. Dialect's the only difference. They're a disorganized lot, the Chachonis. I guess we can be glad for that. Little of them goes a long way. How about the company, Captain? We'll know more when we rendezvous. Lieutenant Cybridge has orders to make camp on the North Platte until the company's accounted for. I think we held up, sir. I hope so. I sure got it first. Hold it, Gorse. You hear that? Like digging? Up there. Top of the rise. I don't see anybody. Neither do I yet. Come on. Move small. She's awful little to be a man in that space. Man, she's not too handy with it. She must want a whole dug-offle bad that hurts like granite. Let's go up, Shazen. It's like she's alone. Yeah.  I got no food, no coffee, nothing to offer the army. We're not asking for anything. Could have come yesterday. Yesterday I could have stood it if you'd come. You'll be all your life picking away at that hard pan. Haven't you got a man to do this for you? I had one yesterday. He's dead now. And the man's got a right to agree. Sergeant. Yes, sir? Get Flint up here. Tell him we need a grave dug-offle. Where is your husband, ma'am? In bed. And the hut there. Bowling here, sir. Gang Green. He's ridden with it. Must have taken him a long time to die. Yes, sir. Got a broken leg. It's hard paying, Captain. Looks hard, Gorse. Here. We'll wrap him in these bed clothes. Right, sir. Please take over this way when it's too late. It's best he's out of here, ma'am. You ready, Gorse? Yes, sir. Easy now. Don't, don't bury him. Just yet. Grave's not ready yet. Drink it, Mrs. Dennis. It's hot. That's all I can promise. There a long time at it. It takes time. Drink it, Mrs. Dennis. Luther was a long time at it, too. The dying. I know. All the things he's lived through out here. Indian raids and blizzards and droughts, starvation. There's never been food enough but a broken leg.  You're a long way from help out here. Yesterday. Just yesterday. And you come today. Yesterday would have been too late, too, Mrs. Dennis. Always before I could do something. I'd freeze with him, starve with him. When's the last time you watched a man die, Captain? Yesterday. Did it take ten days, ten days and ten nights? Did you hear him scream with pain and beg for you to go for help and beg you not to leave him? Mrs. Dennis. Where would you go now? You got people somewhere? Oh, sure, I have people. I've got parents in Philadelphia who never want to see me again. Two years ago when Luther came back for me, they fought us all they could. When they saw I meant to leave with him, they said don't come back. You can't stay here. The nearest to me is here. There's two dead babies out there by where I'll set Luther down. You can't stay here alone, isn't safe. I'm not used to feeling safe. Captain, it's already out there. Then you can go now. Mrs. Dennis, this is no country for a woman alone. We'll take you to Fort Laramie. It's safe there. You'll leave maybe. It's not a brave thing staying on here.  I mean to stay on with Luther. Why yet? All right, Mrs. Dennis. Let's get back to the horses, Sergeant. We're wasting time. She wasn't much grateful, was she, Captain? We did a small thing. She'd no cause to be grateful, Flint. She's no mind to be grateful for anything the West gives her or takes away. Must have been a pretty little thing once. Kind of dainty-like. How old do you reckon she is, sir? Early 20s. Looks most half a lifetime to me, Captain. All drawn tight and mean. The West does that to a woman. They come here as girls and no time they're women. Old past their years. She's not mean, Flint. She's soft as a kitten. She's born a lot, that's all. Oh, you think that, sir? I know that. She'd want to leave, though. No use her hanging on to the land. She can't prove it up by herself. She'll get out once she thinks it's her own idea. Right now, she thinks she can't face the thought of leaving him there. She's got nowhere she wants to go. Wonder, wonder what'll happen to her. I mean, alone, like that. She can't fend for herself. Can't she, Captain? Those women I seen out here would find them a man. Any man. Marry again. Just to live. They hate the West.  But they keep marrying to live. No, this one, Captain. You seem pretty sure, Sergeant. Just a feeling. She'll go back east somewhere. Leave her dead. Go back where she came from. She don't belong out here. She's got no wagon or a stock to pull it. If she goes, she'll have to walk. Maybe she won't, sir. Maybe she won't. Come in! Sent for me, Captain? Yeah, Gorse. Come in. Yes, sir. Sergeant Gorse, ever since we got back from Horse Creek, the fort's been full of stories that make the cavalry sound like a wet nurse outfit. You know anything about them? What kind of story, sir? You know any troopers who are going around collecting money to send Mrs. Dennis back east? Troopers? No, sir. I don't. I've been kind of lucky at poker lately. Thought maybe I'd share it with whoever's running the charity around here. I guess that'd be me, sir. I guess it would. Here. I'm obliged, Captain. You're not going to make this a habit. You taking the money to her? No, sir. Private Flint's leave starts tomorrow after first call. He'll do it. That's all, Sergeant? Yes, sir. She, uh, she reminds you of someone, Gorse? Girl somewhere? No, sir. It ain't that.  She don't belong out here. Carry on, Sergeant. Captain Quint's reporting, sir. I'm afraid you didn't do a very good job on the Shoshone's, Captain. We didn't wipe them out, Major, if that's what you mean. You met them near the Nebraska border before, isn't that right? And they were hightailing it into Nebraska the last we saw. Those that lived... Well, they're back, Lee. And in numbers, too. They're hungry in numbers. I'm familiar with your charitable streak, Captain Quint. I understand it's spread to Sergeant Gorse right on down to the ranks. There's no cause for worry, Major. It's not widespread enough to be called an epidemic. All right, all right, Lee. The Shoshone's are raiding homesteaders from our side of the North Platte, south along Horse Creek. I understand there aren't many settlers along the creek. Well, not many. They're not just hungry, Captain Quint's. This time they're carrying off women. Any questions? No, sir. Then move out. You smoke ahead, Captain. I see there is, Mr. Cybert. Might be able to surprise them. Just how do you think we could manage that? Well, sir, if the fire's still burning, chances are there may be Indians around somewhere.  Yes, sir. Well... I still see it. Good for you.  You think the Shoshone's have gone on, sir? They're not ones to sit around and admire their work once they've struck. Oh! Sergeant! If we can find them, Captain, they're probably hours away by now. Pleasure to trap, Mr. Cybert. Yes, sir. Sergeant, that's Carpenter's cabin ahead, isn't it? It was, sir. You and I'll ride in, Sergeant. Mr. Cybert will move the patrol to that rise to the left and hold the position. Two shots will be your signal to move in, Mr. Cybert. Yes, sir. That's an old fire, Captain. Smoldering. Mr. Cybert's and I know that, Sergeant. Any questions, Mr. Cybert? No, sir. Then move out. Yes, sir. Come on, Gorse. There, Captain. Yeah, he's cold. It is an old fire, Sergeant. Yes, sir. And it'd be his wife's brother by the cabin. He ain't been here months, sir. That's all there was, Carpenter, his wife, her brother. Just the three of them, Captain. I don't see her anywhere, right? It's not likely we will.  You'd think so, Gorse. Come on. No sign of life, sir. No sign of life, Mr. Cybert. I was wondering, Captain. I know what you're wondering, Sergeant. Her place would be north of here, sir. Do north along the creek. Mr. Cybert. Yes, sir. You'll take half the patrol and move along Horse Creek to the south. You see those dots of smoke on the horizon? I see them, sir. Well, check them. Yes, sir. Sergeant Gorse, prepare to move the other half to the north. Yes, sir. All right. Fall in. I'm going north with Gorse, Mr. Cybert. We'll rendezvous the usual point on the north flat. First arrival makes camp and waits. With pickets out. Right, Captain. I'll judge the fires better this time, sir. Use your eyes, Mr. Cybert. Then use your head. How long are you going to wait, Captain? Nothing stirred up there by her place? The troop is in position. Yes, sir. Full circle. Set back in the hills, all around the hut. Likely she's gone by now. Flint would have been through here with the money two, three days ago. Maybe. I'm going in, Gorse. You got a clear shot at the door, all the way. I didn't think we'd find her hut still standing. Well, we'll see, Sergeant. Hold your fire, Gorse. That came from the hut, sir. The army's not welcome here, Captain.  The whole patrol will move in. The money to give me, too, Captain? I will. We'll talk inside, Mrs. Denny. You all right, sir? No problem, Sergeant. How many men, Captain? Six. All around the hut. Six army men. After one woman. Shoshone's a raiden. All along Horse Creek, you're lucky they missed you. Lucky? You can bring a few things, but not much. Let's get them together. You didn't answer me, Captain. I asked you what you come for. I told you to take you back. I was real took in at first. I felt sort of kindly toward all the brave army men who put by the money for me. Private Flint was here then? That is name. That nice smiley one who dug Luther's grave. Yeah, he was here. Clean till early this morning he was here. I don't figure I would army a thing now, Captain. Sorry, Mrs. Denny's. You're always too late, aren't you, Captain? Too late for everything. I am sorry. I warned you it wasn't safe here. So your hands are clean. Your conscience is clear. I didn't mean that. Oh, you warned me, but I hadn't mind you was talking about Indians when you said this was no country for a woman alone. Indians or Flint or any man who hasn't seen a woman for a long time? Now you've come six of you. To force you to safety this time, ma'am. There's a safe place for a woman out here? Fort Laramie for the time being. Flint was from Fort Laramie. Private Flint isn't the whole cavalry, Mrs. Dennis. You'll get food there. Rest. In a couple of days there's a stage out for the east. With cavalry protection. Not unless it's cold for a man.  I guess that's all it's left.  I hate it. I know how you feel, Mrs. Dennis, but I just want to tell you that I... You don't. You couldn't. You couldn't know how I feel about anything. I'm forgetting my things now. The stage driver says about five minutes. I wondered if I'd see you again, Captain. I owed it to the sergeant, the troopers. To see their money got spent the way they meant it. I wondered if I'd find a feeling in me to be grateful to you. Any of you. No one's asking for any thanks, ma'am. No one expects any. Once I can forget, maybe I can be grateful. You're better off, Leven. Luther was a good man. I used to read all he sent me about the west. He saw the good of it. New and full of hope, that's how he said it. I never saw that in it, Captain. I never saw the good. Isn't all good, isn't all bad either. But you're better off back home reading about it. Well, I better be getting on the stage now. Safe journey to you, ma'am. Thank you, Captain. And I mean thank you. Goodbye, Mrs. Dennis. I'll set driver. He's in the saloon. You should feel right about things now, Gorse. You were the first to know she didn't belong here. I won't feel right till he settles, Captain. But how can he be now? I'ma can't touch him without Mrs. Dennis tells her story. She's been through enough. And how about him? Why, he had drawn time, plenty of time for what he'd done to her. Don't worry about it, Gorse. When I wait, Captain, you can't do it that way. I've seen you like this before, Captain. You'll kill him. I'll handle it, Gorse. You know what they do to you, sir? Killing him ain't worth that.  Maybe he'll wish I had killed him. Is he drunk? Not yet. In uniform? No. Still on leave. You give me five minutes emergency leave, just five minutes. You'll leave him be, Gorse. That's an order. Yes, sir. Over there, Captain. I see him. You stay here. But, Captain... That's an order, Gorse. Yes, sir. What? Captain Quince. Hello? Set your glass down, Flint. Not on orders just yet, Captain. Two more days of my leave coming to me. Set it down. Captain Quince got his rights, Captain. The saloon's not run by the Army. It is now. Clear everyone out of here, Barkeep. Now, you just wait a minute. Sergeant, clear the premises. Yes, sir. What is this? Don't know what you got in mind. I do. There's regulations on my side, Captain. I'm waiting to hear you say it isn't true, Flint. Set in your saber aside.  Don't make you less an officer. You can't lay a hand on me. There's regulations. I'm waiting, Flint.  I'll tell my story to the Major. You do that. He'll break you down to my size once I tell my story. You tell him, Flint, and tell it all, because I'll be there to see you don't leave any of it out. Don't come any closer. I've got every right to defend myself. You sure do. Put that chair down. I... I don't care who you... I'm just like you now, Flint. I got every right to defend myself. Your saloons looking kind of run down, Barkeep. Looks to me like it's due for some repairs. Yeah, it sounded like it. But what about the customer?  See, he's taken to the infirmary, Sergeant. Yes, sir. Is he... bad off, Captain? I'm not the best judge, of course. I'd say a good army doctor could get him on his feet again in... six months, maybe. That saloon brawling sure is punishing stuff, sir. It's deadly, Sergeant. But what about me, my saloon? Well, I'd watch who I let in there after this, Barkeep. That man had a bad temper. Who one of your chairs had me? Fort Laramie is produced and directed by Norman MacDonald and stars Raymond Burr as Lee Quince, Captain of Cavalry with Vic Perron as Sergeant Gorse. The script was specially written for Fort Laramie by Kathleen Height with sound patterns by Bill James and Ray Kemper, musical supervision by Amarigo Marino. Featured in the cast were Virginia Christine, John Daner and Barney Phillips, Jack Moyles his major digot, and Harry Bartell his Lieutenant Cybert's. Company tension dismissed. Next week, another transcribed story of the Northwest Frontier and the troopers who fought under Lee Quince, Captain of Cavalry. CBS Radio urges you to follow through to make sure you're registered to vote next November, no matter which candidate you prefer. You are lost in making a choice unless you're registered to vote in a national election. Are you sure you're registered? Are you sure the rest of the voters in your family are? Make sure today. Registration laws vary from state to state. Make sure you're in the book.


Bismillah ar-Rahman ar-Rahim al-hamdulillahi rabbil alameen. Wa salatu wa salam ala ashraf al-anbiya wal-mursaleen. Sayyidina Muhammad wa ala alihi wa sahrihi ajma'een. Allahumma al-limna ma yanfa'una wa nfa'na bima al-lamtana wa zidna il-mannafian wa ba'in. So last session we went over the nafs and the fact that the nafs refers to that part of us that drives us towards unhealthy choices and the idea that the nafs goes through stages. So there's a nafs al-amara, a nafs al-awama and a nafs al-mutma inna. And each stage has strategies to focus on to nudge to the next stage. So a nafs al-amara, what you wanna focus on doing is becoming aware of how the nafs drives us and what the strategies are and then start becoming aware of that and preparing for what are the things that we need to do in order to combat that. And then once you go from preparing to do that then you wanna go into a stage of just taking action. And that's when we're at a nafs al-awama where we're struggling against the nafs and we're actively introducing exercises and strategies not just any exercises and strategies but exercises and strategies that are adequate enough to suppress that nafs. So then what you do is, hold on one moment, I'm having some technical difficulties, I'm terrible with all of this stuff. Okay. And then what you do is you move from actively struggling against the nafs to a nafs al-mutma inna. This is the nafs that's achieved balance and is at peace. And then it's about just maintaining the changes that you've made. So when difficult situations arise leaning back on all the skills that we've learned and continuing to move forward. So the goal is not to just understand the stages but the goal is to understand the strategies to help us move through the stages. So first it's important to understand a nafs al-amara. So this is again, the part of us that discounts future rewards, focuses on the now, wants what it wants and it wants it now, immediate gratification and drives us to unhealthy choices. So everybody struggles with the different nafs. So some people, nafs drives them to overeat, over sleep, overlook, over speak, cannabis, pornography, different things for different people. So we all have more than one of these. The idea is to pick the habit that's causing the most dysfunction. Pick the habit that's causing the most dysfunction and then work on that, the most dysfunction in your family, your life, your future goals, your relationship with the law. So once you pick one, then it's important to realize that the nafs isn't driving you to these unhealthy choices all the time. So then the idea is to understand, well, how does the nafs work, the nafs al-amara? Is it, it's not constantly sending you this impulse, do this, do this, do this. It's dynamic. At times it's really strong and at times it's really weak. At times there's things that we can do to weaken it and there's things that if we neglect them, it strengthens it. So once we understand those things, then we can take control over how to strengthen and weaken the nafs. So what accounts for these differences? What are accounts for these differences? So when you look at how the nafs drives you, your environment is the major part of the battle. So imagine, for example, if you're trying to go on a diet and eat more healthily, imagine if you're at home alone around a lot of food versus being at the mustard where there's no food or being at the gym where people aren't sitting around eating a bag of chips, everybody's working, but you're at home, there's food all over the kitchen, there's food everywhere. Or if your nafs is driving you to look at things you don't wanna look at, imagine being home alone, screens all around versus being at the mustard or being at a different place. So the idea is to recognize that the environment is incredibly important. So when we talk about a nafs al-amara, we talked about the ayah in chapter 12, ayah 53, in the nafs al-amaratun besu. And so this was something that Yusuf al-alaihi salam said and was captured in the Quran for us to learn from. So what Yusuf al-alaihi salam was referring to when he said this that verily the nafs commands to evil or unhealthy choices, what he was referring to was a situation where he was being incessantly pursued by a powerful woman. So this is a surah, Yusuf, we don't have to go into the details. It's a beautiful surah and it's, encourage all of us to read it. But the point I wanna make was he was in her house, she locked the doors and what was his response? The one that is telling us about the nafs al-amara, what was his response to deal with a nafs al-amara? The first thing he tried to do is reason with her briefly and then once she escalated, once she was firm, she firmed her conviction, then he ran to leave the room to remove himself from the situation. And once gone, he resolved not to go back, even if that meant locking himself up. So the point being is that Yusuf al-alaihi salam was aware of how the nafs worked and to address the nafs, you have to address the environment you place the nafs in. Those are where the battle lines are. So the nafs will drive you to make bad choices and you have to keep it out of the environment that strengthens that drive. Another way to put it, to weaken that drive, you have to avoid certain situations or put yourself into certain situations. So in chapter 17, ayah 32, Allah says, la takrabu zina, don't even come close to zina. So fornication. So Allah says, don't do zina. He says, don't even come close to it. And when you look at the tafasir, like for example, tafasir ibn kathir, he says, this refers to those things that pressure you or trigger you towards zina. So don't even go close to zina. And similarly in surat al-Baghra, Allah says when talking about the story of Adam alaihi salam in jannah, don't even go, when he wasn't supposed to take of the tree, he says, don't even go close to the tree. That taqrabah had his shajara. So there's the tree and then you can almost create circles around it and larger circles and boundaries. So don't even come close to the tree. So this idea of keeping your nafs out of certain places is incredibly important in order to understand how to weaken the nafs. So this is geographical space. It's space in terms of time. So if it takes me five minutes to get to my addictive habit versus one minute to get to my addictive habit, then that time is gonna help reduce me from doing that. So getting, let's say, if it's smoking weed, getting the marijuana out of the house, but also getting like pipes and other things out of the house, because if I wanted to go back to it, now it's gonna take me, I can't just use it, it might take me a little bit longer to use it or getting phone numbers out of our cell phone, so on and so forth. Whatever barriers in terms of space, but also time, we can put up against our addictive habit you wanna do that, because what that's gonna do is give us the opportunity to maybe make a course change. And this includes digital space now, since everything can be, you can get everything at the snap of a finger. So whatever you need to do in order to make that happen, digitally, there's a lot of ways to do that. So what I wanna do is go into the text now, chapter five. So step three, becoming a self expert. So on page 84, it goes over it goes over becoming a self expert. And it talks about in order to become a self expert, that means getting an understanding of your triggers, of the range of situations, places that people and experiences that activated, activate your nefs or your addicted behavior or your addicted brain. These things that activate your nefs, your addicted brain, they're called triggers. This is page 84. When you encounter these triggers, they usually come as a sequence of experiences. So what it gives is a chain here. It starts with trigger. So that's a person placed a thing. Then that trigger leads to a thought. That thought leads to a craving. And that craving leads to engaging in the behavior and the reward from that. So, there's many components to this that if we're to intervene on them, we can disrupt that whole process. So you can interrupt the triggers by just staying away from certain people, people, places and things that are associated with their addictive habit. But once that trigger sets off that thought process, then we can intervene on the thoughts. And those are the strategies that we learn in the context of the process. That we learn in the coming chapters of this book. We can intervene on those thoughts. We can intervene on the cravings and then we can intervene in terms of the response as well. Because if the response is less rewarding, it starts to diminish its hold on us. And so we'll learn that as there are many components of cravings and it starts talking about how does a craving or an urge towards our addictive behavior happen? So some people it's just a thought process, like I need it or I can't handle these feelings without it. That it's important to self monitor. For other people, it's just a physical emotional feeling like a drive that comes up. But once you learn it, then you learn how to have an inner dialogue to yourself about it. So the first part is to become aware of it. Once you become aware of it, then you start to learn how to have an inner dialogue with it, which is basically talking back. But the important part is to have an awareness of it. And once you have those red flag thoughts, then you can identify those and intervene on it. So I'm gonna tell you a little bit about why it's important to have awareness of it. So we talked about this study in the past, but I'm gonna bring it up again. Dr. Childress showed that cocaine patients, and again, cocaine is just a strong reward. Anything that provides a reward can result in a habit. And if you continue to engage in that habit and reward, that habit becomes even more and more ingrained. So these researchers showed cocaine patients photos. So people who are addicted to cocaine, they showed them photos of triggers like crack pipes, chunks of cocaine. But here's the thing, they flashed these images for 33 milliseconds where so quickly that these patients couldn't be consciously aware of them.  So despite these people not even being consciously aware of what they saw, it's still activating and triggering the addictive brain. What's interesting is they bought these people back two days later and they did a different test. This time, instead of flashing the image quickly, they allowed them to see the image and let them digest it. So they looked at the images and they found that the ones that had the strongest brain response to unseen cues and the brain imaging, so the brain lit up very strongly to the triggers. They also had the strongest association with the visible cues. So whether you see it and register it or you just briefly see it and don't register it, you're not even aware, you can still be triggered by your environment, by things you see here. So when it comes to triggers, it can be helpful to start with the craving because you might just have a craving to engage in your habit without even realizing how it was triggered. So for many people, it's helpful to start with the craving. I get cravings at 7 p.m. at night every night and then work back, what are my triggers? Maybe it's free time. Maybe it's stress from a long day of work. Maybe it's other things, you're watching television usually when you watch TV or listen to music it's paired to substance use or your addictive habit. So once you recognize the cravings and the pattern of cravings that they happen at a certain time and place, then you can start reverse engineering and start thinking, well, what are the triggers then? And maybe I can break those triggers. So if you have trouble identifying what your triggers are, start with your cravings and start looking at where you might be having conscious or subconscious cravings. So they say this is a key component of becoming a self expert in the last paragraph of page 84. A key component of becoming a self expert is becoming aware of the kinds of things your nefs, your addictive brain will tell you to get you to engage in your addictive behavior. These irrational thoughts or these feelings are like red flag thoughts that we can intervene on and talk back to. Okay, so it goes on page 85 to triggers and urges and then we'll wrap up. So there are biological and psychological explanations for why you feel a desire to engage in your behavior, habit, your addictive behavior, physically when you're addicted to something even if it's screens, your mind and body become sort of dependent or habituated to that thing. So let's say cannabis, for example, when you get a steady dose of cannabis and you take that away abruptly after your body's been dependent on it, your brain just in order to reach some sort of balance is going to send you messages in order to replenish that chemical. But as your body adjusts to being away from your behavior, as your body becomes adjusted to it, you can still have what they're calling here. It might be oversimplification, but what they're calling here is psychological urges or cravings. You can have psychological urges and cravings. So here's the point. When drinking or using drugs, and this is the last point I'll make, when drinking or using drugs becomes associated or whatever your addictive habit is, when it becomes associated or linked with a certain situation, then those situations become triggers. It's like Pavlovian conditioning. You guys remember Pavlov's dogs? Okay, so basically Pavlov had an experiment with dogs. He showed them food. Food is a stimulus that has value and the dogs would salivate when they would see the food. But then he would pair it with a bell. The bell wouldn't stimulate anything within them. It was a neutral stimulus. But then the food was presented to them and associated with a bell. So the food would cause them to salivate. Like you can't force yourself to salivate. If I wanted to move my hand up right now, I'd say move my hand up and I'd move it up. If you wanted to salivate right now, you can't do it on command. Sure, maybe you can visualize food or a lemon or something like that. And then over a period of time, you can then salivate. But it's an automatic process that you can't voluntarily control in the same way you can move your hand. So that's what's so interesting about this. The dogs would see the food and they would salivate. And then the food being presented them was associated with a bell.  And then pretty soon they would remove the food and they would just ring the bell and the dogs would salivate. So here was the bell, which was initially something that was totally neutral. And now it's associated with an automatic response with them that they can't even consciously control. So they took this even further in another study. This was a really interesting study by Peter Holland. They did the same thing, but they did it with rats. So they would pair food with a sound. And so when the rats would hear the sound, they would expect food. But then they took it a step further, which is super interesting. What they did was now they taught these rats to push a lever to get food. So now it's not them passively getting food, they're learning how to push a lever to get food. They had a group that learned how to push a lever to get food. And then they had a group of rats that they habituated and gave them a significant amount of learning on how to push the lever and get food. Put that aside for a moment.  They'd wanna push the lever to get food. So when the sound was played that was associated with food, the laboratory rats now were triggered to push the lever for food. The point being is it's no longer that with the dogs that were passively salivating, with these laboratory rats, now when they played the trigger, it prompted them to action. So now we're seeing this experiment which shows that triggers can not only change your automatic thoughts and processes, it can also propel you into action. The final part of the study was interesting. They injected the rats with lithium chloride, which basically reduces their appetite. So now they killed the appetite of these laboratory rats. So you would think they would play the sound and trigger them and the laboratory rats would say, well, I'm not hungry, so why would I go push the lever to get food? What they found was this was true for the laboratory rats that were not trained significantly on pushing the lever. So in other words, when they killed the appetite for the laboratory rats, the ones that didn't have a habit of pushing the lever, didn't push the lever to get food because they didn't have an appetite. But the ones that developed a complex habit around pushing the lever, every time they heard the sound, these laboratory rats, despite not even wanting food, would push the lever. So in other words, we get to this point with our addictive behavior where sometimes we don't even wanna do it anymore, but we just do it anyway. And it's almost like, why are we even doing it? I'm not even getting the pleasure out of it or I don't wanna do it anymore. And this is where it's important to recognize what are our triggers that are leading up to that? And that's why when we talk about the process of disrupting complex habits and behaviors, it's important to recognize triggers, avoid them, limit our interaction with them and recognize that they're operating within us almost like an allergy. Like if I'm allergic to cats, if I went to a house with cats and I said, I really, really don't wanna get allergic to cats, it doesn't matter. It's gonna cause an allergic reaction within me without me even wanting it to happen. Same thing with the addicted brain. If we become habituated to a certain substance, if I go and do certain things, despite me really, really wanting it to not affect me, I have to recognize I now have created an allergy within myself that I have to account for, which means that there are certain people I might have to avoid, there are certain places that I have to avoid and there's certain things that I have to avoid. So, and then the most important thing is a lot of times people will say, well, I didn't go to a person, wasn't in a risky situation, but I still had a trigger. So how can you account for that? What's interesting is that, and this is really important and they talk about it on page 85 at the bottom, that there are many different triggers. So sure, there's people, places and things, but there's also emotional states that are triggers. So if we constantly pair our drug use or addictive habit, this holds true for pornography, this holds true for gambling and other behavioral habits, if we constantly pair our habit with a negative feeling, a negative emotional state, guess what? Now that when we have that negative emotional state, it's like a bell that triggers us to use drugs and alcohol or to engage in our addictive habit. So that's why it's important, not only to avoid our triggers, but also learn how to manage boredom, how to manage stress, how to manage negative habits and negative emotions so that we can start to disrupt the connection between those and our addictive behavior and start to strengthen the connection between those negative habits, I'm sorry, those negative emotions and other coping skills. That's why the name of the game in recovery is like working on your mind, your emotions, your feelings, your thoughts, your triggers, because this is how the addictive brain works. So once you understand the addictive brain, then there's sort of no circumventing how to fix it because nobody wants to go to groups, people don't wanna go to therapy, people don't wanna do like workbooks, look inwards, talk, like chart their cravings. Many people don't wanna do that naturally, but once they recognize how habits work, that it's not just me being a bad person that there's this rewiring that occurs in my brain because laboratory rats, nobody's gonna say this laboratory rat is morally reprehensible. They're not gonna say these laboratory rats are wrong or there's something wrong with their psychology. Rather what we'll say is that there's a process of learning that occurred that now we have to undo. So in the same way with the brain and addiction and the process of rewiring or undoing this requires these things like therapy groups, exercises, so on and so forth. So with that I'm just gonna pause and show we'll go into check-ins.


True love or true lies one thing you need to know about us is that we're a thrupple and we're all in a relationship together Catherine's my wife and Nicole is My girlfriend couple years into our relationship. We decided to open up our relationship I met Kathy through work and we met and went on a three-way date and Thomas and I had quite a strong connection the rest of history Close exciting inspirational Thomas is really kind of Unapologetic about who he is Nick is really analytical and understands people really well It's the dynamic we have as a as a group, you know We're a real team when we go into the world and Tom is just so laid-back. You know the guys like pretty much horizontal about everything We don't really have a game plan we we would like to normalize our Situation and normalize conversation around it. Yeah, the best thing about this He's been able to tell people that being in a thrupple is a thing hashtag trouble go


Felly, mae'n meddwl. Mae'n meddwl fel yma yn 2013. Felly, nhw'n gweld ymellafol o'r cyfnoddau a'r cyfrannu mygwysig. Mae'r cyfrannu mewn gwirionedd yn ei bwysig ar hyn o'r tîm. Felly, mae'n fwrdd ar ystyried. Mae'n ddweud y cwrs rydyn ni'n meddwl ar y ddechrau ar gael a'r ddau ganddiadau o'r cyfrannu mewn gwirionedd. Mae'r ddweud yw'n meddwl bod yw'r cyfrannu yn gallu yn ymgyrch i'w rhan o'r eu gennych. Mae'r pethau yn ar-dwybr gan ymarfer. Mae'r gwaith, ac yn y gallu'n mynd o'r ysgolwyddiadau yn ymgyrch i'r rhan o'r cyffredinol. Mae'n gweithio ar gyfer gwaith gynhyrch yn ymgyrch, mae'n gweithio ar gyfer gael gweithio'r gwaith, a wneud yma y rhan o'r cyffredinol. I troi'r gynhwys eich ffostion o'r moddog ar gyfer y gweithio a gyfath o amserol yma yn olaf yn ei wneud dod o'n sefydliol ar gyfer yw'r mewn gweld. Er cofnodd yn golygu y gallu amddangos arol yr owniau, nad y gallw'n golygu y gallwch ychydig ac yn adroddodd yn eithaf wybodaeth y cyfrifpo i ymddangos yn gydag yn meddwl yn ei ddweud yn hynodd argyrchu yng Nghymru ar gweithi. Now what I'm going to do today is to talk about some of the preliminary findings from our more quantitative approach to try and unpick this observation that we've found from our qualitative work. The conceptual framework that is going to underpin our work, or the work that I'm presenting today, draws very strongly on the new economics of labourSupermigration and the discussion around potential motives for remittance. The idea that remittances might be motivated by a number of factors which the literature broadly groups into these three strands. So remittances might be purely altruistic or they might represent some sort of relationship between the family that could be called enlightened self-interest. So, for example, a co-insurance arrangement. I'll send money home in the hope that if I need support from my family, they'll support me later. o'r ddweud o'r ffordd, felly rhai gan ddweud â'r hynny yn y cyd-fodol o'r awrcaf o'r sorg o'r cyfwysgol oedd eich gweithio o'r ffordd i'r ffordd o'r cyd-fodol. Yn gyfwysig, yna yw'r gweithio gyda'r dyma a'i gŵl ei ddweud yng Nghymru oherwydd y ffordd o'r ddechrau oherwydd yna'r ffordd o'r ddweud o'r ddweud o'r ddweud o'r ddweud o'r auturism through enlightened self-interest. It's very hard for us to imagine what this might look like in a kind of quantitative way. And the evidence is broadly suggestive that exchange or co-insurance mechanisms dominate altruism. But of course, because this is a very difficult phenomenon to really understand, the evidence on this should be regarded as a little bit suggestive rather than conclusive. Mae'n cymaint ei wneud yylod yw gwahoddiadau yn y Llyfrgell Fyrlus yn ôl hwnnw. Dylai'r holl ddataeth yn ei wneud o'r rhannu, ac rydym yn ei ddweud o'r ddiddordebio'i fod yr roeddfyrddwr.  In contrast, a study by Abrego looking at Salvadorian migrants in the U.S., has suggested that actually their families back home are better off if their migrant member is a woman, because the mother is more likely to be sending money home than the father. So, the evidence is a little bit mixed, and that's something we want to look at for the African context. Ac rwy'n clywed i eisiau i ddweud i ddweud i ddweud i modiwn Can we see any evidence in our data that maybe modives differ and can we or should we be ascribing this to different levels of altruism or is there something else going to go happening in this? So as an overview of the rest of my talk, I'm going to first of all spend a few minutes on data, on remittances and talking to you about what this data gap is under reporting, for example. I then going to introduce you very briefly to the surveys that we've been conducting and the Zimbabwe survey in particular. And then going to talk through how we model remittance decisions, talk you through a little bit on the technical aspect of our research, and then move on to results and discussion. I've kept this as quite a broad, hopefully accessible talk, I'm not going to be presenting lots and tables of regression output because I know this conference is trying to make our research more accessible to not just an economics audience. The one takeaway, I think, from this paper is that women, what we find is that although women, when we just look at the raw data it suggests that women do send less remittances home compared to men migrants. Once you control for characteristics of age, education, those kinds of characteristics, women are just as likely as men to be sending remittances home and to send the same amount. So we observe no difference in what women are sending home. What we do observe as a difference is how they choose to send their remittances home either in the form of cash or in kind, so goods that can be sent home like food and clothing. So that's the sort of takeaway and now I'll try and flesh that out. So first of all on the data gap, there's a number of elements to the data gap on remittances generally. We're all familiar with, we can understand very easily why estimates of cash remittances might be severely under reported because we're all familiar with the ways that people send money home to avoid paying official transaction costs and charges. Money is carried home by a number of ways and even cash transactions or financial transactions don't necessarily involve the direct transfer of cash across a border but can involve sophisticated arrangements where networks of people are involved paying bills for each other or transferring money on other people's behalf. A lot of this data is not reported by gender. So certainly the international remittances data, you won't see that broken down by gender. But the other aspect of the data gap is the data on in kind remittances. So these are goods and things like food, clothing, medicine, education supplies, those sorts of things that we also think are either not collected and when they are they're under reported. So although there are some surveys which I'll show you about that do collect this kind of data, they don't often report what the in kind remittances are. So we've done some work on these surveys but they also don't always capture the most common types of things that people are sending home and I'll elaborate on that in a few moments. So what one takeaway on this data gap for us is that we think that remittances might be underestimated by as much as between 10 and as much as 50% by not including in kind remittances. And the under reporting is particularly significant for women migrants. So let's look at some of the data on remittances that includes in kind remittances. This is data for two Pacific Islands and I'll speed up a bit I think. And this data for Fiji and Tonga suggests that in kind remittances are about 25% of total remittances. So there's some under reporting if we ignore the in kind. And then when we look at the African migration surveys, the World Bank African migration surveys, we can see again that remittances by women are much more likely to be in kind. So goods and these are significantly under reported and you can see by the height of the orange bar on the far right that the under reporting is more significant for women than it might be for men. This is the case of Kenya and Burkina Faso and we can see that the in kind remittances make up the gap once we include them in our estimate of total. These are our own calculations from the migration surveys. A slightly different scenario in Senegal and also in Nigeria where the in kind remittances don't make up the gap but we can still see the significant under reporting of remittances if we leave out in kind remittances. And then finally the South Africa survey which unfortunately doesn't report values and only shows what people are sending home rather than what the value of that is. But we can still see some evidence that women seem to exhibit some preference for sending goods home rather than cash. So let me move on to our research and what we're doing. So very briefly we've been collecting data in five countries in different regions of the world. We have a common approach to sampling and a common framework for key definitions and in the interest of time I will skip this now and I'll just say if you want to find out more about our data including if you want to use our data. It's all available at this web link which will be on these slides when you if you want to download the data at some point in the future would be very would be very happy for people to use our data. The Zimbabwe survey took place in 2015 around Easter time that year. We have data on around 1200 households from three different districts of the country. This comprises 18 villages. So we suggest that our data is representative of rural households in these three in these three districts but not nationally representative because our districts weren't chosen randomly. So therefore we don't claim national representation. We have from our households almost 1500 migrants amongst that. So our households are reporting on their migrants. So obviously there's issues around recall and information gaps between the migrant and the household. But we have data on nearly 1500 people very briefly on our sample size. So just two points to make on this. This table shows the number of households that fit into different categories of having migrants or not having migrants and shown for the three districts separately. So roughly 70% of our households have a migrant or at least one migrant. That percent is just slightly lower in Gwanda. So very close to the South African border because at the time we were doing our field work. South Africa was beginning a lot of repatriation of Zimbabwe migrants. So our field workers reported that households were very reluctant to tell us about their migrants because they were nervous that there may be repercussions for their migrants if they gave us too much information. So the percentage of households of migrants is a bit lower. But generally you can see that the two regions closer to South Africa have more international migrants than Hurungwe in the north which has fewer international ones. So let me return to remittances, in-kind remittances. So the World Bank Survey define in-kind remittances using that list on the left hand side of the screen. I've grouped them into broadly household appliances, business equipment, these sorts of things although that's my grouping. Obviously we could argue whether a sewing machine is a personal or a household or a business. But you can see these are quite large items that have significant economic value to them. But it doesn't include food or clothing. In another World Bank report looking at remittances from the Netherlands back to Surinam, they suggest that most of the parcels that are being sent home contain food or clothing. And the sort of larger items are much lower in frequency. So the African Migration Service are very, very useful resources. They are still underreporting on in-kind remittances if it's food and clothing that people are sending home more often. So when we designed our survey, we decided to focus on food and clothing and these smaller items. Resources for school, medicines, these sorts of things. And we can see that the bulk of in-kind remittances that people are sending home are indeed food and clothing. So these are the remittances that are sent home in the last 12 months. The cash value is reported by the household who is responding about the receipt of these remittances. And clearly they may be an issue about how you value in relative terms goods that might be purchased in South Africa compared to what their value is in Zimbabwe. That's something we're still looking at. But we can see that food and clothing are the most significant items being sent home. We can also see, using our data, that those in-kind remittances are proportionally much more significant for women. So again there's an underreporting if we only looked at cash. And we can see that if we look at the final graph on the right hand side that although the value of the in-kind remittances doesn't make up the gap completely it goes a substantial way to making up that gap. So on average it looks like women are sending less home. But of course our women migrants are not the same as our men migrants. They differ in a number of ways. They're younger, they're more likely to be international. More of our women migrants are in South Africa than staying within the country. So in a way you would think that maybe they'd be more likely to send remittances home by cash because they're having to send them across the border. But no, they're still sending them home in goods. Let me move on to our empirical approach. So we're estimating three different econometric models here. One on the incident, so just a very simple probability model of does a migrant send remittances home. We then model the amount, so the combined dollar value of cash and in-kind remittances. And then we look at the mix of remittances, so the percentage of total that is cash. I've put an equation up there which just puts that in mathematical terms for those of us who like to see an equation to understand a model. So we use gender, we use a range of other characteristics of the migrant and of the household that they've come from. We cluster our observations at the household level because of that unobserved heterogeneity across households and shared characteristics within households of different members. We also make a first attempt at tackling the selection bias that might occur in models two and three where we're looking at amounts and the mix because obviously this data is only available for people who are actually sending money home or goods home. So we use a Tobit model as our first attempt to deal with selection bias issues. I'm not going to put any tables of regression results up. The paper is linked already online so you're very welcome to read it in more detail. I thought I'd try and present the results in a slightly more accessible way. So not trying to put too many numbers on a screen. So this is what we observe from estimating the full model that I just showed you as an equation. So I've got all of the characteristics of the migrant and their household included. So when we control for all of these characteristics we find that there's no difference in the probability of sending remittances home between men and women. No differences in the amounts that they're sending home. But a statistically significant and not a particularly small difference in terms of magnitude in the mix. So we observe that after we control for characteristics that we think might relate to earning potential at the destination we find that women are just as likely to send money home, remittances home, to send similar amounts in value, but they are 12.5 percentage points less likely. Sorry, the percentage of cash that they sent home is 12.5 percentage points lower than it is for men. So that's quite a significant difference. So this suggests then that this idea that women remit less than men needs to be looked at not just for Zimbabwe, but for other countries as well. And we may be underestimating the value of remittances that are flowing between countries or between migrants and their households. I want to return to some of the ideas that I talked earlier about, about motives for remittances. I've got five minutes left. So I've summarised here some of the results we've got from our econometric work. And I've just pulled out some of the sort of themes that have emerged from that work. Let me first of all talk about the exchange hypothesis idea that I mentioned earlier. So this is the idea that migrants are sending remittances home in exchange for something that they're going to receive back from the family. So it might be inheritance. It may be part of a contractual arrangement about looking after children, for example. And there's some evidence that men are more likely to be following these exchange motives than women. So there's a number of points that I can direct you to. So, for example, if we look at our results on household wealth, so these are fixed, tangible assets that we have data on, we find that there is a positive correlation between how much men are sending home and the value of these assets that their households have. But we find no link for women. Another possible evidence for exchange is if we look at remittance decay. So if we look at the time away that the migrant has been from the household, we see that the longer the migrant has been away, the less likely they are to send money home. And also, the smaller the amount. But this only applies to men. There's no change over time, over that time profile for women. Another possible exchange or evidence for exchange might come in our results on dependent children. So we find that if men have dependent children left behind in the household, they send more remittances home. Whereas it doesn't seem to affect the amount of remittances that women are sending home. So there seems to be some evidence for exchange motives for our male migrants. But we don't seem to find any strong evidence for exchange for our women migrants. So that might lead us to think, well, maybe women are just so altruistic that they send money home regardless. I think that would be a jumping the gun a little bit. I think we would find it hard to think that women are more altruistic. Why should women be more altruistic than men? So we'd like to suggest some alternative interpretations of our results. So while we do find some evidence of exchange for men, we can't necessarily include that the absence of that evidence means altruism is the dominant motive for female remittances. And we think it's important to look at the context that remittances are taking place in. So this is what we plan to do in our follow-up work, is to try and understand institutions that might influence whether or not people send remittances home and might also influence what they send home, whether it's goods or cash. So, for example, in the Zimbabwean context, traditional inheritance practices favour men and sons and older sons compared to younger sons and also sons of higher order, higher status wives than lower status wives. So men may have a stronger incentive to send cash because that's going to be invested, hopefully, in the household assets, in the household business, which will be inherited in part, at least, by the man. There may also be an element of control. There may be gendered relationships within the household, which mean that male migrants have more control over what their remittances are used for, and that might not apply to such an extent to women. This might also reflect some differences in ethnicity and practices of inheritance that exist between different ethnic groups within our sample, which we're researching at the moment. This element of control might also reflect a preference for women to send things home in kind, so actual goods that have a specific purpose by a specific person in the family. So if you send baby clothes home, the only person that can use them unless they're sold is the baby in the household. Similarly, food or education supplies, those sorts of things are going to be consumed within the household. So there may be a control issue, and that's why women are preferring to send food and clothing. So we plan to try and unpack the household and look at relationships between migrants and other members in the family. The results might also reflect income sharing practices. There's a lot of literature that looks at the way incomes are not necessarily fully pooled within rural communities, but certainly shared to a certain extent, and a lot of pressure on families to contribute towards community level activities. I'm going to move on to just one last slide, if I may, on generational norms as well. So we observe in our data that older migrants are more likely to be sending money home, and we think this supports some of the observations we made in the field four years ago. Talking to older people, they seemed to have a stronger sense of responsibility towards their families talking about sending money home, whereas younger people seem to see their life, their future outside of Zimbabwe, so they had less incentive to send money home. I'll wrap now. Just with a couple of conclusions to take away, which I won't repeat them all. I'll move on to the last one about policy implications. So why does this matter? So one is that clearly if we ignore in-kind remittances, we're ignoring the contribution or part of the contribution that women make to rural economies and to household economies in rural areas. It raises questions about what might happen to remittance flows if, say, transaction charges come down. They are notoriously high in Africa. Will that change what people send home if the reason they're not sending cash is not because of transaction charges but because of other issues around institutions like inheritance, marriage, income pooling? It may have similar implications for who might contribute to a diaspora bond if, say, the projects that are funded by a diaspora bond don't necessarily concur with the priorities of the migrants. That's all. Thank you very much.


Have you ever noticed how stepping into a shopping mall instantly triggers an almost irresistible urge to buy more than you planned? It's as if you are hypnotized and can't help yourself. And by the time you return home, bags in hand, the spell breaks, and buyer's remorse sets in, you start to regret. It's not a coincidence.  So you might just be wandering around shopping, right? And it would just hit you that the places with the nice sounds are the ones you hung around more. And that's what these stores are banking on. They call it dwell time. Stick around longer and you're likely to buy more. It's like hanging out at a barbershop. Stay long enough and you'll end up getting a haircut. But here's the thing. We watch what we see, right? We choose what to look at. But our ears? They don't get a break. They're always on, taking in everything around us. And sound affects us in so many ways.


oh gosh that is hot oh man oh no did Kobe die as well oh no this is so bad the two-in-one fight oh oh chat this is I hope you're enjoying this content a few months ago I made a new pirate 101 character but every time I died I would have to drink hot sauce if you like this content you should consider subscribing as it helps me and also you get notified every time I post a new video anyway enjoy the video did you choose your name as yeah wow isn't that crazy I added a fancy last name but I'm so excited to actually be able to like you know have my name imagine having your own name pirate or was that would be crazy couldn't be me ho ho ho here we go let's do this this is the first time I've ever played Buckingham actually not really but technically yes oh Aurora Hawkins I didn't notice you that's a fun that's pretty cool right look at this we have my friend here we are playing together tutorial as well so I don't know how to do I don't know what to do I'm sure it'll be fine right let's talk to captain every and start our adventure every death I need to take a teaspoon a teaspoon of um hot sauce hopefully I don't die we will see look at me very much out of my element it's fine you'll pick it up easy yeah but you should probably use your um usually I use my super attacks right at the start just to give as much damage as possible really quickly I think everybody did right level two we have Bonnie Ann look at that fantastic fun fact those this is how you start the game guys you need to change all of the settings first pretty cool luckily we haven't died yet I am very tempted to see what the hot sauce tastes like though I'm really tempted but also I know probably not the best idea yet not the best nearby no I'm I'm on I'm on I'm on hard mode not easy mode we ain't have no I'm on hard mode I only play games on hard mode I asked Rose like an hour ago if she wanted to play fire it with me and she's like maybe and then I'm like well what class do you want and and she's like well I want to be a cowboy yeah so I want to gun class exactly her goal is to be a cowboy so we're going to let her be a cowboy hey do you like what I look like what do you rate out of ten wait I'm trying to put on clothes okay put your clothes on don't worry I am watching okay I think you look very very nice I feel like the green brings out the color of your eyes oh that's cute okay thank you I'll give you I'll give you I'll give you this just because I'm feeling money on it no I've already got I got I got lots of crowns okay don't worry about it don't worry about it we can be panda bros look we're panda bros look at this look at this I wanted this so bad I know that's why I said imagine opening a pack for this mountain when you can just buy it straight up okay on it hold packs where this is rare get out of here that's the only good thing about pirate is the updates have just been mounts from horde packs and whiz so if you don't have them in whiz you can get them in pirate and feel good about yourself I don't understand this plug though I don't understand why it keeps going in further when it's meant to be like raising to let the water out they're dying that's tick tick tick tick just died tick tock just died guys but basically there were a couple streamers who got different codes because they came in a they didn't put their order in straight away so they were in a second batch and their mount codes gave the person who redeemed it three random permanent mounts and was just random permanent mounts but in words not in pirate and three of them which was a slight oopsie daisy but yeah don't worry that was resolved and they get to keep their free three random mounts but yeah it was slightly funny unfortunately mine aren't broken I know you would love free different mounts for free unfortunately I can only offer one so yeah slightly unfortunate all broomsticks imagine that that would be so bad apparently they were just random like it was completely random which free which three permanent mounts you got so it could be any I think we might die here oh no where you might die you're getting yeah I'm getting absolutely bombarded these you are one step away from me God yeah I am it happens it'd be like that or so it's okay I'm at full health I'm just a champion guys I'm just so good at the game I'm at full health who needs to live when you can die you know right source time first first first time we're gonna see how painful this is that smells pretty bad pretty bad okay that's a lot of sauce geez I would show you but it might spill it's quite liquidy it's quite runny it's been in my hot room all day so we're not doing shots I decided I'm not trying to die today we're just doing spin not spin foods spoonfuls oh gosh that is hot oh man oh no did Kobe die as well oh no this is so bad the two in one fight oh oh chat this is I hope you're enjoying this one this is I pulled the stream on my phone just as well I'm not knowing shots of this pain this is pain oh my gosh this is pain and suffering I'm getting a headache ouch it's definitely not terrible I got the hiccups oh no level four whoa nice let's vengeance wow vengeance at level four wow that's crazy that's crazy I did not realize that hey look it's my favorite friend Peter Quint lovely I love Peter Quint he's amazing he is my best friend he used to stay he used to not leave on round one and you used to be able to kill him or kill everybody else before he fled which is crazy so the fight would instantly finish basically it was kind of funny and then they made it so he he left on round one quite sad don't you actually once killed rat but I think I did that on my witch doctor and I was like yes I'm so good at he will never ever be able to be fought again I was wrong but it was funny but it was lovely lovely we got the wandering a grouper sounds bad sounds really bad yeah I don't like the ship's name the ship's name is really sauce what kind of hot sauce we have kaitaya fire which is a New Zealand hot sauce because I'm from New Zealand it was the only one that I could really find like really easy I wasn't really looking too much but that was the first one I saw and I'm like you know what that sounds really cool I also have curry paste as well in case the hot sauce wasn't bad enough I also have curry paste but we're not doing that today maybe maybe another time