Episode number 101. I am devoting to James Tippre Jr aka Alice B. Sheldon. When people talk about women in science fiction, they tend to talk about current stuff like Harry Potter and the Mockingjay stuff, or they'll talk about Octavia Butler or Margaret Atwood, which is fine, but we're talking about classic science fiction authors here and you can't get more classic than James Tippre Jr. This is one of the authors that revolutionized modern science fiction in the 1970s and she started her career after the age of 50. Next time someone asks you about where to find women authors in science fiction, introduce them to this book.  You can support 30 Seconds Sci-Fi and my other projects by becoming a patron. There's a link in the description below. And visit the 30 Seconds Sci-Fi Tumblr, that's my headquarters. In addition to my videos, I publish links and updates there every day.


I'm very happy to be here, I thank the organizers for the invitation. So I will be talking about taking the localization results and trying to learn something from holography about these results. So this is work I've been learning with my friends and collaborator, Jeremías, which is a PhD student who has finished, Diego Correa, who is here, Alberto Faraghi-Leo Vimal, who is a student of Leo and Diego Trancanelli. Okay, so what I will be talking about is taking these localization results for these vessel functions that currently appears in all the talks about Wilson loops. This is a gauge theory result. This is something that you may know nothing about holography and compute. And then Malda comes, tells you that there is a conjecture, and if this exists, then you would like to reproduce this result, a strong coupling from string theory computations. So this is what I will be talking about and telling you about the issue. So the two sides of the, this is, I will be talking most, I will be talking completely in N equal 4, but this is something that can be done in N equal 4 or in N equal 6 where the two sides of the correspondence are precisely defined. So in this way we will see the intricacies that appear when trying to get a number and make it match. So I will be summarizing just a transparency on the Suzy localization, then I will make a summary of the different Wilson loops that appears in the context of these gauge theories. Then Malda comes and tells you if you have something in the gauge theory, what is the relation to string theory? So you have to know the parameters, then expand, and then see what we should do in the string theory side and then what is the outcome of all this that we've been working on. Okay, so exact results in any field theory are rare things. We usually learn perturbative computations, so it's not common to have an exact result in all the parameters of our theory. This is unusual, but if you have enough symmetry, you may be able to compute quantities in an exact form and this is what happens in equal 4 and in equal 6, and mainly there have been two techniques to obtain exact results. These are integrability, which has already been mentioned, and localization. Integrability typically works at the planar level, but there have been recent work by the Derobiere collaborators working beyond the planar. These are like two situations where integrability you can compute for any operator, but you have to be at the leading order in N, but localization allows you to compute for any N, but only for sushi objects, so depending on what you want to do, what kind of exact results you want, you may use one or the other, or maybe combine them, I don't know. But we will be mainly discussing localization with relates to supersymmetry and supersymmetric objects that you can compute by the techniques that you may know because you are experts and have been lectured last week in very nice talks here. So I will start talking about the observables we want to compute. So this is gauge theory, you know nothing about holography. You are given a Lagrangian, you learn a technique to compute the exact things for this Lagrangian, and there are particular observables that can also be computed exactly. Well, in particular, for the N equal 4, there is this Wilso loop called Maldacena Wilso loop. It's the Wilso loop we are used to, that Diego was talking this morning, in the sushi context we have to add some coupling to the scalars in order for this to preserve some supersymmetry. So when you compute the vacuum expectation value of this object is a quantity that depends on say two curves, the curves in the space time where you, the curve of the loop you are drawing in the space time, and also due to the coupling to the scalars you have to tell me along the curve, how does the scalar couples, how does the curve couple to the scalars in the N equal 4? I think we all know, but here you have six scalars. This X prime is here to preserve diphomorphous invariance. So C is the curve on the space time. It can be time-like, space-like, null. You may need to add some eyes here. For example, for a null line, this is supersymmetric without adding these. N is what is called internal space, is how the curve couples to the scalars along the curve. And this can be computed in many representations. I will be talking mostly about the fundamental representation, which is for which this object has a representation in terms of a string as Diego was telling this morning. So, okay, here these are all on the adjoint, but being in the adjoint, they are expanded in generator. The generator can be put in any representation. So this is also a quantity that depends on the representation. Super symmetry demands that then this N, which in principle is something in R6, should be on the five-sphere, and there is a particular relation between the curve and the internal space vector that has to be satisfied in order for this to be supersymmetric. This has been worked on by a lot of people. Nadab has made a lot of work along these lines. Maldacena, Sujon Ray, sorry that I forgot to add him. Well, these guys are here. Okay, so now what is the simplest Wilson loop you can look for, straight line, okay?  This was nicely explained last week. You can do perturbative computation. There is a combined propagator. Nadab was talking about this combined propagator this morning for the straight line, this propagator vanishes, so the straight Wilson line has zero corrections and the vacuum expectation value is just one. This is independent of coupling constant, rank of the gauge group or representation. The straight line preserves one half supersymmetry, this is jargon. This means that preserves 16 of the 32 supersymmetry then equal four has. Okay, so perturbative is a rise in the cancellation between gauge and scalar propagators. As Diego Trancanelli was telling us last week, when we pick the circle and the vector coupling to the scalar is a constant, this is related to what Nadab was saying that he put phi 1 only in the coupling, in the autonomy of the Wilson loop he was computing. The Wilson loops is still one half VPS preserves 16, but now the answer is non-trivial and gives you this Laguerre polynomial. This was conjectured originally by Erikson Semenos and Sarembro doing perturbative computations as Diego was talking us last week. The vertices cancel, so they conjectured that the vacuum expect, this operator should be given by a matrix model, Nadab and Gross, they worked at the planar level, Nadab and Gross generalized this to the non-planar for any n, conjectured, obtained this Laguerre for the Gaussian matrix model and then Pestum with the localization technique proved that what Nadab and Gross were conjecturing and Semenos was purissimo. Okay, so once you have this, this is a very nice result because this is exact in lambda and in n, so now you can expand it. Since this is an exact result and now we are having the Maldacena conjecture in our minds, we can expand it at large lambda and we can expand it in large n and try to see what happens. If we expand these Laguerres, we obtain a series, we expand these Laguerres in one over n, we obtain this series, this would be the leading piece, this would be subleading in n, this will be given, say, by the team Pest. Okay, this is one over n, then when I explain how this is related to string wall sheets, oops, was it me? Maybe it's because of the power. Okay, I will stay here in case. No, maybe it has a turn off after two minutes of this. Well, okay, so this will be related to a disk topology, a disk with a handle, a disk with two handles, et cetera. We will be mainly discussing this, that will be the disk topology, which is the leading contribution in the string topology, in the string topology's expansion, so this can be expanded in this, in different topologies and then we can expand this at large n and we obtain this. What we would be aiming to reproduce is these numbers, from a string theory point of view. Okay, so here you have all these. Well, Diego said this last week, this result arises from, and it's similar to what Diego Correa was saying, that the summation of ladder diagrams gives you these expressions. This is a one-half and now you can put an additional parameter on to the Wilson loops and these are these one-quarter VPS, eight suces, and this corresponds to couple, non-trivial, to the scalars around the curve in internal space. So when you put theta zero equal to zero, everything vanishes and this is a fixed point. When you take a non-trivial theta zero, this is a curve inside the S5. This is a generalized Wilson loop, preserved some supersymmetries, another conjecture in 2006, I think, that the result for this Wilson loop with this particular coupling was just the same as before this, but replacing lambda by lambda cos square theta. This was checked by perturbative computations. Then what Nada was saying this morning, Pestum did some localization also for this Wilson loop, but piece was not completely, as far as I understand, not completely fixed, but if you suppose that this determinant, instant on determinant, were one, everything seemed consistent with this conjecture. So we have the line, the circle one-half, and the circle one-quarter. In particular, there's a particular limit for also for this Wilson loop that amounts to take theta zero to the equator, and if you take theta zero to the equator, you may see that this is going to give you one, and this turns out to be also an interesting limit. Okay, that was gauge theory. Then Malda comes and tells you, okay, if you have n equal to four super young mills, and you have, this should be dual to type 2b, in n equal to 4 you have gauge coupling, range of the gauge group, the natural parameter is the tuft coupling. Why? Because if you make this change of parameters, and you re-express everything in terms of lambda and one over lambda, this naturally decomposes all the quantities you want to compute in this gauge theory in terms of planar and non-planar diagrams, and this naturally maps to the topological expansion of the string. And on the string side, one writes the Polyaco action, one has the Diego was saying this morning, one over alpha prime, you also have the target space metric, the target space metric depends, has an R square because it's the size of the, this comes out of the action, so you get an effective tension being L square over alpha prime, and this is the relation. These are the gauge theory parameters, and they relate to the string theory parameters in this way. So now that I have an exact expression in gauge theory, the natural thing to do is to re-express it in terms of string parameters, see what is the perturbative limit I can take in strings and expand in this appropriate limit and try too much. So then you go to the string theory side, you, the string theory side, as I was saying, you have the target space, this string tension, R square comes out, so the natural thing to do in the string side is to make a semi-classical expansion. The role of H bar is going to be played by this effective tension, so H bar going to zero, this, this is very big, so I have to take large lambda, large lambda will allow to make classical plus fluctuations over classical, over classical worksheet, and this is what we are going to do now. We are going to keep n equal infinity, that amounts to what we are going to say, not to consider handles on the on the on the worksheet, and the remaining piece I have to tell you is what is a Wilson loop from the string theory point of view. The Wilson loop has a curve, as Diego was saying, the worksheet has to end on this curve. So this is the problem you have to solve, and depending on the curve you choose to parallel lines, a cask, a circle, a circle, you have different worksheets in the bulk. I stolen this from many different papers. This is from Valentina Forini, this is from Nadab, this is from the internet, this is from Sarembro, and this is from Eduardo Vesco Vitesis. So in the end what you have to do is compute, in technical words, the discamplet of the type 2 super string with Ramon-Ramon flexing with a precise contour attached to the boundary. So now you have all the pieces. So now take the localization results for the one half, for the one quarter, and if you write them down you will see different pieces. This is the leading, now you're supposed to expand that large lambda because in the large lambda you're expect to be able to reproduce this using string theory computations. You find different terms. This is the leading, sub-leading, sub-sub-leading, sub-sub-sub-leading. If this is h-bar, what is the meaning of all these terms? This is the classical thing. This logarithm we know. We go to Coleman Instantons and he says, when you see a logarithm of h-bar this has to do with zero modes. So this kind of expected to be related to some zero modes and these numbers should be the value of the determinants from a quantum theory boundary view. So now we would like to see how this kind of, we would like to reproduce this minus three halves and this one half log of two pi by computing determinants. Well okay this is what he said. Here the logarithm and this three here of, this precisely, this one half logarithm of square root of lambda, this is precisely amounts, if you go to all the numerology, this amounts to having three zero modes for some determinant. Nadab and Drucker suggested that these three was coming from zeros of the Fadeye Popov gauge fixing determinant in the string, in the string diff of gauge fixing. Okay you go to chapter two of Polchenki where he talks about this. So in order not to deal with this what, okay this work I will be talking about this work I've been done with Leo, the collaborators and another group of Italian guys working also on computing, on trying to compute this. In order to forget about the log of lambda and Sarene as well you compute this quotient. If you compute these quotients if this is topological it's not going to be there so you don't care. So if you compute the quotient of these two things and you trust on the fact that this is going to be topological this is the natural thing you would like to reproduce. Okay so you will have a leading, this will be the quotient of the say classical surfaces and this should come from the determinants of the fluctuating of the fluctuating fields of the string action around a classical solution. You mean this? The argument is that the h-bar is outside the action so the logarithms of h-bar the cost theta is coming from something that has to do with the worksheet that if you if you believe in this because the argument was that the Faye Popo, Riemann, Rochtheorem have three for the disk it's h-bar. No it showed up in the when you when you see the expression it came out from there but it's it has to come from the determinant. You will see when we compute now the determinants you will see that it shows up by computing the determinants. It's not solved the problem I will go on to that. Okay so I think that now it I well okay okay so what is the string partition function? This is a string partition function typically you will have a normalizing factor that you don't know much what is. If you expand to second order you will have the classical action, the determinants, the Faye Popo. This is all we have. Oops just for not to vanish. Okay so this is typical quantum field theory perturbation theory. This is all the stuff you have inside. Nadab's argument with with Gros was that this Faye Popo that you go and see what is the form of this operator it's a p-p dagger related to the fixing of the D-Pho plus by then this that they were saying Riemann-Roch disk the disk has three conformal key vectors. These three conformal key vectors of that operator correspond to the three zero mode correspond to the three halves of the logarithm of square root of lambda that I was referring to and this is topological. If I question this with a with a similar topological string I forget. Okay so now I will go to the details. Any question? Because I was asking this the argument it's a fancy argument because when you go to the type 2a in abjm context it doesn't show up to have the same kind of three halves although you have a disk topology. So it's not clear that the argument is true or not. No no he was saying the three halves of the log if I if I trust the three halves of the log why don't you I say that. Okay so now we go to the solution we want to find a solution which is a circle on the S5 a circle on the configuration space this is at the boundary of ADS we write ADS5 process 5 if you are lucky you choose a nice parametrization of ADS we did this this is embedding so the embedding corresponds to setting a place in the string at the u equal to zero surface so this is collapsed u equal to zero this is one this is not there and it's embedding all these hyperbolic slides on ADS5 and then in for the five sphere we put a non-trivial profile on this angle this angle this three sphere is fibered over this angle you plug everything into the machine you find the classical solution this is the solution okay so rho is like a sigma coordinate the angles are tau this is wrapping all the surface and it's also this tau at the same time you are wrapping here the angle on the on the on the ADS you are moving on this on this angle here on the five sphere note that we have put a fixed and we sit at a fixed point inside this three sphere okay due to the homogeneity of the s3 we expect these these angles the point at which we are sitting on the three spheres nothing should depend on that so now we have the string solution this can be shown to to be supersymmetric looking at the supersymmetries of the type to be green schwarz action so now what we have to do is to compute the on shell action ah okay before this well or no at the same time okay so if you have a surface you look at the induced metric on the surface by when you you put it inside the ADS what is the induced metric for this embedding the induced metrics are asymptotic to ADS to this is in correspondence with the symmetries we expect that they will salute should have this can be analyzed also in a in terms of symmetries I won't talk about that we did that in in our papers but the important fact I want to stress is that the induced metric can be written as an ADS to with a conformal factor and this conformal factor as you go to the boundary goes to one so it's like having ADS to the boundary and then a deformation inside a smooth conformal factor which deforms ADS to inside so this is the geometry it's a disc if it's a disc it's it has three conformal green vectors no matter what is the theta zero this theta zero I'm placing here it's just a boundary condition which is this theta zero is the theta zero which is supposed to be related to the gauge theory theta zero which was parameterizing the the circle inside the five sphere we can compute the on shell action put this over here of course if the surface extends all the way to to the boundary it will have infinite area this is very well understood how to regularize this you essentially drop away this number and you end up with this negative area after regularization now you go here e to the action on shell minus minus gives you a plus and you find that the leading contribution matches this thing that you have here okay in some way we have found a worksheet that has the same the same supersymmetries than the gauge theory side you can match the supers you can you can make a matching between the gauge theory supersymmetries and the bulk supersymmetries and you can check both present the same supersymmetries it has the same area so now we would like to do the sub leading computation this is one quarter the the generic ones louder no they if you take a tita set equal to zero no they are measured with this what do you mean the half bps in this in this drawing means a point here above it's a point and it doesn't move so it's a mu and five six just a single one without moving it's here you put zero theta is constant all the way in row doesn't change tita zero since since i am comparing between the okay okay okay just just to have an intuition on on these geometries as samir was saying the one half bps corresponds to tt igual a zero the geometry is precisely a ds2 when it's precisely a ds2 a ds2 it has sl2r symmetry the three conformal in this particular case are three killin vectors okay if you go to a particular coordinate system you can you can draw them these are the three killin vectors one this is the d tita the angular and these are the other two okay these notice that the these these killin vectors they are killin vectors which their action on the on the worksheet leaves the boundary invariant but the boundary moves okay it points on the boundary to points on the boundary and then the one quarter the particular i was saying the equator the equatorial one quarter when you put this angle to the equator of ds5 well it has this particular thing now only one killin vector survives which is dd5 two conformal killings but something interesting happened in this case and that's why i was mentioning because in this case these classical parameters that you are expected to give from a boundary point of view become zero modes the reason for these parameters to become zero mode is that when you go to the equator when you place the boundary conditions the boundary conditions at the boundary for the for the worksheet on the on the internal sphere on the on the internal space you see that if theta is equal to pi over two these cos cancels so you don't have to give the boundary conditions for this is similar to the king in one plus one you put going to the two to the two back you are and suddenly the solution a typical solution in a second-order differential equation is i give you two boundary conditions the solution is unique okay except when you have zero modes the king sees you put the two on the recondition and there remains the position of the king this is a similar thing so we expect to have zero modes on the bosonic related to the existence of this feature for tt-walla pi over two and this is a serenbo-quatorial loops let's go to the fluctuations so now we want to expand around this worksheet compute the operators representing the expansion and then compute their determinants okay this is there's a very nice formalism to do these fluctuations are properly defined on tangent space the original the original formalism for this was also developed by nadab, druker and sightling and now you might have to do gauge fixing since we are at second order it can it is kind of irrelevant whether you do an ambugotto or you do poliaco if you do an ambugotto you go to static gauge you look for the faie popo this gives you a trivial faie popo determinant and you end up with eight physical bosons and fermions operators this is oh sorry i should have added here also the italiens i put uh no here i put them okay the italiens the italian group or you can go to a poliaco go to a conformal gauge if you go to a conformal gauge you will find out the faie popo but the faie popo is going to cancel uh this is also uh an assumption which has been worked out you looked at the faie popo determinant and you look at the longitudinal fluctuations and they are exactly the same operator so you say they cancel they cancel but the boundary conditions not being the same doesn't mean that they should cancel so assuming that they cancel you end up with the eight and eight and the operators we found were similar were the same as these italian guys found and then the kappa symmetry fixing gives a trivial contribution so we don't care okay so now we want to compute a functional determinants if you want to compute a functional determinant you need a differential operator boundary conditions and an inner product the inner product is going to say to you which which is the precise operator because once you have fluctuated you you write down this this is ambiguous if i put an m here an arbitrary function here and here so it's not clear what is the operator i am diagonalizing uh until i give you what is the precise measure on which i will uh auto analyze the ahem functions good so there's an important recurring theorem that appears every time in two dimensions which is this what happens if i change them how these two determinants related by a by rescaling how do they relate okay there is a formula short 79 which is nothing but hand-wavingly the vile anomaly if you interpret parts you may see that this is the typical eluville mode so this is important because um as you may guess in the end we will make this kind of vile conformal transformations and they will vanish because the string is supersymmetric and conformally variant uh okay so this is one piece of a ingredient you need to to know in order to compute the determinants because now i'm going to compute the determinants so you go you plug the formalism of fluctuating strings and you end up with a bunch of operators fermionic and bosonic ones fermionic this is the one quarter so it's the deformed ads2 so you you you can write them in this way in this particular induced metric i am assuming that i use i am using as a measure the induced metric on the worksheet so this is the the operators one finds they are kind of la la plus operators with gauge fields on a deformed ad asymptotic ads2 space okay this is the details it is important to say that the gauge field is smooth it collapses smooth at the center of the disk it vanishes in the vps limit these are okay originally the the first guy who nadab i think in in in their paper with gross and sitling computed this operator then martin kruczynski and tirsiu try to evaluate this for the one half vps and the italian sanas were computed this operator for the one quarter and we try to go on and try to compute the determinants another important thing to say that the fermions have chiral and non-chiral masses and the this non-chiral vanishes in the one half vps limit so these operators in the one half vps limit are just a free fermion and ads2 with a chiral mass and la plus operator and ads2 good okay so we would like to reproduce this term by computing the determinants these determinants we can do two things we can scale the induced metric to flat space because in two dimensions every metric is conformally flat so we can write write it as a these operators as if they were in flat space or we can use a set of functions we have done both both tricks this is kruczynski tirsiu the italian group us and this is sarembo recently this year drucker gross cycling buhbinder cycling or any cycling beskovi okay i don't know what this is ah this is us because it has two surnames so i put the second surname in lower case sorry okay so we have let's let's do the first idea to scale the metric to flat space okay so this is induced metric take everything out and write it as a flat and forget about the conformal factor you cannot do this in principle not because the conformal factor i've already showed a formula of shorts that shows that there there should be an additional piece okay but when you when you see the contribution of bosons and fermions everything cancels so yeah i can do it okay bosons and fermions the different contributions coming from this conformal factor goes away how do i compute the determinants when i write them as if they were in flat space well there's a well-known technique coloman did everything in the 70s because if you go to appendix of the uses of instanton this is already said they are how to compute determinants in terms of he doesn't call him call it gelfand yaglom but it's this trick of looking for an homogeneous solution of the operator you want to compute the determinant with particular boundary conditions this is for 1d determinants we are in a 2d situation we cannot use this yes we can if we define the operator as a sum over the Fourier modes okay this is a lot of delicate issues in order to see whether this is convergent or not okay this is okay this is what the italians and us did in in 2016 so we we we cope with this with these things and we ended up with the result we want to obtain plus an additional reminder okay it's important to say that the potential potentially divergence in the Fourier modes cancels and this is what we did look into the sucy multiplet so this is correct so we are having a thing that is worrisome in the end this will turn out to be related to the fact that we have changed topology from this to cylinder this is what recently sarembo realized okay so let's go to the second perspective to do a set of function computation this has a long story Camporese Wucchi in the 90s began studying this set of function on on ads maybe Samir knows better than this because he used it every day then it was used in this bunch of papers with and without agreement in different situations for example in Buchbinder-Seitling and in in this Fourier-Seitling best copy when computing using the heat kernel set of functions since the space is homogeneous you have an integration over heat kernel kk and you have to integrate over x sorry heat kernel k xx and you have an integration over x since the space homogeneous doesn't depend on x so this is the volume the volume typically is put to minus 2 pi although it's infinity the argument is that if you take the the volume traca traca traca traca you find the divergence the divergence this 2 pi was appearing this morning also in in adab's in one of nadab's formula so we decided to work out this in the more difficult or more involved problem of a conformally related geometry to ads with no change of topology so typically we have this kind of look notice this when i wrote them down i this is the the one quarter the one quarter we have already written them in terms of some conformal on ads2 this is pure ads2 with a conformal factor here so these are the typical operators we have where these are just ads connections so our idea was to write to say that the determinants were the determinant in the scaled in the vile scaled operator plot the anomaly now the anomaly is not going to cancel and it's going to be our contribution since we are not going to flat space to set a function we do the same idea logarithm of the 2d written as sum over Fourier modes this is a tricky because now the sum over l is divergent this problem was studied by ketten and duni in 2006 for flat space we follow their their their their ideas they didn't consider gauge field we introduce gauge field typically the set of function i am getting faster because he's saying i have no time so the set of function is determinant as usual is expressed in terms of the derivative of the seta there might be an ambiguity related to the normalization scale of course this is going to cancel you can show by adding all the all the pieces of the contributions typical typical seta function typical seta function expressions for for writing down a determinant they involve a function with simple pose at the location of the singularities euclidean rotation end up with this what is called a just function which is nothing but the phase shift of of of the problem note this resemblance with the gelfanieblon in fact the gelfanieblon can be deduced from these from these expressions we end up with a bunch of expression with with a finite finally a finite expression for the bosons and fermion determinants add get the three halves but maldito reminder and this reminder i told you that forini sightling and bescovie had done a heat kernel computation that was matching to the localisational result in fact our reminder is to an order that forini sightling and bescovie didn't compute it so this is an uneasy situation because we found agreement with what has been done here but we perform these two all orders in tita and tita zero and this disagrees so we don't understand what this is doing there well this is what's embodied but i have no more time so let's finish with a loop boundary conditions link all the function matches fluctuations with different techniques give the same result so it's not a problem of the technique because you can you can see it matching i didn't have time to talk to speak about sarembo but my name is not sarembo and there are a lot of things that are not clear which are because originally we started this project trying to to learn about supersymmetric boundary conditions on eds and this kind of stuff but this didn't work the role of zero modes in equatorial will salute with an index the three quarters and this doesn't match with the type 2a why is the mismatch okay and this is a student of sarembo which ended up with some result saying okay we have this happened last month it would be to have a better understanding thank you


This is what a lot of you do. We people bond oftentimes through their experiences. And this is a different form of trauma bonding.  But that's not really getting to know someone. All you're doing is getting a recap of their past. Now, this is critically important to get a recap of the past. I'm not saying that, but actually going deeper. How did you heal from this experience? And my suspicion is this person had no healing.


Every so often a film comes along that encapsulates what the movie-going experience is all about. Movies that have terrific stories and characters you want to spend a lifetime with. Music that withstands the test of time. I'm of course referring to films like Jaws, The Matrix, Lord of the Rings, Star Wars, Jurassic Park and of course 50 Shades of Grey. With its Torah love affair, interesting cast and rippling abs. I can watch that movie over and over again. Okay, obviously being sarcastic on the last one, but Jurassic Park does fit the bill. The sequels, not so much! Today we're going to look back on the best and worst of the franchise starting with the bottom, the heap of them all, on movie feuds. Hang on to your butts. The Lost World's bad. It's a really awful follow-up to the first film that captures none of the magic and a tiny bit of the fear. Even worse is they tack on an unlikable daughter that he apparently has. And unlikable is really the key word here because that fits the bill for every person in the movie.  She's supposed to be the smart scientist yet she gets dinosaur pheromones covered on her and doesn't realize that that's a tracking the scent of the other dinosaurs. Even though earlier in the movie she points that exact same thing out.  Like fighting a raptor with gymnastics. Or stealing a baby dinosaur.  Why? Why would you take a baby T-Rex?    Granted it set up one of the coolest scenes in Jurassic Park history, which is the mom and dad T-Rex gang-banging this whatever, all-terrain vehicle, this mobile home that goes off the side of the edge. Julian Moore. Mortal combats into a side of the glass. Cracking around her spider glass scene. You're just hanging on to the other edge of your seat.  Kill her. They saved her. Still a great scene.  She roams the streets. Eating stoplights and killing dogs. Somehow she escaped from her holding cell on the ship.  I don't know what she did. Clevagal. No.  There are one or two other cool parts where they're going on their little safari hunting trip and when the raptors are sifting through the weeds, picking guys off left and right, him and him. But really it's just a total cash grab that doesn't need to exist and I wish it didn't. Make no mistake, I have the same amount of the stain for Jurassic Park 3 as I have for Jay Park 2. The only difference is, it's a half hour shorter. The pain goes away faster.   Like stealing a dinosaur egg. Once more an unlikable cast with Tay Leone and William H. Macy playing a divorce couple. Half of the movie is just listening to these two dipshits argue with each other and yell out for their kid. Sam Neal's wandering the woods, wondering how the hell he managed to get signed on for this third trip when he clearly made the right decision passing on the second one. The raptors get a good portion of screen time and there's not one but two next snaps by dinosaurs which is just absurdly awesome. The way the pterodactyl slowly turns around is enough reason to watch Jurassic Park 3. Banking. Can we show a clip on that? Your name is Banking. This is a solid step in the right direction. Not only does it pay tribute to the first movie but it also has its own likable cast, good story, and great action. You can argue it follows the playbook a bit too closely to the original with two kids, a man and woman with an awkward relationship and a nerdy computer technician but at least none of them busts out into a triple axle to kick a raptor out a window. There are plenty of illogical parts and an overbundance of CGI. Even the birds are computer generated. Thrills more than make up for the missteps and that final battle between the hybrid and the fan favorite is worth the price of admission. Call me biased. Right now.  Because I am. Jurassic Park will always be the top dinosaur film. I don't care what comes next. I don't care. I saw this movie at the tender age of eight in theaters.  I saw it two more times in theaters. I dragged my parents out. And then I watched probably a dozen more on VHS, DVD, Blu-ray, digital, blah, blah, blah, blah. It is an amazing movie. It's in a top ten for me. For sure. It's one of Spielberg's best. Not only were the dinosaurs incredible to see, but the humans were equally enjoyable. There are so many nostalgic moments from the first time seeing the T-Rex in the pouring rain as he engulfs a man on the John. The incredible and scary raptors stocking their prey in the kitchen.  And then a girl. A young girl that for some reason knows the inner workings of an advanced park security system is able to hack it in a matter of seconds. And it all works. It all works. Welcome to Jurassic Park. I spared no expense coming up with my list and I suggest you do the same. Did you like the 2015 version?  Let me know in the comments. Like the video. Subscribe to Feud Nation because you like what I'm doing here. And maybe support me on Patreon. I'm a one man army right now and I probably always will be. More than just reviews, this is Movie Feuds. I can't decide if a dinosaur army is the dumbest thing I've ever heard or the coolest thing I've ever heard. Guess we'll find out in the next couple films. Gonna freaking happen.


Remember when we talked about it earlier this week how you could be out having a great time. Everybody's enjoying themselves The mood is right. Everything's going really good, but then you got one person in your group And they just end up being the vibe killer That was today It was the other day when we started hearing all this good stuff about the Ravens got something brewing We do something big was on the way But then the report came out over 49 as they checked in on trading for Lamar Jackson But now that was the past but now in the present Today Lamar Jackson is officially agreed to terms with the Baltimore Ravens on his mega deal His record breaking historic contract without an agent and we are on the high off that we are happy We are celebrating everybody's in a great mood. Well, everybody who wanted Lamar Jackson to stay So most of us there's some people that's right But anyway, that ain't important right now But this is Because we got good news and we got bad news Good news again Lamar Jackson signed his deals deals official good to go. That's amazing Um, and now this news output in the middle because depending on how you feel I don't know how to feel about it. It's like, okay, who could it be for but let's just get to it Um, this is from mj hurley tdt. He said the packers have been contacted by the Ravens about trading for the 13th pick That's significant if that's true. That is very significant because for the Ravens to go from 22 all the way up to 13 Oh That that you would have a price to pay with that one And you actually might have to start dipping into next year's picks if you're gonna pull that off That's very significant. Now. I'm not sure what What will be going on with that like what the reasoning would be or who it will be for but Hey, we'll see We'll see we'll see if they actually make the move or it's just a little pre draft talk or whatnot Time will tell now. That's the uh, I guess that's the middle news because that could be good news Depending on how you look at it. It could be bad news depending on how you look at it. It all just depends but the bad news This came from pro football talk mic floreo. He said Hearing the cardinals are trying to send the number three overall pick And de andre hopkins to the titans for the number 11 pick plus more We just We just we can't can't have nothing nice. Can we now again? It's not official yet but That's apparently what's happening right now So that would be heartbreaking for sure I know for me personally it would be because this would be if that does happen if that does go down this would be The second time right before the draft right before the draft That what ravens are trying to get de andre hopkins and then everything falls apart at the last second I would be crushed. I'm gonna let y'all know from jump Because well y'all y'all know already we ain't got to get into it So we'll see We'll see what happens, but hopefully um Ravens can fix this Hopefully ravens can close the deal. Hey, you close the deal on obj Ravens show us again Show us again But you got to think if this is true. That's gonna be tough competition right there, man That's gonna be a tough competition because if if the cardinals are would be went If they would be sending the number three pick to and de andre hopkins to the titans for number 11 plus more You got to think they may be dipping in the next year too But next year some high picks for next year and some stuff this year too because if they're gonna go from 11 all the way up to three Oh That's that's significant right there like i'm over here talking about moving from 22 to 13 is significant And it is I mean that's nine spots But moving from 11 all the way up to three I know you are taking on de andre hopkins.  Good timing Um Ian RappapEven Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Ian. Thank you. Look at Ian saving a day. Okay I feel better now. I feel a lot better. Ian RappapEven Oh, man Oh, I love YouTube. I love y'all man. I love y'all I love this because stuff like this happens Anyway, Ian RappapEven said literally just now At 6 o 2 p.m. He said while the Titans have had conversations about a potential trade up to number three among other spots they have not Had conversations centered around star wide receiver the Andre Hopkins source said yes. All right. So we back on We back on Thank you. Oh man, that's that's that's oh, that's a big relief. That is a big relief of course Anything possible till it ain't possible no more But that is a huge relief. Thank you. All right. So anyway I'ma let y'all get back to whatever y'all are doing. Hopefully the next time I see y'all It won't be for the live stream, but it'll be to say a the Ravens officially Traded for the Andre Hopkins. Hopefully But until then Like Lamar won't be since he signed a five-year contract We out


Team keep it clean. What's going on? It's engraving here with another video and another episode Well, yeah, this is a kind of a triple episode of NFL questions from subscribers because in this live stream We're gonna be doing three NFL questions from subscribers One came from my boy Marcus. Why she asked With this will he asked us before today So this was before to real to real folks had a little press conference or whatever But he asked with this being to real so looking like it's his last year Will he kill it this year and then come back and play another two years and then my guy Lord Dayquan He asked on Instagram Should the Ravens sign a veteran wide receiver before the season starts and then my boy JB smooth He asked on Twitter He asked who are the most over and underrated teams in the NFL so Before we get into these three NFL questions from subscribers, let me introduce myself me I'm engraving vids and this is my YouTube channel engraving vids and I'm a Ravens fan But on here we just talk football period no matter what team you like who you dislike make sure you subscribe Turn your notifications on and leave a like on the video click that thumbs up button and know that I appreciate y'all coming through And also make sure you follow on Twitter Instagram and chat most importantly Twitter all three are engraving vids But the reason you should follow on Twitter the most out of the three is because sometimes YouTube it likes acting up And it'll it'll unsubscribe you if you're not careful, man They will they will unsubscribe you in a in a heartbeat. But anyway So the first question Again from my guy Marcus White.  Well, he Kill it. So again, like I said, he did ask this question before today And then today it actually came out with Tarell sucks said he wants he's he got a lot of football left in him He said that and that's that is a It's it's a good and a bad thing because Tarell sucks beginning of the season. Oh, man He's all over. He's killing it. He's getting all these sacks He's getting all these precious but toward the end of the season. He starts to fall off He starts to get tired. He starts to kind of not necessarily disappear But he can't get to the quarterback as much you can just tell he's drained man He's drained from having to carry the pass rush load all by himself.  We know Tarell sucks is a beast one of the best one of the best Not only Justin in that field, but just period One of the best in Raven's history. Definitely best best fast Russian in Raven's history. That's that's done He's got that accolade And one of the best fast Russian ball time in NFL. He's done his thing. I felt like but again I was wrong two years ago. I felt like two three years ago. It's gonna be his last year He just came back. I feel like the year before last is gonna be his last thought this year Might have been his last year, but then he came back. It's weird because had more I had more What's the word?  Yeah, and will he play for a couple more years where he answered that question today? If it was based on how he said he felt today, it will be a yes It will be a yes He will play a couple more years. Will it be with the Ravens though? That's the real question Will it continue to be with the Ravens? I think that it will be because I think that with Terrell Suggs. I think Ravens got these guys, you know and I wish it would have happened with every because Even though he wasn't all the way done yet. He was pretty close to being done Ravens got these guys, you know that They are Ravens for life Ray Lewis Kyle Boller Jonathan Ogden Man Jamal Lewis he ended up going to the Browns and he almost had it Ray Rice even though it didn't end the way we all wanted it to end But y'all get what I'm saying you got these guys that are Ravens for life and Terrell Suggs I think From a business standpoint, and I know Ravens are a business for it first and foremost I feel like Depending on how this year this is depending on how this year goes and depending on his has Kathy It works out of his salary and whatnot in his contract This could be his last year but It's Terrell Suggs man, and it's the Ravens. It's Terrell Suggs and it's the Ravens. So with those two things being said, I Don't know if they even I don't know if they cut them But what they saw what he said he wanted you he said he wants to play a couple more years If he can if he can just get a little more energy, but more more than getting energy what I want for Terrell Suggs I want for the Ravens to actually get him help. I want for them to put the young guys out there on the field Can they turn Terrell Suggs into a situational past Russia? I don't think so because with Terrell Suggs he He is good at stopping to run and a pass. He's good at run support. He's good as past rush He's good at all that stuff. So you can't Take him off the field and make him a situational past Russia because that takes away from your overall game Unless you've got other guys stepping up and filling that role Do I see anybody on the team who can do that right now? No, but Those younger guys haven't got much playing time. So hopefully they ended up they end up proving me wrong And they end up being people who can actually come in for run support and being able to stop the run and Do well as past Russia too So that's that Next question came from a guy Lord Dequan and he asked should the Ravens sign a veteran wide receiver before the season We don't know yet Because right now it's all about giving the rookies a chance giving the young guys a chance Michael Plattree John Brown Will he see it's about giving the people that's on the team now a chance They signed those guys for a reason they drafted the other guys for a reason So show us the reason why you drafted them give those dudes a shot give those dudes the opportunity To prove themselves and show you what they got. I don't think you will be time to sign a guy right now Unless it was just some amazing guy that just so happened to fall to the Ravens or whatnot But no, I don't I don't think it's instant. I don't think the time is right now There's Brian is still out there And he's a possibility, but I think he's only a possibility if everything else just completely falls through and falls off the wagon and whatnot And it just doesn't work out for the guys that we got shout out to be in home. We made it So, I mean, we'll see we'll see But yeah, right now I would say no but and hopefully the answer remains no because hopefully the Ravens just Hopefully that they can develop the young guys and the guys that we signed that are not young guys Hopefully they can just go out there and kill it. What's up Christian? What's up everybody that came through to appreciate y'all So that's that and the last question was from a boy JB smooth He asked who is the most overrated and underrated team in the NFL? Well With Patriots Based on success, they're not overrated. So don't get me wrong y'all got a little hit me out when I say this They're one of the most overrated teams though. Reason I say they're one of the most overrated teams because no matter what move they make No matter what move they make It doesn't matter who they sign who they cut who they draft who they this who they that No matter what they do, they will always get praise for it It'll always be somebody no matter what they do. They could trade Tom Brady for a six-round pick And it'll be somebody that's out there coming. Oh, man these Patriots these guys are geniuses these guys are geniuses. They all man But just based off of that based off of success now. No, they're not overrated. I mean you see you see that success but based off of that but Who else who else who's some overrated teams right now in the NFL? Hey, if he and King I agree But if you say you want to still play you want to still play. What's up? You coming all the way from Russia? Is that that looks like rushing right there? Hello? I don't know how to say the name, but I'm gonna just call you B. So what's up B? Are you in Russia or is that just that you just you just got your name to a Russian name? I appreciate you coming through ever you from So China thing overrated underrated I Think cowboys They can be a little overrated because the reason I think they're overrated is because And this this kind of goes with Steelers too, but still as they get the job done recently They've been getting the job done recently as far as getting in the playoffs doing and I mean They don't really do much when they get to the playoffs But they've been getting it to the playoffs nonetheless, so they've been having a better chance than we have been getting but I feel like Steelers are They get overrated based off of past success past success because you know if you That's what it's certain Steelers fans that you can talk to and this is with every fan base So this ain't just about Raven Steelers and whatnot But it's certain certain teams of every fan base and this is with Steelers and Cowboys mainly Steelers fans But with with some Steelers fans If you're talking to them, you might be going back and forth having a debate about football or whatever And you know that the debate is over and you need to just walk away Close down Twitter shut down Instagram Shut off to YouTube get out of the comment section whatever video you're talking about If if you are going back and forth with a Steelers fan no matter what team you're a fan of well if they say six rings If they say that you need to walk away Walk away save yourself the headache save yourself the trouble save yourself the waste of time because when they go to six rings That's when you know whatever y'all are arguing about you've already won because whenever they resort to that I hate it's so cringy. It's one of the most cringiest Points in a Steelers argument that one can make six rings Come on man You got to let it go and it can happen with some Cowboys fans, too I see it a lot more Steelers fans, but that's probably because I interact a lot more Steelers fans, but I appreciate that Marty Thanks a lot, but um That that's that's it for that I'm trying to think of some other overrated teams Well, Patriots Patriots can say it because Patriots got the rings recently But when Steelers fans do it it's such a reach because four of them rings came so long ago They came so long ago It's like come on now like y'all really going back to the 80s with this don't do that And what else what else what else I'm trying to think of some other overrated teams Arizona maybe I'm wrong. Hey, I don't know. He went to school in Arizona But who else overrated team Ravens can be over not as a team, but as a Ozzie Newsom as a GM recently That there has been some overrated with him as a GC GM recently Because people will praise him. Oh, yeah, I just knew some is that he's this and that and and he has done well over his career But recently things ain't been hitting so much in Baltimore Whether it's draft picks and he's got he hit on some draft picks and he's missed on a lot of them too As any GM has but he um, I think Well, that's but this is not really team over at but that's more GM overrated Now his final draft Kildren said his final draft was a masterpiece now his final draft right now. It looks nice But it's not we can't call it a masterpiece yet the way that he worked in what not nice But it if it doesn't result to action on the field if it doesn't result to success on the field Then it won't even matter how good or bad he maneuvered the draft What guys he picked if those guys don't translate to on the field then it's not gonna mean anything and that's what's been The issue with Ozzy Newsom recently is that it hasn't been translated to on the field with enough guys Not with everybody but with enough, but I'm still trying to think of some other overrated teams What's some other overrated teams? Oh 49ers 49ers 49ers now I get that when Jimmy G came in he went 6-0. I get that I get that and I respect it I like it enjoyed it whatever I get that but for them to oh Yeah, Jimmy G 6-0 for them to throw this guy what six prime time games I think five or six prime time games and For them to be just on this bandwagon of 49ers 49ers 49ers like hold up slow your roll It was six games and now six games is a big chunk of the season But slow your roll, please hold up slow down slow down Let's let's let's relax. Let's relax So I would have to throw 49ers on there too Well, let's think of some underrated teams who are some underrated teams that don't get enough respect That don't get enough praise that don't get enough I Would say Jaguars I think jaguars could be one They on the rise though, man. Jaguars. I feel like a borderline. They on the rise Texans could be one Texas. I mean, well, they didn't lose their quarterback though So that kind of took them from killing it to being killed Who else Oh Johnson said the Panthers They underrated I don't know about undurated They've been doing that thing. I didn't see that yin-yang Tampa Bay under what they they've been successful on the field so I can't call them underrated Well, I'm definitely say jaguars Yeah, jaguars takes St. Louis St. Louis came out last year and they they shocked the world Do I consider them underrated right now? They made a lot of moves. I Feel like they just I feel like the the St. Louis Rams are just right charges. Oh charges is one La charge. Oh la Rams my fault. Yeah. I'm tripping. I'm still on st. Louis I'm tripping. Yeah, y'all already know. I'm still with the old the old name of the team Yeah, charges is a good one charges is a good one Phillip Rivers and Phillip Rivers is nice man He's underrated as a quarterback. He's that team is yeah charges is a good one charges. It's a really really really good So, yeah, so charges not not Randall. I feel like Randall just right charges Hold it, who do we say just You said oh jaguars was a jaguar charges and jaguars made in Texas, maybe Jaguars in a Jets now, I don't think jets are underrated now saints Saints are like because people people know drew breeze. They respect your breeze. They honor drew breeze Then their defense stepped up a lot last year saints could be so I Like what saints I don't think they underrated. I don't think they're overrated either. I feel like saints are like just right I don't think they're over or under. I think they're like just right So that's that Who else yeah, and I say that's it man That's a tough question. Good question. Oh my boy smooth appreciate it So and I appreciate y'all coming through I'm gonna go ahead and hop off of here now But thank y'all for coming through. Thank you all for watching Um Thank you. I don't think Seattle slept on I mean they they made everybody go to sleep because they ain't been doing nothing But yeah, appreciate y'all Thank y'all for watching and again if any of you guys want to be part of NFL questions from subscribers Sorry, this one came in the dark. It's real monkey outside right now cuz all the rain But if any y'all want to be part of NFL questions from subscribers the only thing you gotta do the only thing Send me a DM on Instagram Twitter or snapchat either one of the three Send me a DM with your question. We'll do it in the video. That's it. That's it Send me a DM with your question. We'll do it in the video and that's it So appreciate y'all coming through.  You don't miss a video but also follow on Twitter So then you really don't miss a video because YouTube will have you have you coming through the stream and being like a I'm here What's up, and we we we done so appreciate y'all coming through. Thank y'all team. Keep it clean. We out


Well, the first night of the second Democratic Party primary debate is officially over and Basically, it lived up to my expectations What I wanted going into this was for Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren to really team up and take on all of the Santrists they did that and I think that you're gonna see They were victorious overall because the centrists they just even though they were all dog piling on Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren Which is what I expected them to do since they are the two front runners in this race It was clear who shied it was clear who got the most applause It was Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, so I'm gonna get into you know some general takeaways from the debate First of all, I just want to start with some numbers So we kind of get a sense as to what the public feels about the debaters as Well as how much time they had to speak So when it comes to the number of Twitter followers gained Marianne Williamson obtained the most during the debate with 8,000 Elizabeth Warren came in second with almost 6,000 Pete Buttigieg in third with nearly 5,000 Bernie with over 2,000 John Delaney with over 1,000 Bullock with 1,000 Amy Klobuchar with 782 Beto O'Rourke with 718 John Hickenlooper with 407 and Tim Ryan gaining the least amount of Twitter followers with 372 now when it comes to Google searches It looks like Marianne Williamson is the one that was the most searched throughout the country with Steve Bullock coming in second place being the most searched name in his home state of Montana now when it comes to who spoke the most Elizabeth Warren came out on top with 18 minutes Bernie with 17 minutes Pete Buttigieg in third with 14 minutes Bullock, Klobuchar and O'Rourke all had 10 minutes 44 seconds spoken exactly, which is a little bit weird John Delaney had 10 minutes 24 seconds spoken Tim Ryan 938 Marianne Williamson 853 and John Hickenlooper 8 minutes and 37 seconds So that's some numbers But I want to start to get into a little bit of the general takeaways that I had as well as some specifics and then I'll have some additional videos planned where I get into Highlight moments that I thought were just great But first of all for someone like John Delaney It really felt like and I don't know if this is just because I hate him so much He spoke so much like if you're pulling at 1% to have a Disproportionate amount of time to speak that's even comparable to someone like Amy Klobuchar And Pete Buttigieg, I think that's an issue and it wasn't just that he was budding in a lot like he did last time Because I don't think he did that as much but seeing uncalled on him. It felt like repeatedly and That's really irritating Because again, he has no support. He was booed by Democrats at the California Democratic Party Convention he isn't very popular but the reason why they were kind of using him as the antagonist against Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren is because he's probably the furthest to the right and Spoke out against them the most like he started off the debate by Criticizing Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren and they kind of base the first question with regard to healthcare around John Delaney's Criticism so he's kind of in a way being propped up by CNN Simply so that way, you know, there's this dynamic where it's someone versus the progressives But I think that that's unfair to the other centrist not that I care too much about them But I mean if you're Amy Klobuchar, I'm thinking what gives why is he getting more time than me? Why is he getting called on more than me when I'm pulling ahead of him now? She may be pulling at well like two three percent still. I mean the fact that he's getting more airtime I think that's a failure on CNN's part and it was clear, you know That CNN did have a bias when you go to this tweet by Vic Berger Look at the framing on some of these headlines when they were live tweeting this debate Well, you can see that, you know, they frame it as Delaney goes after Sanders and Warren not that oh well They sparred, you know, they try to make it seem as if John Delaney was the winner here And even though centrists on Twitter like Jennifer Rubin of the Washington Post Will say that Delaney was the winner and came out on top He absolutely did not and this debate is not going to help him at all So let's get into the winners and the losers, which is probably my favorite part now as I usually do I have four main categories. I have the winners I have the people who performed well the good category if you will and then I have them Category people who kind of just maintained and then I have the losers. I have a lot of losers this time So the biggest loser without question is John Delaney And it's not just that I ideologically Disagree with John Delaney the most based on what he was talking about But he obviously was struggling to defend His vision for the party when it came to health care He couldn't talk about it without using Republican Party talking points He literally espoused numerous lies about Medicare for all for example He claimed that Medicare for all would cause hospitals to go out of business This is factually incorrect even political fact rated that statement false So he's coming up with these myths about Medicare for all and you would think that because he's willing to lie That should help him right as long as you say it confidently You're going to come out on top of this debate, but even with his lies It was clear that Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren dominated So he just was someone who was propped up by CNN so that way, you know They can have this dynamic Bernie versus the centrists and he didn't come out on top And he literally took a moment to declare his support for TPP. He bragged about that He said I'm the only candidate on the stage who supports the TPP John it's 2019 That's part of the reason why Hillary Clinton lost because Trump was against it and she claimed that she was against it But voters didn't believe her particularly voters in the rust belt where she lost Do you honestly believe that's going to get you any momentum? I don't know what he's doing. So without question John Delaney biggest loser Other individuals I would put in the loser category are definitely the centrists John Hickenlooper Tim Ryan and Steve Bullock, you know, it's really sad that Mike Ravel was excluded from the debate, but instead we got all of these centrists Why did we need Steve Bullock and John Hickenlooper and John Delaney all on the debate stage?  He is getting Curbstomped not even gonna be close. So John Hickenlooper. I don't know why he hasn't dropped out Steve Bullock I don't know why he was included in this debate. Nothing. He said Was great, you know, there was an exchange between him and Elizabeth Warren when it came to nuclear You know non proliferation and he was arguing with Warren about first strike Warren made a case that look We should commit publicly that we will never be a first-right country We will never be the first country to drop a nuclear bomb We'd only consider using them in response to another country using them on us first and she explained this phenomenally and clearly and he just couldn't get it through his thick skull and he even kind of conceded at some point Look, I kind of see what you're saying, but then he wouldn't back down because he was clearly working backwards from his conclusion It wasn't a good look. Hopefully this will be the last that we see of him Tim Ryan again I mean, what was the purpose of Tim Ryan being at this debate? He got crushed by Tulsi Gabbard last time and he clearly didn't learn his lesson because when it came to the foreign policy portion he was criticizing Donald Trump and Getting into kind of this exchange with Amy Klobuchar because he said we shouldn't speak with you know Kim Jong-un in other words. He's saying if I'm president. I will be against diplomacy. I'm not gonna talk to dictators Now you may be philosophically opposed to dictators. I am as well, but as president you don't have a choice That's your job. You are the chief diplomat. So what are you expecting to do? Not pick up the phone if a dictator calls. I've got bad news for you There's a lot of dictatorships in the world most countries are not democratic, you know for the most part So the fact that he has this view it's not just naive, but it's dim-witted I mean we expect you to do diplomacy, but he's basically saying I wouldn't talk to anyone And if I need to I would escalate that's really the sense that I got from him and it just it was embarrassing He should have dropped out after Tulsi Gabbard destroyed him last time the fact that he didn't learn his lesson You know, it's embarrassing Okay So moving on to the meh category, you know Beto or work made it into this Category it's a step up from last time because I believe last time I placed him in the loser category And it was because everybody was just tag-teaming, you know just beating up on Beto this time That wasn't the case But he still did not shine and what was embarrassing was that he kept trying to make the case that look, you know There's a new battleground state in play It's Texas the problem is that you can't make this case because you just lost the Ted Cruz had you defeated Ted Cruz You would be able to make this argument, but because you have lost to him the fact that you're making this is a little bit embarrassing Now, you know, he didn't hurt his campaign any further, but he didn't do enough I think to have the momentum to propel him further along Maybe he'll make it to Iowa, but at this point I just don't know how he's going to be able to you know, withstand Other candidates surging like why go for a roark when Buddha judge is surging and has money Why go for him? There's other options if you want a milk toast centrist who is you know kind of this Obama light individual It's Buddha judge. It's Klobuchar even so I just don't know why he's still in the race either But nonetheless, he didn't perform terribly didn't do enough to help himself also in the Mac category I'm gonna put Amy Klobuchar here Amy Klobuchar is in the Mac category because For most of this debate, I forgot that she was participating like I know that she's really trying to set herself apart as Kind of the pragmatic centrist.   She's just so boring. So it's just like What have you proposed that's unique? Why should we vote for you over any other centrist and the race? There's tons of centrists. So why should I go for you if I support a centrist, you know Over Joe Biden over Pete Buttigieg. Why she's not making that point and making that case for herself And if she doesn't really start to get some type of spark that ignites, she's gonna have to drop out soon I don't know how she can keep this up Okay, let's get to the next category. It's the did-good category This is candidates who didn't win, but I think they did a relatively good job. They had a good performance and I'm gonna tell you Marianne Williamson Barely made it into this category. She was almost in the meh category And it was because at the beginning of this debate during the healthcare portion.  She said usually I'm in the camp Of Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren But she sided with the centrists and the reason she gave as to why she is Against Medicare for all is because something something agent of chaos something something stability Marianne that is not persuasive at all and you speak so intelligently and articulately about race issues and economic issues and corruption and corporate greed So why on this one issue? Are you so bad? I don't get it and for everyone in the orb gang It's heartbreaking right because she was steadily rising in my book and at that moment That was that was awful. That was a gut punch. However, towards, you know, the end of the debate She started to move back up even though I will not forgive her for Medicare for all But you know, she started to move up as she usually does. She talked beautifully about reparations I don't think her number is high enough. Nonetheless, she still speaks about this, you know as a debt That's owed in I think a persuasive manner in terms of talking about corruption and you know Treating the causes instead of just talking about the symptoms. It's all brilliant She called out the other candidates for the financial contributions that they are taking from special interests So she does a good job and she's picked her lane as someone who is progressive But this you know this healthcare portion It was a bad look so Mary Ann I Don't know why you're choosing to be bad on the issue of health care But you need to educate yourself as you've done with other issues because to describe You know your unwillingness to support Medicare for all as you not wanting to act as an agent of chaos I find that downright insulting do better here improve if you want the support of grassroots Activists most of which who are progressive which you'll need to get into the third debate. Mind you in September You need to come around to this issue and do better. Okay, so getting to the winners Look, this was the best case scenario who won hands down Bernie and Elizabeth Warren now one of them edged out. It was really close I was conflicted as to whether or not I would declare this a tie, but I do think there's a clear winner And that winner is Bernard Sanders Bernie Sanders absolutely brought the heat He did everything I have been begging him to do. I told him to take the gloves off. He took the gloves off I told him to be more aggressive. He was more aggressive. Not only did he absolutely Dominate that discussion on health care, but he had a lot of great one-liners that were definitely weren't intentional You could tell that he didn't rehearse them because he was just responding in an off-the-cuff way To other candidates who were criticizing him. He, you know, had a lot of funny moments. I wrote the damn bill And he also brought the substance Bernie Sanders was phenomenal now with that being said the reason why You know, I was questioning who I place as number one If I would place him as number one or just declare it a tie Was because he kind of faded into the background towards the second half But he still had a great closing performance But towards the end Elizabeth Warren was Phenomenal when it came to trade she did a good job at basically beating Don Delaney into a pulp So at the beginning, you know, you had Bernie Sanders basically annihilate him when it comes to health care And in the second half Elizabeth Warren did the same with regard to trade now Elizabeth Warren She was one of the few Democrats who actually stood up to Barack Obama when he was pushing for the TPP So she has credibility on this issue and you know in response to John Delaney saying that her stance on trade is radical She said what is radical about bringing workers and unions to the table to negotiate these free trade agreements? You can't dispute that point. You're at a Democratic Party debate You can't dispute that and really this shows that as an educator She does a great job at communicating, you know things in a very elementary way that are easily digestible and This was great. I mean both Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren. I said they needed to team up They both teamed up and this was a great night for progressives everything that I saw from them I loved because what they did here was they showed that out of all of these Santrists they shined in spite of everyone dog piling on them and they didn't have to lie They didn't have to obfuscate. They told the truth in spite of CNN's biased framing like for example Jake Tapper Really wanted Elizabeth Warren and Bernie to admit that taxes would increase under their plans, but they held their ground They said look overall most people will have more money in their pockets if we pass Medicare for all because we are eliminating premiums Copays and deductibles that's gonna make a huge difference and speaking to CNN's bias I mean towards the end Jake Tapper on the topic of foreign policy when that came up He basically tried to compare Bernie Sanders to Donald Trump saying well look Donald Trump said he's anti-interventionist and anti-war So you're saying the same thing. Why should Americans believe you and not Donald Trump? Okay? First of all who is it that's been leading the charge To end the war in Yemen. It's been Bernie Sanders Who is it that considered bombing Iran and then changed his mind at the last minute Donald Trump? So when Bernie Sanders said it's because Trump is a liar It's as simple as that and you know the fact that Jake Tapper framed it this way really is Disgusting because to compare Bernie Sanders to Donald Trump Really shows that you're not willing to dive into the nuance because these are different positions Donald Trump doesn't have a coherent policy when it comes to you know foreign issues. He just doesn't he acts Instinctively and basically he will have an opinion that's formed based on who says what on Fox News or what the neocons in his cabinet say So to compare Bernie and Trump really is egregious But overall Bernie and Liz dominated but Bernie Sanders definitely was a standout here and that is really good because Bernie needed a win You know he was starting to kind of stagnate in the polls And it's not that he was necessarily slipping per se But other candidates were catching up because they were surging Kamala Harris Elizabeth Warren so Bernie needed a victory and I hope that this will give him some warm momentum Propel him forward, you know in hopes that Joe Biden gets another lose, you know in the following debate Hopefully he'll go down and hopefully we see Bernie go up now getting into some specifics here One thing that stood out to me was the discussion about guns surrounding the you know NRA and the influence of them on Congress You know a lot of the candidates were not afraid to call out money in politics and corruption For example Beto O'Rourke tied that to Congress's unwillingness to act So what irritates me though is that the candidates they can talk Intelligently about corruption when it comes to one issue where they're clearly not corrupted because nobody is taking money from the NRA on That debate stage as far as I know But when it comes to health care, they were just advocating Against Medicare for all they were just taking the side of the health insurance industry So none of them have credibility here You can talk a good game all you want But unless you actually put your words into practice and support the policies that the people want and not Couch out to special interests as people like Beto O'Rourke and Pete Buttigieg do then you just have no credibility When it came to the issue of electability Elizabeth Warren made a very powerful point when John Delaney and the other centrists were trying to assert that you know If we nominate someone who's a quote unquote far leftist Well that just means that Donald Trump is going to win but what Elizabeth Warren said in response to that was look I remember when they said Obama couldn't win I remember when they said that Donald Trump couldn't win We shouldn't be worrying about you know Who can and can't get elected and then as a result end up nominating someone who we don't believe in and then Pete Buttigieg actually chimed in with the solid point saying look We shouldn't be worrying about what Republicans say and he also made another point that I thought was great at a Different time in the debate. I believe where he said look regardless if we nominate someone who's from the center or the center left or the left Republicans are going to call you a socialist no matter what so it doesn't matter Just promote the policies that you believe in and that was a great point I just wish that he wasn't a coward and you know stopped promoting all of these neoliberal policies There was a moment when Pete Buttigieg lied about student loan debt cancellation And he said something to the effect of look why would we cancel everyone's student loan debt and then college students who are you know Starting college next year. They're gonna accumulate debt But what he failed to mention was that any candidate who has proposed student loan debt cancellation? They also in conjunction with student debt cancellation are promoting free college So he's being incredibly disingenuous here and he does not support free college Nor does he support student loan debt cancellation because Pete Buttigieg is a centrist So, you know one thing that is a common theme with all these centrists is that since they clearly are less inspirational than Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren to a lesser extent, you know, they have to lie about the policies that they promote in order to make themselves look better But Mary Ann put it best. I think she said I wonder why some of you are running as Democrats Exactly there was another point where Elizabeth Warren said, why are we using Republican Party talking points when it comes to issues like health care? Exactly all these centrists did was lie. They gaslighted people. They obfuscated They couldn't tell the truth about the policies that are overwhelmingly popular among the Democratic Party base So what they chose to do what their strategy what's collectively assumed was to lie to the Democratic Party base and say these policies that are extremely popular You actually don't want to support them because they're not in your best interest, and I'm sorry Democratic Party primary voters They are more savvy than Republican Party primary voters So you're not going to be able to lie to them as easily as Trump was able to lie to Republican Party primary voters Just that's just the fact so the fact that they're going out of their way to lie and the fact that they're not Disclosing the conflicts of interest the financial contributions that they have taken the fact that John Delaney literally has stake in the health care industry I mean it just shows that they can't win by being honest So they have to lie and I think that this came across people knew that they were being dishonest Which is why I believe they absolutely lost this debate John Delaney especially last thing I want to talk about Bernie Sanders Responding to Pete Buttigieg because it was clear that CNN wanted to go to Pete Buttigieg into attacking Bernie Sanders for being too old Pete Buttigieg then said look, I don't care how old you are, but I care about the ideas and your vision for the country I think Bernie Sanders had a very persuasive argument. He sold People on the vision that he believes in you know student loan debt cancellation Medicare for all and It doesn't matter how old you are and voters certainly don't care How old Bernie Sanders is and that's proven by the fact that so many Millennials and Gen Z are support Bernie Sanders and you know Pete Buttigieg I don't know off the top of my head where his support comes from Demographically speaking, but you know, I know he's not gonna get anywhere near the support that Bernie Sanders has among Millennials So with that being said, that's just my general take. We're gonna get into some specifics in Videos that will be published after this one But overall this was really the best case scenario It was a clear victory for Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren But especially Bernie Sanders and I think that what they did was effectively wipe out these centrists They wiped them out because they showed themselves as the frauds that they are You know, they made asses of themselves by basically taking the entire time to shit on progressive policies I mean John Delaney. He is indistinguishable from a moderate Republican like John Kasich So why are you on the debate stage if all you're doing is saying we can't do this policy We can't do that policy. Why are you there? What ideas do you have? I don't understand why anybody goes to all the trouble of running for president of the United States Just to talk about what we really can't do and shouldn't fight for You've talked about vague proposals with regard to healthcare You've talked about policies that aren't popular like the TPP But why are you there and for someone who's pulling at 1% as Ken Klippenstein pointed out on Twitter For you to talk about what is and isn't realistic is a little bit ironic because your campaign is not Realistic, but what's great is that since Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, they did such a good job I don't think we're going to be hearing much from these centrists And I say that because I don't know that they're going to be able to qualify for the third debate in September Because the the requirements are a lot more stringent. I mean you need 130,000 individual donations. I'm not sure what the polling requirements Currently are but that's a lot and these guys some of them haven't even reached the 65,000 Donor threshold and again, it's just extra egregious to me that Mike Ravel met that but still was excluded So I don't know that John Delaney John Hickenlooper will be included in the September debate But they shouldn't because I mean look it's time to start thinning the field There's more than 20 candidates running and most people on the stage half of them are not serious contenders There's no movement There wasn't movement after the first debate and they utilize the same strategy here And I predict that we're not gonna see much movement from them if any and if we do see movement It's gonna be backwards. So the main takeaways are Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren proved why progressivism is stronger Why it makes them more electable and centrist, you know They were scrambling trying to figure out ways to sell their centrism and they just couldn't do that in a persuasive way Hence why they had to lie. So look drop out John Delaney drop out John Hickenlooper. We don't need to hear from you It's a no It's time for the big boys and the big girls to start debating and for all of these, you know losers to just drop out already You know, it's not gonna happen I don't know how they have the money to stay in the race because you know You don't have much grassroots support So you've got to be taken in a lot of money From special interests in order to propel your campaign But I can't even see why if you are a rich person You'd want to donate to these people because they're not gonna win. They're not going anywhere So I just don't see how they can, you know maintain their campaigns. You've got to pay staff You've got to pay for headquarters. You've got to pay rent and they're not picking up any steam yet. So I mean By now they should drop out and if they don't drop out soon, then I Don't know what to say. They're just fooling themselves at this point But that was my breakdown of the debate Bernie and Liz shined, you know Warren and and Bernie Sanders really did a great job at promoting progressivism I think that Pete Buddha, Jesper Marianne Williamson They also did a good job But there was a lot left to be desired between the two of them and Marianne Williamson She needs to do better on health care because what she's saying not great But overall that was entertaining that was the Bernie that we need to see in future debates He was on fire. He brought it. He was aggressive Bring that to every single debate and interview in town hall going forward because that's what you need To prove to be able that you are the fighter not anyone else


Okay, so this is a demonstration of the quadrangle and the triangles, spaces and intervals which are usually seen on the posterior aspect of the pectoral girdle. So this is the prone cadaver, we are standing on the left side of the cadaver and the camera person is also on the left side towards the head end. First let's identify some essential landmarks. This muscle that we see here, this is the TD's major muscle. The TD's major muscle takes origin from the lateral border of the scapula near the angle of the scapula and the fibers then go up and they get inserted onto the medial lip of the inter tubercular sulcus of the humerus. This muscle that we see here, this is the TD's minor. This takes origin also from the lateral border of the scapula just above the TD's major and it gets inserted onto the greater tuberosity, the lower part of the greater tuberosity. This muscle that we see here, this is the long head of the triceps which takes origin from the intraglina tubercular of the scapula and then continues down and merges with the other fibers. Having mentioned these, now let's come to the quadrangles and the spaces where my finger has gone in. This is the quadrangular space. The quadrangular space is a space which allows structures to come out from the axilla posteriorly. What are the boundaries of the quadrangular space? Superiorly, the quadrangular space is bounded by the TD's minor head of the humerus and further anteriorly will be the tendon of the subscapularis where my finger has gone in. That is the superior boundary. The inferior boundary of the quadrangular space is bounded by this structure here, this structure. This is the TD's major. So in simple terms, superior boundary is TD's minor, inferior boundary is TD's major. The medial boundary is by the long head of the triceps and the lateral boundary is by the where my finger is touching the surgical neck of humerus and the coraco brachialis muscle. So these are the four boundaries of the quadrangular space. The quadrangular space gives passage to, first of all, we can see this structure here. This is very important. This is the axillary nerve. It comes out from the brachial plexus, it passes through the quadrangular space and it enters into the deep surface of the deltoid muscle which I'm holding up here and it supplies the deltoid muscle through its numerous branches and we can see all the branches of the axillary nerve and after that it pierces through the deltoid and it supplies the skin of the upper lateral aspect of the arm here. So that is one important content. The next important content of the quadrangular space is these vascular structures that we can see here which I have lifted up. These vascular structures are the branches of the posterior circumflix humeral artery which is a branch from the third part of the axillary artery. So they also pass through the quadrangular space. So having mentioned the quadrangular space, what is the important clinical correlation pertaining to the quadrangular space? This axillary nerve which passes through the quadrangular space can be injured in inferior dislocation of the humerus because the head of the humerus is located just above its superior boundary of the quadrangular space and when the axillary nerve is injured or compromised, then it can lead to paralysis of the deltoid muscle. So that is an important clinical correlation pertaining to the quadrangular space. Now let's come a little down and medially. This space where my finger has gone in, this is the triangular space. The triangular space is bounded by the dearest minor above the dearest major below and laterally by the long head of the triceps. So this is the triangular space. Of course the space is not so obvious. We have made the space big and this gives passage to these vascular structures that we can see here. This is the circumflex scapular artery. The circumflex scapular artery is a branch from the sub scapular artery which is the last branch of the axillary artery and after it has given out the circumflex scapular artery, the rest of the sub scapular artery continues as the thoracodorsal artery which I have picked up here and we can see the thoracodorsal artery here also which supplies the latsymus dorsi. So the circumflex scapular vessels are the main contents of the triangular space. In fact, circumflex scapular artery participates in the scapular anastomosis which is a very important anastomosis between the first part, branches of the first part of the subclavian artery and the third part of the axillary artery. And as the circumflex scapular artery passes medially, it forms a groove between the origin of the T.D.'s minor and the origin of the T.D.'s major. So that is the important content of the triangular space. Now I am coming to the triangular interval. So we have moved further laterally and below. So it is lateral to the triangular space and below the quadrangular space. This is the triangular interval. This triangular interval is bounded by medially by the long head of the triceps. Superially it is bounded by the T.D.'s major and laterally it is bounded by the lateral head of the triceps and the humors. So this is the triangular interval and what are the contents of the triangular interval and we can see the content. One content is the branches of the profunda brachii artery which pass through the triangular interval and we can see some of the branches down there and it also gives passage to the radial nerve. The radial nerve passes down and we can see it is supplying the triceps muscle. Here there is a very important clinical correlation. The radial nerve can be injured in this region in fracture of the humors in which case there will be paralysis of the lateral head of the triceps and the structures of the extensor muscles of the arm. Similarly the structures in the triangular interval may be compromised by wide or thickened the T.D.'s major and the long head of the triceps. So that is the triangular interval. So these are the quadrangular space, triangular space and triangular interval with the respective vestular structures and the clinical correlations. Thank you very much for watching. If you have any questions or comments, please put them in the comment section below. Dr. Sanjay Sanyal signing out.